Suchergebnisse

Javne su politike, kao višedimenzionalan i izrazito kompleksan fenomen, nužno multidisciplinaran predmet istraživanja. Cilj je rada istražiti što je specifično politološko znanje o javnim politikama, odnosno koji je jedinstveni doprinos politologa izučavanju i upravljanju javnim politikama u svrhe profiliranja te mlade politološke discipline u Jugoistočnoj Europi. Rad je nastao kao rezultat pregleda temeljnih udžbenika javnih politika u svijetu i regiji, te literature o metodologiji i pristupima istraživanju u društvenim znanostima i politologiji. Kreće se od određivanja što su javne politike i što je politički aspekt javnih politika. Propituju se pristupi istraživanju javnih politika (policy studije). Zatim se identificiraju vrste profesionalne uporabe tih istraživanja (policy analize). Ključna je pretpostavka kako je politologija prvenstveno kompetentna za analizu aktera stvaranja politika. Osnovni je nalaz da temelj profesionalnog profiliranja politologa u javnim politikama, s obzirom da jedini rabe istraživačku perspektivu usmjerenu na aktere, reprezentativnost i legitimnost stvaranja politika, može biti jedan oblik participatorne policy analize. ; Public policies, as a multi-dimensional and highly complex phenomenon, necessarily make a multidisciplinary research subject. The aim of this paper is to examine what is specific political science knowledge about public policy, and what is the unique contribution of political scientists to policy research and governance to enhance consolidating this young discipline in Southeastern Europe. This paper is a result of a review of policy textbooks in Southeastern Europe and worldwide, and literature on approaches and methodologies in social sciences and political science. It starts with determining public polices and their political aspect. Then it explores approaches of policy studies. Finally, it identifies types of professional policy research or policy analysis. The key assumption is that political science is primarily competent to analyze policy actors. The main finding of the paper is that the basis of political scientist professionalization in policy research, given that they are best in actor-centered research, and issues of representativeness and legitimacy of policy-making, can be a form of participatory policy analysis.

Kako primjereno politologijski istražiti, prikazati i vrednovati povijest i sadašnje stanje politologije u Hrvatskoj? Tekst se fokusira na pomno razmatranje predmeta znanosti o politici – što je politika? – kao pretpostavke znanstveno primjerenog odgovora na dvojbu o stručnoj profilaciji studija i polaznika studija-politologa. A u tom sklopu, na smisao određenja politologije kao "znanosti o općenitosti" i politologa kao "stručnjaka za općenitost". Objašnjava se smisao, teorijski i kontekstualni, tih određenja (Prpić, 1969), vrednuju njegove pretpostavke, domašaji i ograničenja. Dramatična, teorijska i praktična, dvojba s kojom nas je Prpić suočio neprevladiva je u povijesnom kontekstu demokratske države, s obzirom na svojstvenu joj epohalnu ambivalenciju. Pri čemu se pokazuje nesuvislost dileme između množine i jednine: politička znanost u singularu sluškinja je političke moći, a političke znanosti tek metaznanstvena humanistička kritika postojećeg svijeta, što znači da znanost o politici ne valja ni u singularu ni u pluralu. Kada je znanstvena i stručna, tada je opasna po političku slobodu, kada je pak humanistička i ne-stručna tada je nemoćna i suvišna. Politolog je pak ili "stručnjak za posebnost", etički i vrijednosno neutralni sluga političke moći, ili pak pretenciozni misionar. Izlaz iz začaranog kruga: znanost o politici, u plodnoj i nezamjenjivoj dvojini metodički osloniti na novo načelo konstitucije zajednice, koje je imanentna kritika i prevladavanje moderne demokratske države i građanskog društva. Time se osnažuje i shvaćanje političke znanosti kao "znanosti o općenitosti". Znanost o općenitosti kao znanost o političkome tvori se u autonomiji (ali i komplementarnosti) spram znanosti o "općosti" (filozofije, etike i prava) i spram znanosti o posebnosti (posebnih sektora političkoga i društvenog bitka). Općenito je zbiljsko samo u odnosu spram općega, kao oposebljenje općega, i u odnosu spram posebnoga, kao poopćavanje posebnoga. Čime se suzbija opasnost od prividne općenitosti, kao bahate pretenzije ...

