Suchergebnisse

"Quality of life and governance are more and more related. The Consensus Building method is the "other" democracy, the one which works in complex societies. This approach has old roots, but its current success born in the last years due to two phenomenon's; the great crisis in traditional governance in particular in western societies from 70's until nowadays, and the inadequate local answers to this problems. On one hand some governments try to solve it with more restrict places of power, that take decisions on their own, on the other hand or they try to solve it with naïve participation, open new moments of decision without specific methods, thinking that differences could be solve with "good will" and voting. (From the introduction"Confronto Creativo; dal diritto alla parola al diritto di essere ascoltati" Lawrence Susskind- Marianella Sclavi 2011)On September 2011 Lawrence Susskind came to Italy in order to presents his book "Confronto Creativo, dal diritto di parola al diritto di essere ascoltati", wrote with Marianella Sclavi. This book has been published in more than 20 countries, from China, to Japan. The authors underline the idea that globalization is, in certain way, helping the born of a different governance, which makes democracy and new ways of participation been closer than in the past. This interview tries to answer some questions of participatory urban planning in Italy nowadays. As for example; can consensus building help to deal with complex cities nowadays? Who should promote consensus building approach: governments, citizens, private entrepreneurships? Which are the obstacles, and the methodologies to solve them? Once urban planners finish their work, who implement the projects? What are the new languages that urban planning should find in order to create local processes? ; "Qualità della convivenza e governance sono sempre più strettamente intrecciate. Il Confronto Creativo è l'altra democrazia, quella che funziona nelle società complesse. Questo approccio ha radici lontane, ma la sua fortuna crescente negli ultimi decenni nasce da due tipi di constatazioni: la crisi di governabilità che colpisce le società occidentali dalla fine degli anni'70 in poi e l'inadeguatezza dei due rimedi opposti ai quali si ricorre: il decisionismo, il prendere decisioni in sedi sempre più ristrette ed esclusive, e l'afflato verso la partecipazione ingenua, l'allargare gli spazi decisionali con spirito assembleare, pensando che il supplemento di esigenze e punti di vista divergenti ai quali si riconosce così cittadinanza sia risolvibile con la "buona volontà" e il voto a maggioranza. (Dell'introduzione "Confronto Creativo; dal diritto alla parola al diritto di essere ascoltati" Lawrence Susskind- Marianella Sclavi)Nel settembre 2011 Lawrence Susskind arriva a Roma per presentare il libro "Confronto Creativo; dal diritto alla parola al diritto di essere ascoltati", scritto insieme a Marianella Sclavi. Questo libro è stato pubblicato in più di 20 paesi dalla Cina, al Giappone, l'autore sostiene che la globalizzazione sta aiutando a contaminare l'idea di una forma di governance diversa, che avvicina la democrazia a nuove forme partecipative di prendere delle decisioni. L'intervista cerca di rispondere alle grandi domande che l'urbanistica partecipativa si pone in questo momento in Italia; può il confronto creativo affrontare gli scenari complessi delle città contemporanee? Chi sono gli attori che devono promuovere questo approccio: i governi, i gruppi della società civile, le imprese?Quagli sono gli ostacoli e le metodologie per superarli? Quando i gruppi di urbanisti lasciano i territori, chi deve implementare i progetti? Quale sono le nuove modalità e linguaggi che deve trovare l'urbanistica per tradurre questo approccio in narrazione locale?

