Search results

Icelandic politics are analysed from the perspectives of three normative models of democracy: the liberal, republican and deliberative democratic theories. While the Icelandic constitution is rooted in classical liberal ideas, Icelandic politics can be harshly criticized from a liberal perspective, primarily because of the unclear separation of powers of government and for the extensive involvement of politics in other social sectors. Despite strong nationalist discourse which reflects republican characteristics, rooted in the struggle for independence from Denmark, republicanism has been marginal in Icelandic politics. In the years before the financial collapse, Icelandic society underwent a process of liberalization in which power shifted to the financial sector without disentangling the close ties that had prevailed between business and politics. The special commission set up by the Icelandic Parliament to investigate the causes of the financial collapse criticized Icelandic politics and governance for its flawed working practices and lack of professionalism. The appropriate lessons to draw from this criticism are to strengthen democratic practices and institutions. In the spirit of republicanism, however, the dominant discourse about Icelandic democracy after the financial collapse has been on increasing direct, vote-centric participation in opposition to the system of formal politics. While this development is understandable in light of the loss of trust in political institutions in the wake of the financial collapse, it has not contributed to trustworthy practices. In order to improve Icelandic politics, the analysis in this paper shows, it is important to work more in the spirit of deliberative democratic theory ; Peer Reviewed

This essay offers a succinct but comprehensive overview of Icelandic cinema from its early 20th-century emergence to the present day. Split into two parts, the first half focusses on filmmaking in Iceland prior to the founding of the Icelandic Film Fund in 1978, which was to establish a continuous local film production for the first time. Prior to that filmmaking in Iceland boiled down to the occasional efforts of local amateurs, albeit often quite skilled ones, and professional filmmakers visiting from abroad. Indeed, the few silent feature films made in the country all stemmed from foreign filmmakers adapting Icelandic literature and taking advantage of its photogenic landscapes. The first Icelandic feature was not made until 1948 and although immensely popular, like those that followed in its wake, the national audience was simply too small to sustain filmmaking without financial support. Although this changed fundamentally with the Icelandic Film Fund, which instigated contemporary Icelandic cinema and the subject of the essay's second half, the Fund's support proved insufficient as the novelty of Icelandic cinema began to wear off at the local box office in the late 1980s. The rescue came from outside sources, in the form of nordic and European film funds, whose support was to transnationalize Icelandic cinema in terms of not only financing and production but also themes and subject material. These changes are most apparent in Icelandic cinema of the 1990s which also began to garner interest at the international film festival circuit. In the first decade of the twenty first century, however, American genre cinema began to replace the European art film as the typical model for Icelandic filmmakers. Hollywood itself also began to show extensive interest in Icelandic landscapes for its runaway productions, as did many other foreign film crews. In this way Icelandic cinema is increasingly characterized by not only national and transnational elements but also international ones.

This chapter explores the possible influences of Sweden, Denmark and Finland on the Environmental Policy of the EU. We focus specifically on the reputation, expertise and role model behaviour of the Nordic EU members and their possibilities to use these factors as cognitive power resources.The chapter discusses several examples where the Nordic EU member states have successfully promoted their national environmental interests within the EU. We also make use of interviews with environmental representatives at the Swedish, Danish and Finnish Permanent Representations to the EU in Brussels, officials from other member states, DG Environment of the Commission and the European Environment Agency. The results indicate that the Nordic EU members have to some extent minimised their quantitative disadvantages, such as small administrations and limited voting powers, by successfully using the cognitive power resources in question within the Environmental Policy of the European Union.