Članak propituje doprinos hrvatske politologije razvoju demokracije u Hrvatskoj. Fokus analize je pojam kulture o kojem autor govori u pet koraka. U prvom koraku je određena u modernom ključu, u drugom kao različita od prirode, a u trećemu kao različita od društva. U četvrtom se unutar politike razlikuje politička kultura od političke ekonomije i političkih ustanova, no u petom se pokazuje da je kultura nosivi dio politike i kao politics i kao policy i kao polity. Na temelju tih odredaba pokazuje se da je matica hrvatske politologije zaokupljena pretežito i u sve većoj mjeri izučavanjem upravo predmeta koji na prvi pogled pripadaju politici kao kulturi, i to u užem smislu političke kulture, te da se ona sama reproducira kao politička kultura. ; The article discusses the contribution of Croatian political science to the development of democracy in Croatia. The focus of the analysis is the concept of culture which author talks about in five steps. In the first step it is understood in the modern key, in the second step as different for nature and in the third as different from society. In the fourth step author differentiates political culture from political economy and political institutions, but in the fifth part there is an attempt to show culture as a fundamental part of politics, policy and polity. On the basis of these insights author shows that the matrix of Croatian political science is more and more devoted to scientific investigation of politics as culture as both study of political culture and as a source of development as politics as culture.

Vrijeme kada nisu postojali odnosi između politike i sporta, bilo da se radi o svakodnevnoj praksi ili znanstvenoistraživačkim pristupima povezanosti tih dvaju pojmova, ako ga je ikada i bilo, svakako je odavno iza nas. Usprkos tome danas se čini da se, osobito u znanstvenoistraživačkom radu na području nekadašnjih sportskih socijalističkih velesila, tim odnosima ne posvećuje odgovarajuća pozornost i da se oni često a priori negiraju i smatraju nevažnima. Zbog toga je glavni cilj ovoga članka potaknuti raspravu o važnosti i smislu istraživanja odnosa između politike i sporta gledano iz dvije perspektive – s obzirom na iskustva znanstvenika iz cijeloga svijeta te s obzirom na dosad provedena istraživanja znanstvenika iz bivše Jugoslavije. Stoga smo u ovome članku najprije teoretski odredili kontekst odnosa politike i sporta, a zatim smo analizom postojeće svjetske literature i radova znanstvenika s prostora bivše Jugoslavije analizirali međusobnu povezanost sporta i politike. Na temelju dobivenih rezultata, koji potvrđuju stalnu i čvrstu povezanost, ali ujedno i suviše apstraktno i paušalno razumijevanje odnosa sporta i politike, nudimo politološki relevantnu tipologiju odnosa između politike i sporta. Smatramo da razlike između odnosa politike kao borbe za vlast, institucionalne strukture te koncepta javnointeresnog djelovanja i sporta presudno utječu na buduća obilježja odnosa sporta i politike. ; Times when relations between politics and sports did not exist – be it in everyday practices or within scientific research – is definitely long gone, if they ever even existed. Nevertheless, it seems today that, especially within scientific research, these relations do not receive appropriate attention in the territories of former socialist sports superpowers, being a priori denied and considered as unimportant. That is why the key motive of this article is to initiate a discussion about the relevance of knowledge and research of the relations between politics and sport from two perspectives – the existing world-wide political science research experiences gained so far and already conducted researches in the territory of former Yugoslavia. In doing so, we first theoretically define the context of sports and politics, and then with the use of the literature review method analyse their mutual connectivity in the world and, more narrowly, within the work of the scientific community in the region of former Yugoslavia. Based on the gained conclusions which confirm a tight and constant, but also often abstract and flat-rate understood interplay between both analysed phenomena, a special typology for their in-depth and political-science-focused study is delivered. It is believed that distinctions between political, polity and policy approaches to sport decisively influence the mode of their future interplay.

U članku se razmatraju empirijski potkrijepljeni nalazi o trendovima, pitanjima i perspektivama političke znanosti koji su izloženi u radovima unutar biblioteke Istraživačkog odbora br. 33 Međunarodnog udruženja za političku znanost (IPSA-e) pod naslovom "Svijet političke znanosti: razvoj discipline" te na konferenciji IPSA-e održanoj u Montrealu 2008. o "Novim teorijskim i regionalnim perspektivama političke znanosti". Jedno je od pitanja koje se razmatra u ovoj analizi snaga i slabosti političke znanosti kao discipline – je li ona uopće relevantna za svijet koji nas okružuje, i ako nije, zašto nije? Golim je okom vidljivo da u usporedbi s, primjerice, ekonomijom kao znanošću (Predsjednik Obama ima tri savjetodavna vijeća) politička znanost razmjerno manje zanima kreatore javnih politika, medije i javnost. Stoga se pitamo je li politička znanost u raskoraku sa svijetom, i ako jest, što se može s tim u vezi učiniti? ; This paper arises from the empirical evidence about trends, issues and perspectives in political science to be found in the International Political Science Association's (IPSA) Research Committee 33 book series entitled: The World of Political Science: Development of the Discipline and the papers presented at the 2008 Montreal Conference of the IPSA on New Theoretical and Regional Perspectives on International Political Science. One of the issues raised by this analysis of the discipline's strengths and weaknesses is the question of whether political science is relevant to the outside world and if not, why not? It is evident to the naked eye that in comparison with, say, economists (President Obama has three advisory councils), political science is of relatively little interest to policy-makers, the media and the public. We have to ask if political science is out of step with the world and, if so, what might be done about it?

