评估咨询委员会的新市政改革:马德里和巴塞罗那的案例(2015-2019)

IF 2.4 3区 社会学 Q2 URBAN STUDIES
José Luis Fernández-Martínez, Patricia García-Espín, Pau Alarcón
{"title":"评估咨询委员会的新市政改革:马德里和巴塞罗那的案例(2015-2019)","authors":"José Luis Fernández-Martínez, Patricia García-Espín, Pau Alarcón","doi":"10.1177/10780874221109444","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"New Municipalism governments in Madrid and Barcelona (2015 − 2019) promoted a new agenda which included participatory budgeting, e-initiatives, and randomly selected forums. Both cities implemented deep modifications in their Advisory Councils’ (AC) systems while the ‘New Municipalism movement’ (radical-left candidacies) was in government for first time. In this article we reflect on how these municipal administrations faced the different strategies for reform across their ecosystem of ACs. For this purpose, our analysis relies on six dimensions (drivers, inclusiveness, deliberation, communication, policy-making capacity and connectedness) which are identified in the literature and are empirically applied through a comparative case study (thirty-one interviews). Despite the common agenda, the cases show dissimilarities which are connected to alternative reform strategies: one case was characterized by experimentation (Madrid), the other by slight improvement (Barcelona). Path dependency contributes to understanding these alternative logics, even when a common agenda was at play.","PeriodicalId":51427,"journal":{"name":"Urban Affairs Review","volume":"59 1","pages":"1567 - 1600"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing the New Municipalism Reform of Advisory Councils: The Cases of Madrid and Barcelona (2015–2019)\",\"authors\":\"José Luis Fernández-Martínez, Patricia García-Espín, Pau Alarcón\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10780874221109444\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"New Municipalism governments in Madrid and Barcelona (2015 − 2019) promoted a new agenda which included participatory budgeting, e-initiatives, and randomly selected forums. Both cities implemented deep modifications in their Advisory Councils’ (AC) systems while the ‘New Municipalism movement’ (radical-left candidacies) was in government for first time. In this article we reflect on how these municipal administrations faced the different strategies for reform across their ecosystem of ACs. For this purpose, our analysis relies on six dimensions (drivers, inclusiveness, deliberation, communication, policy-making capacity and connectedness) which are identified in the literature and are empirically applied through a comparative case study (thirty-one interviews). Despite the common agenda, the cases show dissimilarities which are connected to alternative reform strategies: one case was characterized by experimentation (Madrid), the other by slight improvement (Barcelona). Path dependency contributes to understanding these alternative logics, even when a common agenda was at play.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51427,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Urban Affairs Review\",\"volume\":\"59 1\",\"pages\":\"1567 - 1600\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Urban Affairs Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10780874221109444\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"URBAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urban Affairs Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10780874221109444","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"URBAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

马德里和巴塞罗那的新市政政府(2015 - 2019)推行了一项新议程,其中包括参与式预算、电子倡议和随机选择的论坛。当“新市政主义运动”(激进左翼候选人)首次进入政府时,两个城市都对其咨询委员会(AC)系统进行了深刻的修改。在这篇文章中,我们反思了这些市政当局如何面对不同的改革战略,在整个生态系统的ac。为此,我们的分析依赖于六个维度(驱动因素、包容性、审议、沟通、决策能力和连通性),这些维度在文献中得到确定,并通过比较案例研究(31次访谈)进行了实证应用。尽管有共同的议程,但这些案例显示出与备选改革战略有关的不同之处:一个案例的特点是试验(马德里),另一个案例的特点是略有改进(巴塞罗那)。路径依赖关系有助于理解这些可选逻辑,即使在使用共同议程时也是如此。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing the New Municipalism Reform of Advisory Councils: The Cases of Madrid and Barcelona (2015–2019)
New Municipalism governments in Madrid and Barcelona (2015 − 2019) promoted a new agenda which included participatory budgeting, e-initiatives, and randomly selected forums. Both cities implemented deep modifications in their Advisory Councils’ (AC) systems while the ‘New Municipalism movement’ (radical-left candidacies) was in government for first time. In this article we reflect on how these municipal administrations faced the different strategies for reform across their ecosystem of ACs. For this purpose, our analysis relies on six dimensions (drivers, inclusiveness, deliberation, communication, policy-making capacity and connectedness) which are identified in the literature and are empirically applied through a comparative case study (thirty-one interviews). Despite the common agenda, the cases show dissimilarities which are connected to alternative reform strategies: one case was characterized by experimentation (Madrid), the other by slight improvement (Barcelona). Path dependency contributes to understanding these alternative logics, even when a common agenda was at play.
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
Urban Affairs Review
Urban Affairs Review URBAN STUDIES-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: Urban Affairs Reveiw (UAR) is a leading scholarly journal on urban issues and themes. For almost five decades scholars, researchers, policymakers, planners, and administrators have turned to UAR for the latest international research and empirical analysis on the programs and policies that shape our cities. UAR covers: urban policy; urban economic development; residential and community development; governance and service delivery; comparative/international urban research; and social, spatial, and cultural dynamics.
×
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