后代在两院制议会中的实质性代表:比利时众议院和参议院的比较(2010-2014)

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Daan Vermassen, Didier Caluwaerts
{"title":"后代在两院制议会中的实质性代表:比利时众议院和参议院的比较(2010-2014)","authors":"Daan Vermassen, Didier Caluwaerts","doi":"10.1177/14789299231169491","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is generally argued that representative democracies are unresponsive to the needs of future generations. Representatives, standing for re-election, are incentivized by the needs of current generations, and fail to take the interests of the unborn into account. However, this argument bypasses the institutional diversity among parliaments. In this article, we focus in particular on bicameralism, and we ask whether the representation of future generations is more prevalent in upper than in lower houses. We expect that posterity’s interests will be taken into account more strongly in upper houses which are (1) mandated to reflect on the long-term impact of policies, (2) less politically and publicly visible and (3) at least partially composed of non-elected members. Based on an exploratory analysis of representative claims made on behalf of future generations in the Belgian Chamber of Representatives and the Senate, we conclude that the institutional status of the parliamentary assembly is not related to the propensity of making claims on behalf of posterity. We provide several explanations why this might be so.","PeriodicalId":46813,"journal":{"name":"Political Studies Review","volume":"21 1","pages":"539 - 547"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Substantive Representation of Future Generations in Bicameral Parliaments: A Comparison of the Belgian Chamber of Representatives and the Senate (2010–2014)\",\"authors\":\"Daan Vermassen, Didier Caluwaerts\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14789299231169491\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is generally argued that representative democracies are unresponsive to the needs of future generations. Representatives, standing for re-election, are incentivized by the needs of current generations, and fail to take the interests of the unborn into account. However, this argument bypasses the institutional diversity among parliaments. In this article, we focus in particular on bicameralism, and we ask whether the representation of future generations is more prevalent in upper than in lower houses. We expect that posterity’s interests will be taken into account more strongly in upper houses which are (1) mandated to reflect on the long-term impact of policies, (2) less politically and publicly visible and (3) at least partially composed of non-elected members. Based on an exploratory analysis of representative claims made on behalf of future generations in the Belgian Chamber of Representatives and the Senate, we conclude that the institutional status of the parliamentary assembly is not related to the propensity of making claims on behalf of posterity. We provide several explanations why this might be so.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46813,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Political Studies Review\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"539 - 547\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Political Studies Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14789299231169491\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Studies Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14789299231169491","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

人们普遍认为,代议制民主国家对后代的需求反应迟钝。竞选连任的众议员受到当代人需求的激励,没有考虑到未出生者的利益。然而,这一论点忽略了议会之间的制度多样性。在这篇文章中,我们特别关注两院制,我们问后代的代表性在上议院是否比在下议院更普遍。我们预计,上议院将更加强烈地考虑子孙后代的利益,因为上议院(1)被授权反思政策的长期影响,(2)在政治和公众面前不那么显眼,(3)至少部分由非民选议员组成。基于对比利时众议院和参议院代表后代提出的代表性主张的探索性分析,我们得出结论,议会的制度地位与代表后代提出主张的倾向无关。我们提供了几种解释为什么会出现这种情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Substantive Representation of Future Generations in Bicameral Parliaments: A Comparison of the Belgian Chamber of Representatives and the Senate (2010–2014)
It is generally argued that representative democracies are unresponsive to the needs of future generations. Representatives, standing for re-election, are incentivized by the needs of current generations, and fail to take the interests of the unborn into account. However, this argument bypasses the institutional diversity among parliaments. In this article, we focus in particular on bicameralism, and we ask whether the representation of future generations is more prevalent in upper than in lower houses. We expect that posterity’s interests will be taken into account more strongly in upper houses which are (1) mandated to reflect on the long-term impact of policies, (2) less politically and publicly visible and (3) at least partially composed of non-elected members. Based on an exploratory analysis of representative claims made on behalf of future generations in the Belgian Chamber of Representatives and the Senate, we conclude that the institutional status of the parliamentary assembly is not related to the propensity of making claims on behalf of posterity. We provide several explanations why this might be so.
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
Political Studies Review
Political Studies Review POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
10.50%
发文量
62
期刊介绍: Political Studies Review provides unrivalled review coverage of new books and literature on political science and international relations and does so in a timely and comprehensive way. In addition to providing a comprehensive range of reviews of books in politics, PSR is a forum for a range of approaches to reviews and debate in the discipline. PSR both commissions original review essays and strongly encourages submission of review articles, review symposia, longer reviews of books and debates relating to theories and methods in the study of politics. The editors are particularly keen to develop new and exciting approaches to reviewing the discipline and would be happy to consider a range of ideas and suggestions.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信