Suchergebnisse

'Democracy and Corruption in Europe' edited by Donatella Della Porta and Yves Meny is reviewed.

Marriage reviews 'The Multiverse of Democracy' edited by D. L. Sheth and Ashis Nandy.

'Democracy and Corruption in Europe,' edited by Donatella Della Porta and Yves Meny, is reviewed.

What is democracy? Under what conditions does it thrive? What are the consequences of democracy?This book aims to answer these questions and more by exploring different varieties of democracies around the world. It starts with definitions of democracy and then divides the concept into three dimensions, which provide a framework for the study of democracy in all its forms. These dimensions form the three main sections of the book:*constitutional democracy which explores political rights*participatory democracy which focuses on participation of citizens*egalitarian democr

This May Day, trade unions must be at the centre of defending and rebuilding democracy.

A country's democracy improves when it receives democracy aid from a larger number of donor countries. This finding appears surprising from a development perspective, as the presence of a large number of donors, and more generally 'fragmented aid', have been shown to impact negatively on the recipient country. But fragmented aid can be beneficial: Diversity on the donor side provides choice to the local actors involved in the process of democratization. It thus creates a 'marketplace of ideas' which increases the viability of the resulting institutions. In contrast, a highly-concentrated donor community can lead to the imposition of an institutional blueprint, designed in advance and not adapted to the needs of the recipient society. An instrumental variable analysis with panel data for 133 countries from 1994 to 2013, explicit tests of the causal mechanism, and anecdotal evidence from Ghana provide strong support for the benefits of diverse democracy aid.

This title was first published in 2000: Administration, Ethics and Democracy is concerned with the disciplines of philosophy, political science and sociology. jvind Larsen's book provides a deeper analysis of the relations between administration, ethics and democracy. In modern society, it is no longer sufficient to be the obedient administrator Max Weber speaks about. The time is ripe to re-evaluate the overriding responsibilities of the administration. Today, responsible administration demands an independent position to be taken. jvind Larsen views the administration from the continuous complex demands it is required to meet and proposes that the professional role is not exempt from personal responsibility or position. Therefore it is crucial that the administrator has freedom of expression and the opportunity to discuss his problems with others. Ethics are a common concern and also a political problem in democratic society. This is why there is a close connection between administration, ethics and democracy.

The proposed new epoch of the Anthropocene, whereby humans have become the dominant geological force shaping Earth systems, has attracted considerable interest in the social sciences and humanities but only scant attention from democratic theorists. This inquiry draws out the democratic problems associated with the two opposing narratives on governing the Anthropocene – Earth systems governance and ecomodernism – and juxtaposes them with a more critical narrative that draws out the democratic potential of the Anthropocene as a new source of critique of liberal democracy and a new resource for democratic renewal. While Ulrich Beck welcomed reflexive cosmopolitan democracy (understood as a civil culture of responsibility across borders) as the appropriate response to the world risk society, this narrative develops an account of hyper-reflexive 'geopolitan democracy' based on a more radical extension of democratic horizons of space, time, community and agency as the appropriate response to navigating the Anthropocene.

A country's democracy improves when it receives democracy aid from a larger number of donor countries. This finding appears surprising from a development perspective, as the presence of a large number of donors, and more generally 'fragmented aid', have been shown to impact negatively on the recipient country. But fragmented aid can be beneficial: Diversity on the donor side provides choice to the local actors involved in the process of democratization. It thus creates a 'marketplace of ideas' which increases the viability of the resulting institutions. In contrast, a highly-concentrated donor community can lead to the imposition of an institutional blueprint, designed in advance and not adapted to the needs of the recipient society. An instrumental variable analysis with panel data for 133 countries from 1994 to 2013, explicit tests of the causal mechanism, and anecdotal evidence from Ghana provide strong support for the benefits of diverse democracy aid.