挪威的民主

S. Ringen
{"title":"挪威的民主","authors":"S. Ringen","doi":"10.29654/TJD.201012.0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In international comparative studies, the Norwegian system is consistently at the top of the range in democratic quality. However, in a scrutiny against more absolute standards of ”democraticness,” it has been found to perform less well. The strength of this system is less in lofty democratic idealism than in its down-to-earth solidity in the making of public policy, and its weakness more in democratic virtue than in public policy management. Strength is explained by historical factors, by a consistent experience of progress, and by solidity of public policy decision-making. Weakness is in what has been identified as a disruption in the democratic chain of command in constitutional institutions. Three general observations follow. First, the double set of observations-a robust democracy, comparatively, nevertheless with notable weaknesses in trends-suggests that the state of democracy in the world is far from impressive in qualitative terms. The democracies of the world, even the most established ones, are very different in quality, and democracy overall is and remains a fragile and endangered system of government. Second, is the significance of solidity in policy procedures. What other democracies can learn from the Norwegian case might primarily be the importance for democratic order and legitimacy of firm, stable, and established procedures and institutions in the system of government. Third, is the pervasive importance of the elusive quality of democratic culture. Democratic leaders have a duty not only to their voters but also to the needs of democratic systems for good governance.","PeriodicalId":403398,"journal":{"name":"Taiwan journal of democracy","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Democracy in Norway\",\"authors\":\"S. Ringen\",\"doi\":\"10.29654/TJD.201012.0003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In international comparative studies, the Norwegian system is consistently at the top of the range in democratic quality. However, in a scrutiny against more absolute standards of ”democraticness,” it has been found to perform less well. The strength of this system is less in lofty democratic idealism than in its down-to-earth solidity in the making of public policy, and its weakness more in democratic virtue than in public policy management. Strength is explained by historical factors, by a consistent experience of progress, and by solidity of public policy decision-making. Weakness is in what has been identified as a disruption in the democratic chain of command in constitutional institutions. Three general observations follow. First, the double set of observations-a robust democracy, comparatively, nevertheless with notable weaknesses in trends-suggests that the state of democracy in the world is far from impressive in qualitative terms. The democracies of the world, even the most established ones, are very different in quality, and democracy overall is and remains a fragile and endangered system of government. Second, is the significance of solidity in policy procedures. What other democracies can learn from the Norwegian case might primarily be the importance for democratic order and legitimacy of firm, stable, and established procedures and institutions in the system of government. Third, is the pervasive importance of the elusive quality of democratic culture. Democratic leaders have a duty not only to their voters but also to the needs of democratic systems for good governance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":403398,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Taiwan journal of democracy\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Taiwan journal of democracy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29654/TJD.201012.0003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Taiwan journal of democracy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29654/TJD.201012.0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在国际比较研究中,挪威的制度在民主质量方面一直处于前列。然而,在对更绝对的“民主”标准进行审查时,人们发现它的表现不那么好。这一制度的优点与其说在于崇高的民主理想主义,不如说是在于它在制定公共政策时脚踏实地的坚定;它的缺点与其说是在于公共政策管理,不如说是在于民主美德。实力可以用历史因素、持续的进步经验和公共政策决策的稳定性来解释。弱点在于宪法机构的民主指挥链被认为受到了破坏。以下是三个一般性的观察结果。首先,这两组观察结果——相对而言,一个强健的民主国家,尽管在趋势上存在明显的弱点——表明,从质量上讲,世界上的民主状况远非令人印象深刻。世界上的民主国家,即使是最成熟的民主国家,在质量上也各不相同,总的来说,民主仍然是一种脆弱和濒危的政府制度。第二,政策程序的稳定性的重要性。其他民主国家可以从挪威的案例中学到的,可能主要是政府系统中稳固、稳定和既定的程序和机构对民主秩序和合法性的重要性。第三,是民主文化难以捉摸的特性的普遍重要性。民主领导人不仅对他们的选民负有责任,而且对民主制度对善政的需要负有责任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Democracy in Norway
In international comparative studies, the Norwegian system is consistently at the top of the range in democratic quality. However, in a scrutiny against more absolute standards of ”democraticness,” it has been found to perform less well. The strength of this system is less in lofty democratic idealism than in its down-to-earth solidity in the making of public policy, and its weakness more in democratic virtue than in public policy management. Strength is explained by historical factors, by a consistent experience of progress, and by solidity of public policy decision-making. Weakness is in what has been identified as a disruption in the democratic chain of command in constitutional institutions. Three general observations follow. First, the double set of observations-a robust democracy, comparatively, nevertheless with notable weaknesses in trends-suggests that the state of democracy in the world is far from impressive in qualitative terms. The democracies of the world, even the most established ones, are very different in quality, and democracy overall is and remains a fragile and endangered system of government. Second, is the significance of solidity in policy procedures. What other democracies can learn from the Norwegian case might primarily be the importance for democratic order and legitimacy of firm, stable, and established procedures and institutions in the system of government. Third, is the pervasive importance of the elusive quality of democratic culture. Democratic leaders have a duty not only to their voters but also to the needs of democratic systems for good governance.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信