Autorica se bavi stanjem komparativne politike, a posljedično i političke znanosti uopće, u Hrvatskoj četvrt stoljeća nakon početka političke transformacije. Glavne uzroke njihova nezavidna statusa u međunarodnoj politološkoj zajednici vidi u selekcijskoj pristranosti u komparativnim istraživanjima i podrazvijenosti discipline. U prvom dijelu teksta općenito razmatra problem selekcijske pristranosti kao jedne od najčešćih i najpogubnijih grešaka u komparativnim istraživanjima. Prirodna pristranost očituje se u odabiru samo poznatih i dostupnih slučajeva, a neprirodna u "odabiru koji se provodi na ovisnoj varijabli", to jest u izboru samo onih slučajeva koji potvrđuju polazne hipoteze i isključivanju onih koji ih dovode u pitanje ili ih opovrgavaju. U drugom dijelu autorica ilustrira selekcijsku pristranost u transformacijskim istraživanjima i regionalnoj komparatistici na primjeru Hrvatske. Uzroke prirodne pristranosti vidi u tome što strani komparatisti ne poznaju jezik, povijest i politiku zemlje. Ona je umnogome posljedica large-nation biasa, to jest usredotočenosti istraživača na velike i moćne zemlje, i historiografskog biasa, to jest njihova oslanjanja na selektivne historiografske izvore podataka. Neprirodna pristranost izraz je metodoloških problema u dizajniranju komparativnih istraživanja, najčešće neopravdanog precjenjivanja jednih, a podcjenjivanja drugih varijabli, što znatno utječe na rezultate istraživanja. Naposljetku se osvrće na uzroke podrazvijenosti komparativne politike u Hrvatskoj. ; The author deals with the state of comparative politics in Croatia, and the state of political science more generally, a quarter of a century after the beginning of political transformation. Selective bias in comparative research and underdevelopment of the discipline are diagnosed as the main causes of its unimpressive status in the International community of political scientists. The first part of the article discusses in more general terms the problem of selective bias as one of the most widespread, but also most dangerous mistakes in comparative research. Natural bias is reflected in the choice of only known and available cases, while unnatural bias involves choice only of the cases that confirm the starting hypotheses and exclude those that question or repudiate the hypotheses. In the second part, the author illustrates the selective bias in research of political transformation and regional comparative politics using Croatia as an example. The main cause of natural bias has to do with the fact that many comparativists are unfamiliar with the language, history and politics of the country. This is largely due to large-nation bias and Reliance on selective historical data. Unnatural bias reflects methodological problems in designing research in comparative politics, most often in emphasizing one set of variables at the expense of another, which affects the results of research. In the concluding part, the article deals with the causes of underdevelopment of comparative politics in Croatia.

U radu se izlaže prvi dio prijedloga analitičkog okvira za opće razmatranje teritorijalne osnove lokalne samouprave. Obrađene su dvije sastavnice tog okvira: 1. opća načela na kojima se treba zasnivati podjela teritorijana lokalne samoupravne jedinice i 2. uvjeti koji ograničavaju odnosno faktori koji utječu na teritorijalnu podjelu. Valjanost analitičkog instrumentarija provjerava se na komparativnom materijalu. ; The paper contains the first part of the analytical framework for theoretical analysis of the territorial basis of local self-government. Two components of the framework have been dealt with: 1) general principles on which territorial organisation should be based in any developed local self-government system, and 2) conditions that limit and factors that influence any territorial organisation. With regard to general principles, the author differentiates between the principles of the territorial basis of the whole local self-government system and the principles related to the determination of the territory of individual local self-government units, i.e., parts of local self-government system. The principles related to the whole local self-government system are coverage, stability, rationality, and organisational adequacy of the territorial division, while the principles on which the territory of local self-government units should be based are the wholeness of a self-government unit, uniformity of local selfgovernment units, financial capacity and independence, democratic quality of local governance, and accessibility of local services. Each principle has been analysed with regard to its limitations and problems concerning its implementation. The author points out contradictory implications that may arise from the implementation of certain principles related to territorial determination of local self-government units. The second component of the analytical framework deals with objective conditions and subjective factors that determine and influence territorial organisation. These conditions and factors have been grouped and systematised into eight groups according to the degree of their invariance: natural characteristics of the territory; network and types of settlements; population characteristics; administrative-territorial tradition; level of economic development; transport and communication networks; efficiency and effectiveness of local services; and political aims and interests. The validity of analytical tools has been corroborated by the examples from comparative local self-government. The second part of the analytical framework containing the main problems of any territorial division to local self-government units and their possible solutions is forthcoming.

