协商会议中调解方式与参与者对成功的感知:以墨西哥瓜达拉哈拉为例

David Garcia
{"title":"协商会议中调解方式与参与者对成功的感知:以墨西哥瓜达拉哈拉为例","authors":"David Garcia","doi":"10.16997/JDD.286","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article entails a comparative study of municipal consultative councils in Guadalajara, Mexico, to explore the mediation styles employed by those in charge of conducting the councils’ deliberation, which I call Mediators of Deliberative Process (MDP). Through the construction of an indicator called Participants’ Perception of Success, the article evaluates the relationship between the mediators’ styles and the degree to which participants think that the consultative council (CC) has been successful in achieving its purported goals. The results suggest that 1) MDPs exert different levels of directiveness that change over the course of the mediation according to the type of decision-making under deliberation; 2) that participants have a higher perception of the CC’s success in the case where the MDP is an expert in the subject matter of the council, resorts to a more directive approach to mediation, and deliberation is more oriented towards the outcomes of the mediation; and 3) that participants perceive the CCs as successful spaces to communicate with public officials, but least successful in having an influence over public policies.","PeriodicalId":23601,"journal":{"name":"VOLUME-8 ISSUE-10, AUGUST 2019, REGULAR ISSUE","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mediation Styles and Participants’ Perception of Success in Consultative Councils: The case of Guadalajara, Mexico\",\"authors\":\"David Garcia\",\"doi\":\"10.16997/JDD.286\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article entails a comparative study of municipal consultative councils in Guadalajara, Mexico, to explore the mediation styles employed by those in charge of conducting the councils’ deliberation, which I call Mediators of Deliberative Process (MDP). Through the construction of an indicator called Participants’ Perception of Success, the article evaluates the relationship between the mediators’ styles and the degree to which participants think that the consultative council (CC) has been successful in achieving its purported goals. The results suggest that 1) MDPs exert different levels of directiveness that change over the course of the mediation according to the type of decision-making under deliberation; 2) that participants have a higher perception of the CC’s success in the case where the MDP is an expert in the subject matter of the council, resorts to a more directive approach to mediation, and deliberation is more oriented towards the outcomes of the mediation; and 3) that participants perceive the CCs as successful spaces to communicate with public officials, but least successful in having an influence over public policies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23601,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"VOLUME-8 ISSUE-10, AUGUST 2019, REGULAR ISSUE\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"VOLUME-8 ISSUE-10, AUGUST 2019, REGULAR ISSUE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.16997/JDD.286\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"VOLUME-8 ISSUE-10, AUGUST 2019, REGULAR ISSUE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.16997/JDD.286","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

本文对墨西哥瓜达拉哈拉市的市政协商委员会进行了比较研究,以探索负责进行委员会审议的人所采用的调解风格,我称之为审议过程的调解人(MDP)。通过构建一个名为“参与者对成功的感知”的指标,本文评估了调解员的风格与参与者认为咨询委员会(CC)成功实现其预期目标的程度之间的关系。研究结果表明:1)决策者在调解过程中发挥不同程度的指导作用,指导作用随审议决策类型的不同而变化;2)如果民主党是委员会议题的专家,采取更直接的调解方式,审议更以调解的结果为导向,与会者对委员会的成功有更高的认识;3)参与者认为CCs是与政府官员沟通的成功空间,但在对公共政策产生影响方面最不成功。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Mediation Styles and Participants’ Perception of Success in Consultative Councils: The case of Guadalajara, Mexico
This article entails a comparative study of municipal consultative councils in Guadalajara, Mexico, to explore the mediation styles employed by those in charge of conducting the councils’ deliberation, which I call Mediators of Deliberative Process (MDP). Through the construction of an indicator called Participants’ Perception of Success, the article evaluates the relationship between the mediators’ styles and the degree to which participants think that the consultative council (CC) has been successful in achieving its purported goals. The results suggest that 1) MDPs exert different levels of directiveness that change over the course of the mediation according to the type of decision-making under deliberation; 2) that participants have a higher perception of the CC’s success in the case where the MDP is an expert in the subject matter of the council, resorts to a more directive approach to mediation, and deliberation is more oriented towards the outcomes of the mediation; and 3) that participants perceive the CCs as successful spaces to communicate with public officials, but least successful in having an influence over public policies.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信