"Quality of life and governance are more and more related. The Consensus Building method is the "other" democracy, the one which works in complex societies. This approach has old roots, but its current success born in the last years due to two phenomenon's; the great crisis in traditional governance in particular in western societies from 70's until nowadays, and the inadequate local answers to this problems. On one hand some governments try to solve it with more restrict places of power, that take decisions on their own, on the other hand or they try to solve it with naïve participation, open new moments of decision without specific methods, thinking that differences could be solve with "good will" and voting. (From the introduction"Confronto Creativo; dal diritto alla parola al diritto di essere ascoltati" Lawrence Susskind- Marianella Sclavi 2011)On September 2011 Lawrence Susskind came to Italy in order to presents his book "Confronto Creativo, dal diritto di parola al diritto di essere ascoltati", wrote with Marianella Sclavi. This book has been published in more than 20 countries, from China, to Japan. The authors underline the idea that globalization is, in certain way, helping the born of a different governance, which makes democracy and new ways of participation been closer than in the past. This interview tries to answer some questions of participatory urban planning in Italy nowadays. As for example; can consensus building help to deal with complex cities nowadays? Who should promote consensus building approach: governments, citizens, private entrepreneurships? Which are the obstacles, and the methodologies to solve them? Once urban planners finish their work, who implement the projects? What are the new languages that urban planning should find in order to create local processes? ; "Qualità della convivenza e governance sono sempre più strettamente intrecciate. Il Confronto Creativo è l'altra democrazia, quella che funziona nelle società complesse. Questo approccio ha radici lontane, ma la sua fortuna crescente negli ultimi decenni nasce da due tipi di constatazioni: la crisi di governabilità che colpisce le società occidentali dalla fine degli anni'70 in poi e l'inadeguatezza dei due rimedi opposti ai quali si ricorre: il decisionismo, il prendere decisioni in sedi sempre più ristrette ed esclusive, e l'afflato verso la partecipazione ingenua, l'allargare gli spazi decisionali con spirito assembleare, pensando che il supplemento di esigenze e punti di vista divergenti ai quali si riconosce così cittadinanza sia risolvibile con la "buona volontà" e il voto a maggioranza. (Dell'introduzione "Confronto Creativo; dal diritto alla parola al diritto di essere ascoltati" Lawrence Susskind- Marianella Sclavi)Nel settembre 2011 Lawrence Susskind arriva a Roma per presentare il libro "Confronto Creativo; dal diritto alla parola al diritto di essere ascoltati", scritto insieme a Marianella Sclavi. Questo libro è stato pubblicato in più di 20 paesi dalla Cina, al Giappone, l'autore sostiene che la globalizzazione sta aiutando a contaminare l'idea di una forma di governance diversa, che avvicina la democrazia a nuove forme partecipative di prendere delle decisioni. L'intervista cerca di rispondere alle grandi domande che l'urbanistica partecipativa si pone in questo momento in Italia; può il confronto creativo affrontare gli scenari complessi delle città contemporanee? Chi sono gli attori che devono promuovere questo approccio: i governi, i gruppi della società civile, le imprese?Quagli sono gli ostacoli e le metodologie per superarli? Quando i gruppi di urbanisti lasciano i territori, chi deve implementare i progetti? Quale sono le nuove modalità e linguaggi che deve trovare l'urbanistica per tradurre questo approccio in narrazione locale?

The advance of democracy in different regions and access to new communication technologies has resulted in societies with high demands to their governments and a political participation process. Interdependence as a result of social, economic and political global processes has generated a series of social demands on the efficiency of their governments on the use and management of their development finance, identifying promoters of social agendas which are closer to communities and national and regional integration. This paper cites two separate regional integration processes in Central America which have initiated a route to the interdependent development through participatory regional development process, which although it is in an initial and inspiring model has become increasingly pragmatic and direct due to its results and philosophy, presenting at the end, a model of a modern and representative state which has never failed as has been stated by some social. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5377/lrd.v31i0.1240 Revista de Derecho, Vol. 31, No. 1, año 2010; 5-25 ; El avance de la democracia en diferentes regiones y el acceso a las nuevas tecnologías de comunicación ha dado como resultado sociedades con alta exigencia hacia sus gobernantes y procesos de participación política. La interdependencia como producto de los procesos globales tanto económicos, sociales como políticos ha generado una serie de demandas sociales sobre la eficiencia de sus gobiernos en cuanto al uso y administración de sus finanzas para el desarrollo, identificando cada vez más a los constructores de agendas sociales cercanas a los pueblos y su integración nacional y regional. El presente documento, cita sendos procesos de Integración Regional Centroamericana que han iniciado una ruta al desarrollo interdependiente a través del proceso de desarrollo regional participativa, el cual si bien es cierto está en un modelo inicial e inspirador, se ha vuelto cada vez más pragmático y directo por sus resultados y filosofía, planteando al final un modelo de estado moderno y representativo y jamás fallido como lo platean algunos críticos sociales DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5377/lrd.v31i0.1240 Revista de Derecho, Vol. 31, No. 1, año 2010; 5-25

In this article I argue that there are grounds for considering agonistic
democracy and participatory democracy complementarity in order to
institutionalize agonism which has thus far lacked an elaborate articulation
of its institutional dimension. The two democratic theories share a
commitment toward widening the scope of the political as a way of inclusion
of citizens and their subsequent political subjectivation and empowerment.
Furthermore, there are authors on both sides who think democracy does not
need foundations. Agonistic participation and contestation, on the one hand,
and the broadening and strengthening of various sectors of political
participation, on the other, both open up new possibilities for critique and
change, but also create new risks. Building on a redefinition of agonisitic
participation, I aim to attenuate an objection that agonism is normatively
weak in terms of lacking resources to motivate citizens and justify their
critique of practices of domination and oppression. The article concludes
that we need to embrace agonistic participation as a means towards the
development of democratic political judgement, as there are no other
guarantees, i.e. secure foundations, for our ability to distinguish between
democratic and non-democratic agon.