U radu se izlaže prvi dio prijedloga analitičkog okvira za opće razmatranje teritorijalne osnove lokalne samouprave. Obrađene su dvije sastavnice tog okvira: 1. opća načela na kojima se treba zasnivati podjela teritorija na lokalne samoupravne jedinice i 2. uvjeti koji ograničavaju odnosno faktori koji utječu na teritorijalnu podjelu. Valjanost analitičkog instrumentarija provjerava se na komparativnom materijalu. ; The paper contains the first pan of the analytical framework for theoretical analysis of the territorial basis of local self-government. Two components of the framework have been dealt with: 1 ) general principles on which territorial organisation should be based in any developed local self-government System, and 2) conditions that limit and factors that influence any territorial organisation. With regard to general principles, the author differentiates between the principles of the territorial basis of the whole local self-government System and the principles related to the determination of the territory of individual local self-government units, i.e., parts of local self-government System, The principles related to the whole local self-government System are coverage, stabïlity, rationality, and organisational adequacy of the territorial division, whïle the principles on which the territory of local self-government units should be based are the wholeness of a self-government unit, uniformity of local self- government units, financial capacity and independence, démocratie quality of local governance, and accessïbïlity of local services. Each principle has been analysed with regard to its limitations and Problems concerning its implémentation. The author points out contradictory implications that may arise from the implémentation of certain principles related to territorial détermination of local self-government units. The second component of the analytical framework deals with objective conditions and subjective factors that determine and influence territorial organisation. These conditions and factors have been grouped and systematised into eight groups according to the degree of their invariance: natural characteristics of the territory; network and types of settlements; population characteristics; administrative-territorial tradition; level of economic development; transport and communication networks; efficiency and effectiveness of local services; and political aims and interests. The validity of analytical tools has been corroborated by the examples from comparative local self-government, The second part of the analytical framework containing the main Problems of any territorial division to local self-government units and their possible solutions is forthcoming.

Rad se bavi fokusiranim studijama zemljopisno povezanih i zemljopisno nepovezanih zemalja, odnosno regionalnim i komparativnim regionalnim studijama. U prvom dijelu opisuju se uloga i razvoj te vrste studija kao poddiscipline komparativne politike. U drugom dijelu iznose se rezultati kvantitativne analize sadržaja tekstova objavljenih u časopisima kojima je Fakultet političkih znanosti Sveučilišta u Zagrebu izdavač ili suizdavač. Predmet analize su regionalne studije Jugoistočne i Srednje Europe objavljene u tim časopisima. Cilj ovog istraživanja bio je utvrditi koje zemlje u svome okruženju hrvatski politolozi (i drugi autori koji u njima objavljuju na hrvatskom ili engleskom jeziku) najčešće istražuju te s kojim se zemljama Hrvatska najčešće komparira. Istraživanje je pokazalo da kada je riječ o istraživanju regije, politolozi sužavaju svoja istraživanja na zemlje bivše Jugoslavije. ; This article studies the focus studies of geographically connected and geographically not connected countries, i.e. regional and comparative regional studies. In the first part of the article, a description of the role and development of this type of studies as a subdiscipline of comparative politics is provided. In the second part, I present the results of quantitative analysis of the content of articles published in the academic journals published or co-published by the Faculty of Political Science, University of Zagreb. The objects of analysis are regional studies of South-East Europe published in the journals. The main goal of this article is to determine which countries in their regional surroundings are researched the most by Croatian political scientists (and other authors who publish such articles in Croatian or English language in those journals), and which countries Croatia is most often compared to. This research has shown that, with regard to studies of the region, Croatian political scientists mostly focus on the countries of the former Yugoslavia.

The author looks into the studies Hrestomatija politologije 1962.-2002. (Chrestomathy of Political Science 1962-2002) & Fakultet politickih znanosti 1962.-2002. (The Faculty of Political Science 1962-2002) & contends that these are the first serious contributions to the history of Croatian political science. The history of this discipline in the last 20 years has turned into a new subdiscipline of political science. The author shows that -- especially during the 1960s -- the so-called political science of the "new community" prevailed, a fact overlooked in these studies. Besides, he analyzes the concept of progress in Croatian political science used by the authors of Chrestomathy & shows that they lack understanding of the general idea of progress in political science. The author thinks that the rationalist-progressivistic concept of progress should be conceptually replaced by a contextual concept of progress in political science. 39 References. Adapted from the source document.

