¿A qué llamamos participar en democracia? Diferencias y similitudes en las formas de participación

Ernesto Ganuza Fernández; Francisco José Francés García

doi:10.3989/ris.2008.i49.84

Authors

Ernesto Ganuza Fernández IESA-CSIC
Francisco José Francés García Universidad de Alicante

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3989/ris.2008.i49.84

Keywords:

Conventional Participation, Democracy, Non Conventional Participation, Policy

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to deliberate about the means and the context involved in individual’s participation. For this respect, we make up two models about participation that we present regarding the political and cultural background bound to them. The first one is related to participation by institutionalized ways as such social organitations or direct contact with politicians, while the other one is related to participation by not regulated ways as such demonstrations, shopping boycott, that is, conventional and non conventional ways of participation. The aim is to know which features we can find being linked to both models to be able to think of citizenship participatory. Our analysis conclude that either conventional and non conventional ways of participation are reciprocal, so they reinforced each other, although it stress on that the non conventional participation support, better than the first one, the civic values we can expect from participation and democracy.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alaminos, A. (2004), “Tendencias en ideología política: estructura y contenidos”, en Alaminos, A.; Francés, F.; y Santacreu, O. (2005), Socialización, ideología y participación. Casos prácticos de análisis estructural de covarianzas, Obets, Alicante. (2005), El análisis de la realidad social, Alicante, Obets.

Alaminos, A., F. Francés Y O. Santacreu (2005), Reflexiones teóricas y modelos empíricos sobre identidad, diversidad y participación social, Alicante, Obets.

Barhy, B. Y B. Silver (1990), “Soviet citizen participation on the eve of democratization”, American Political Science Review, vol. 84, pp. 821-848.

Bowler, S., T. Donovan y R. Hanneman (2003), “Art for democracy’s sake? Group membership and political engagement in Europe”, Journal of Politics, vol. 65, nº 4, pp. 1111-1129. doi:10.1111/1468-2508.t01-2-00128

COMITÉ DE MINISTROS DEL CONSEJO DE EUROPA (2001), Recomendación (2001) 19: “La participación de los ciudadanos en la vida pública local”, ed. Fundació Carles Pi i Sunyer d’Estudis Autnòmics i Locals, 2002. (puede consultarse en www.pisunyer.org)

CURTAIN (2003), “How citizens can take part in developing and implementing public policy” en Canberra, Bulletin of Public Administration, junio 2003.

Delhey, J. y K. Newton (2002), Who trusts? The origin of social trust in seven nations, WZB Publications. Berlín.

Deth, Jan W. Van (2001), “The proof of the pudding: social capital, democracy and citizenship”, EURESCO Conference Social capital: interdisciplinary perspectives, Exeter, UK, 15-20 Septiembre 2001.

Ganuza, E. y C. Álvarez (coord.) (2003), Democracia y Presupuestos Participativos, Barcelona, Icaria.

Hox, J.J. y T.M. Bechger (1998), “An introduction to structural equation modeling”, Family Science Review, 11, pp. 354-373.

Inglehart, R. (1991), El cambio cultural en las sociedades industriales avanzadas, CIS, Madrid.

Inglehart, R (1997), Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, economic and political change in 43 societies, Princeton, Princenton University Press.

Jöreskog, K.G. y D. Sörbom (1989), Lisrel 7: A guide to the program and applications, Chicago, SPSS.

Kline, R. B. (1998), Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, Nueva York, Guilford Press.

Morales, L. (2005), “¿Existe una crisis participativa? La evolución de la participación política y el asociacionismo en España”, RECP, nº13, octubre 2005, pp. 51-87.

Navarro, C. (1999), El sesgo participativo, CSIC, Madrid.

Newton, K. (2001), “Social trust and political disaffection: social capital and democracy”, EURESCO Conference on Social Capital: Interdisciplinary Prespectives, Exeter, 15-20 september 2001.

Norris, P. (2001), “Making democracies work: social capital and civic engagement in 47 societies”, EURESCO Conference Social capital: interdisciplinary perspectives, Exeter, UK, 15-20 Septiembre 2001.

OCDE (2001), Citizens as partners. Information, consultation and public participation in policy-making, OCDE, París.

Ping, R.A. (2004), Testing Latent Variable Models with Survey Data, 2nd Edition, [on-line monograph], http://home.att.net/~rpingjr/lv1/toc1.htm(04/06/05).

Putnam, R. (1993), Making democracy work, Princeton, Princeton University Press.

Putnam, R. (2000), Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, Nueva York, Simon and Schuster.

Sintomer, Y. y E. Koehl (2002), “Les jurys citoyens de Berlin”, Centre Marc Bloch-Délégation Interministérielle pour la Ville, Berlín.

Stoker, G. (2001), “Trends in public participation: part 1 Local goverment perspectives”, Public Administration, vol 79, nº1, pp. 205-222.

Uslaner, E. (2000), “Democracy and Social Capital”, in Warren, M. (ed) Democracy and Trust, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Uslaner, E. (2002), The Moral Foundations of Trust, Nueva York, Cambridge University Press.

Uslaner, E. (2004), “Bowling almost alone: political participation in a new democracy”, ECPR Joint Sessions of Workshops, Emerging Repertories of Political Action: Toward a Systematic Study of Postconventional Forms of Participation, Uppsala, Sweden, April 13-18.

Uslaner, E. y R. Conley (2003), “Civic engagement and particularized trust”, American Political Research, vol. 31, nº 10, pp. 1-30.

Wollebaek, D. y P. Selle (2002), “Does participation in voluntary associations contribute to social capital? The impact of intensity, scope and type”, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, vol. 31, nº 1, pp. 32-61.