Eitt af meginmarkmiðum núgildandi aðalnámskrár (Mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneytið, 2011/2013) er að búa nemendur undir þátttöku í lýðræðislegu samfélagi. Samkvæmt þessu á grunnskólinn að vera sá staður sem veitir nemendum svigrúm til að öðlast reynslu af lýðræðislegu starfi og vera þátttakendur í því. Markmið þessarar rannsóknar var að kanna mögulegar breytingar á viðhorfum nemenda í þessum efnum yfir fimm ára tímabil, 2010 til 2015. Tveir hópar nemenda í 6.–10. bekk (Nalls = 627) voru spurðir um afstöðu sína til lýðræðis og lýðræðisþátttöku með fimm ára millibili. Rannsóknin var gerð í samvinnu við tíu skóla sem söfnuðu gögnum við reglubundið sjálfsmat. Niðurstöður sýna að viðhorf nemenda til lýðræðis í grunnskólum á Íslandi og lýðræðisþátttaka virðist hafa tekið mjög litlum breytingum á framangreindu tímabili. Engar breytingar var að finna á því sem kallað hefur verið frjálslynd lýðræðissjónarmið, svo sem tjáningarfrelsi og samkeppni í skólastofunni. Aftur á móti mátti greina smávægilega jákvæða breytingu á viðhorfum til þess sem kallað hefur verið samstarfslýðræði, þ.e. til þátttöku og samvinnu. Mikilvægi lýðræðisþátttöku að mati nemendanna virtist dala lítillega yfir þetta fimm ára tímabil. Niðurstöðurnar voru bornar saman við danska rannsókn frá árinu 2001 sem þessi rannsókn tók mið af. Enginn afgerandi munur fannst á viðhorfum dönsku og íslensku ungmennanna. Þó virtust frjálslynd lýðræðissjónarmið vera traustari hjá dönsku ungmennunum. ; The Icelandic national curriculum guide for compulsory schools published in 2011 specially emphasized the importance of preparing students for active participation in a democratic society: "It is expected that children and youth learn democracy by learning about democracy in a democracy" (Mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneytið, p. 19). Democracy was furthermore emphasized as one of six fundamental pillars of the Icelandic education system together with literacy, sustainability, health and welfare, human rights, equality, and creativity. Accordingly, knowledge about changes in attitudes towards democracy and democratic participation since the introduction of this new conception in 2011 is of importance. The increased emphasis on issues related to democracy introduced in the Icelandic national curriculum guide for compulsory schools were to be fully implemented in 2013. Studies on how Icelandic students are prepared for an active participation in the constantly changing democratic society are few and far between. Therefore, the results of this study can be considered of importance for education stakeholders such as teachers, parents, students, and scholars. The theoretical model used in the study is based on the works of Danish researchers (Jacobsen, Jensen, Madsen, Sylvestersen, & Vincent, 2004), where democratic perspectives in a Western tradition are conceived as liberal democracy (e.g., emphasizing the rights of the individual) and republican democracy (e.g., emphasizing solidarity). According to the model, both perspectives need to be in place for a democracy to function, and it is in the tension between these two perspectives a democratic process becomes active. The goal of this study is to contribute to an increased theoretical and empirical knowledge about democratic processes and democratic participation in public schools. The research was intended to detect possible changes in the responses of children to questions related to liberal and republican democracy after the full implementation of the Icelandic national curriculum guide from 2011. The goals of the study were approached by asking two groups of children in Grades 6 through 10 (Ntotal = 627) about their attitudes towards democracy and democratic participation in the classroom. The first data collection was conducted in 2010 and the second data collection was conducted in 2015. The study was conducted in collaboration with 10 schools that carried out the data collection as a part of their own internal evaluation. The results show that attitudes towards democracy and democratic participation over the above depicted period had changed remotely during the five-year period. No changes were found in attitudes related to a liberal democracy. A slight positive change was detected regarding opportunities for participation and collaboration in a republican democracy. However, the importance of democratic participation showed a slight decline during this five-year period. According to the model of Jacobsen et. al. (2004) one of the prerequisites for liberal democracy is individuality. A comparison with Danish result from 2001 showed that about 61% of the Danish adolescents indicated that it was very important to "be the way they are" but only 47% of the Icelandic adolescents responded the same way in 2015. These results were in accordance with other manifestations of liberal democracy in the survey, which seemed stronger among the Danish adolescents. The limited change in the attitudes of adolescents towards democracy and democratic participation raises questions about whether compulsory schools had the resources to implement the changes in policy recommended by the 2011 national curriculum guide. More research is needed to explore what was done in schools to increase democracy in the classroom during the 2011-2013 implementation period. Furthermore, it is important to conduct further research to identify efficient ways for teachers and school administrators to meet the policy recommendation for an increased emphasis of democracy in Icelandic classrooms. Finally, comparison with results from other countries give reason to conduct more research on manifestations of liberal democracy (e.g., opportunities for an open and democratic discussion; respect for individuality) among Icelandic adolescents. ; Peer Reviewed