Ovaj se rad bavi jezičnom politikom i društvenim promjenama koje su se dogodile u Hrvatskoj za vrijeme i nakon rata koji je trajao od 1991. do 1995. godine. Počinjem opisom povijesne pozadine, rata i devedesetih godina 20. stoljeća, koje je obilježila velika količina jezičnog purizma i preskriptivizma u Hrvatskoj te stvaranje postjugoslavenskih država u kojima je pripadanje naciji predstavljalo ključ za definiranje državljanstva. Istraživanjem odnosa između promjena u jezičnom i društvenom poretku, problematiziram više tema. Tvrdim da je zakonski okvir prava manjinskog jezika osnažio i legitimizirao nacionalistički imaginarij, stvarajući daljnje društvene podjele i učvršćujući hijerarhije koje među nacionalnim kategorijama promoviraju određeni nacionalisti. Iz tog razloga, tvrdim da nekritičko odobravanje ili promoviranje lingvističke različitosti mogu biti opasni. Nadalje, u aktivističko-antropološkom smislu, razlažem moguće razloge zbog kojih su znanstvenici društvenih i humanističkih znanosti rijetko sudjelovali u sociolingvističkim raspravama koje se tiču novog hrvatskog standardnog jezika. Tvrdim da bi takvim raspravama u znatnoj mjeri doprinijelo sudjelovanje znanstvenika humanističkih i društvenih znanosti, jer bi se stvorila veza između sociolingvistike i ostalih grana humanističkih i društvenih znanosti te bi se tako odmaknuli od, prema mojem sudu problematične, politike usredotočene na "identitet". ; This paper focuses on language policy and social changes which have taken place in Croatia during and since the 1991-5 war. I first describe the historical background, the war and the nineties being marked by excesses of linguistic purism and prescriptivism, alongside the formation of post-Yugoslav states in which national belonging was key to defining citizenship. Through examining the relationship between changing linguistic and social orders, I raise a number of issues for discussion. I argue that the legal framework of minority language rights has consolidated and legitimated a nationalist imaginary, increasing social divisions and reinforcing hierarchies asserted by some nationalists between national categories. For this reason, I suggest that the uncritical endorsement of or promotion of linguistic diversity can be dangerous. Second, in an activist-anthropological vein, I discuss possible reasons why academics trained in the social sciences and humanities have rarely participated in sociolinguistic debates concerning the new Croatian standard. I suggest such discussions could greatly benefit from interventions by social scientists, so as to bring sociolinguistics into contact with other strands of the social sciences and humanities and move away from what I believe to be a problematic policy focus on "identity".

The essay deals with the evolution of the theory of transformation in German political science of the 1990s. This research was given fresh blood by the collapse of the communist systems in Eastern Europe. Realizing that the existing theories of transformation cannot be applied to Eastern European countries due to a plethora of important distinguishing features, German political scientists used two general starting points in their research. The first starting point is the theory of universal waves of democratization, which focused its research on the application of comparative methods & comparative politics. The second starting point is the assumption that Eastern Europe is undergoing the social system change & not the political regime change, which enormously broadened the research scope. These general starting points gave rise to a series of studies, which are among the best works from the field of the theory of transformation in contemporary political science. This also resulted in the first political science handbook on the theory of transformation. 31 References. Adapted from the source document.

The Ministry of Science of the Republic of Croatia decided on a new Rule Book of Definition of Scientific Areas. According to the book, Politology is a scientific field in the area of social science. It is divided into 3 branches: (1) Politology, (2) Theory and History of Politics, & (3) Political Philosophy. By using documents, the author of this article shows how political science is differently structured by IPSA & APSA. The author describes 120 years of dominantly American development of political science & of professions of political scientists, which brought out a recent new world standard with around 100 subdisciplines & areas of expertise that are structured in 8 fundamental disciplines: (1) Political Institutions, (2) Political Behavior, (3) Comparative Politics, (4) International Relations, (5) Political Theory, (6) Public Policy & Public Administration/Management, (7) Political Economy, & (8) Political Methodology. The author points out that a voluntaristic intervention in the definition of scientific areas could mean an attack on the development of science, research organization, renewal of teaching staff at the university, & academic education of political scientists, as well as internationally comparable competence of Croatian experts & Croatian democratic political thought & political culture in general. 133 References. Adapted from the source document.