This paper aims, after acknowledging the importance of Mouffe's perspective in underlining that conflict is inherent to society, to overcome the limitations that her approach shows in dealing with the duality of conflict and consensus. To this end, it presents the idea that the medieval trio of truth, goodness and beauty represents an unattainable concept-limit, but one that is necessary to legitimise the political process. From this perspective, it is possible to reimagine public debate: it is necessary to overcome its contemporary sterility, caused by imagining democracy as a marketplace of ideas, where there is no interchange but only competition between different positions and where the determining factor is force (sublimated in the number of votes). The paper attempts to offer some alternative ways of imagining democracy as a continuous process that respects pluralism and makes public debate constructive. ; Este artículo pretende, tras reconocer la importancia de la perspectiva de Mouffe al subrayar que el conflicto es inherente a la sociedad, superar las limitaciones que su enfoque muestra al tratar la dualidad del conflicto y el consenso. Para ello, presenta la idea de que el trío medieval de verdad, bondad y belleza es un concepto-límite inalcanzable, pero necesario para legitimar el proceso político. Partiendo de esta perspectiva, es posible reconceptualizar el debate público: es necesario superar su esterilidad contemporánea, causada al imaginar la democracia como un mercado de ideas, donde no hay intercambio sino sólo competencia entre posiciones distintas y donde el factor determinante es la fuerza (sublimada en el número de votos). El escrito intenta ofrecer algunas formas alternativas de imaginar la democracia como un proceso continuo que respete el pluralismo y haga que el debate público sea constructivo. ; Este artigo visa, depois de reconhecer a importância da perspectiva de Mouffe ao sublinhar que o conflito é inerente à sociedade, superar as limitações que sua abordagem mostra ao lidar com a ...

This paper sheds light on an overlooked issue in economics, namely the social responsibility of central banks in a democracy. We consider central banks as institutions of power, and, as such, neither are they nor their policies neutral, in the sense that there are inevitable winners and losers. In this context, we explain why and how their power should be regulated and controlled by society. Specifically, we focus on the income distributive nature of monetary policy to demonstrate this assertion. From this, we explain that the time is ripe to build a new framework for central banking aiming at improving central banks' social responsibility consistent with the spirit of a democratic system, and resting on new rules, new types of inner organization and, more broadly, an ethics of responsibility of a new kind. JEL codes: B55, E02, E12, E52, E58

El artículo pretende analizar la voluntad democrática de la sociedad y los actores políticos para mirar con certidumbre el porvenir democrático de México; aborda el proceso institucional en que está inmerso y observa que en esta conducción se tiene al Parlamento como baluarte. A partir de una revisión documental, se afirma que el fortalecimiento de los procedimientos de control parlamentario en México permitirá enjuiciar públicamente la actuación del poder ejecutivo, al brindar a la opinión pública la ocasión de conocer, a través de las críticas y censuras de la oposición, los errores y omisiones del Gobierno, siendo este mecanismo una vía para que el Gobierno se sienta vigilado, que evite hacer algo que pueda parecer incorrecto, convirtiéndose en un papel preventivo frente a posibles abusos. Esta investigación propone comprender que en la democracia se requiere de responsabilidad compartida al momento de ser ejercida por los poderes públicos y la sociedad en los temas de interés general. ; The article analyses the democratic will of the society and the political actorsin order to visualize the democratic future of Mexico. This article discusses theinstitutional process of Mexico, in which the Parliament has an important role toplay. From a theoretical-methodological approach and a documentary review, thearticle establishes that the strengthening of parliamentary control in Mexico willhelp to publicly prosecute the actions of the executive power. This will providethe opportunity to expose the mistakes and actions of negligence committed by theGovernment through the criticism and censure carried out by the opposition. Thismechanism offers a way to watch over the Government in order to prevent it fromdoing something wrong, and from possible abuses. This research aims to evidencethat democracy requires a shared responsibility of the public authorities and thesociety on the topics of general interest.