Suchergebnisse

Rad se bavi inačicom socijalne države koja se od devedesetih godina razvijala u Hrvatskoj, odnosno pitanjem kako su socijalni programi za veterane i pretvaranje veteranskih organizacija u ključne političke aktere utjecali na njezin razvoj. Hrvatska ima oko pola milijuna registriranih veterana te snažne i brojne veteranske organizacije. Djelomice reagirajući na mobilizaciju veteranskih organizacija, vlade predvođene HDZ-om stvarale su od 1994. trajne materijalne povlastice za veterane, uz simbolične poveznice koje njeguju od svršetka Domovinskog rata. Jačanje veteranskih organizacija kao političkih aktera utjecalo je stoga na razvoj socijalne države u Hrvatskoj. Snažno oslanjanje na obitelj u pružanju skrbi središnje je obilježje koje Hrvatska dijeli s drugima konzervativnim socijalnim državama, dok je klijentelistički karakter odnosa između države i društvenih skupina povezuje s južnim tipom konzervativne socijalne države. Nadalje, Hrvatsku obilježavaju "kompenzacijski" socijalni programi, kako za veterane tako i u obiteljskoj politici općenito, koji imaju kontradiktorne društvene učinke. Klijentelističku inačicu konzervativne socijalne države u Hrvatskoj održava politička mobilizacija veteranskih organizacija, ali je istodobno nagrizaju odnosi ovisnosti, predbacivanja i brojni drugi socijalni učinci tih programa. Ovaj rad ukazuje na potrebu obuhvatnijih komparativnih istraživanja socijalne države u Hrvatskoj. ; The paper theorizes about the type of welfare state that emerged in Croatia post-1990, focusing specifically on ways in which the evolution of welfare programmes for veterans, and the gradual strengthening of veteran organizations as pivotal political actors, impacted its morphology. Croatia currently has a population of around 500,000 registered veterans, which in the mid-1990 started organizing into powerful organizations. Partly in response to this mobilization, from 1994 onwards HDZ governments created a comprehensive institutional architecture of entitlements for veterans, instituting durable material linkages alongside symbolic ties to this population. The prominence of veterans as a pivotal political actor has impacted the development of the welfare regime in Croatia. Strong reliance on the family for a broad range of care work is the central feature Croatia shares with other conservative welfare regimes, while the clientelist character of state-society relations relates it specifically to their Southern variant. Distinctly, the "compensatory" character of welfare programmes, which is characteristic of veteran programmes, and of family policy in Croatia generally, creates contradictory impulses. What seems to have emerged is a specific clientelist variant of a conservative welfare regime, sustained by veteran mobilizations, while at the same time eroded by the dependency, resentment and a myriad of other social impacts of these programmes. Future research on the welfare state in Croatia will hopefully further explore the arguments that this paper brings forward.

Josip Zupanov's thesis about the egalitarian syndrome as an obstacle to development is very influential across the social sciences in Croatia. This paper analyses the theoretical and empirical basis of Zupanov's work on radical egalitarianism from the late 1960s. He developed the theory in three key publications 'The producer and risk' (1967), 'Economic aspirations and the social norm of egalitarianism', which he published with Darinka Tadic (1969), and finally 'Egalitarianism and industrialism' (1969), repeating it in his later work. The analysis reveals important weaknesses in the empirical foundations and theoretical inferences of Zupanov's thesis of radical egalitarianism. Secondly, contextualising his work into the late 1960s re-examines the widely held view about his work as critical of the regime, showing that his theses about the homo oeconomicus were part of a liberal reform wing that openly advocated market solutions at the time of his writing. Thirdly, his work is related to the concept of 'deviant' modernization in Yugoslavia, which assumes that all societies converge to a capitalist model of development. This approach is criticised from the perspective of multiple modernities, according to which modernization is not a linear trajectory towards a hegemonic model, but an open ended process that necessarily takes shape in context-specific constellations. Adapted from the source document.

U radu "Izlazak iz Lepušićeve?" Kasapović se ponovno bavi vrlo važnom temom kritičke procjene razvoja discipline političke znanosti u Hrvatskoj, osvrćući se posebno na stanje u komparativnoj politici. Autorica proučava zašto se Hrvatska rijetko nalazi u međunarodnim komparativnim istraživanjima, s tim da problem analizira iz vanjskog ugla, pitajući se zašto strani politolozi i veliki međunarodni istraživački programi rijetko uključuju Hrvatsku. Nadovezujući se na Kasapović, sumirat ću glavne boljke, a zatim utvrditi da se razvoj empirijske politologije u Hrvatskoj odvija u odsutnosti sustavne znanstvene politike, ali i u kontekstu nedovoljne brige samih znanstvenika i o uvjetima produkcije znanja i o mehanizmima reprodukcije discipline. ; In the article "Exiting Lepušićeva?" Kasapović engages once again with the very important issue of critical evaluation of the development of political science in Croatia, with a particular focus on the status of comparative politics within the discipline. The author takes an outside perspective in the approach to the analysis of the reasons why Croatia can rarely be found in international comparative studies, and inquires into the reasons why political scientists abroad, involved in large-scale international research programs, rarely include Croatia as one of their case studies? In addition to Kasapović's argument, I begin by summing up the main problems, and afterwards I argue that the development of empirical political science in Croatia takes place in the absence of a comprehensive Science and research policy on the national level, but also in the context of insufficient concern of the scientists themselves for the conditions of knowledge production and the mechanisms of reproduction of the discipline.

This article discusses the application of the QCA method in the social sciences, especially as it relates to the field of comparative politics. In its first part, the article presents a critical overview of the key methodological literature on the QCA method (e.g. Ragin et al., 2003, Rihoux, 2003). The main advantage of this method is in its ability to bridge the gap between qualitative and quantitative studies by including an intermediary number of cases in the analysis, increasing the variance of both the exploratory factors and the observed outcome, and thus improving the validity of conclusions and their scope for generalisation. Since the QCA method requires a formalisation of explanatory conditions and the outcome, the analysis is easily replicable, which brings it closer to accepted standards of the scientific method. Three characteristics of the QCA method are of particular importance: complex causality, equifinality, and its asymmetric character. The article presents the key elements of Boolean algebra, which is applied in computing the results. We pay special attention to the problem of limited diversity, and to the specificities of the fuzzy set variant of the QCA method. Finally, the author introduces several critical points regarding ways in which the QCA is being implemented. Although the QCA method has been developed in order to bridge the gap between qualitative and quantitative methods, when it is implemented without adherence to its key principles, it exhibits the same weaknesses as standard statistical techniques. Its successful implementation depends on sound contextual knowledge of the analysed country cases. Adapted from the source document.

This paper engages with the broader debate about the failures of representative democracy through a critical analysis of political cleavages in Croatia from 1991 until the present. Building on existing studies which repeatedly show that in Croatia political party competition is not structured along socioeconomic cleavages, I argue that a socioeconomic cleavage exists in society, but is not represented in the parliamentary arena. This hypothesis is backed up by data from the ISSP survey (2009), aggregate comparative data as well as an overview of existing studies. Available evidence points to growing social stratification in society, while the citizens of Croatia are aware of socioeconomic inequalities, they exhibit egalitarian value orientations and their economic preferences seem coherent when approached from a social class perspective. The second part of the paper formulates potential explanations for this proposed mismatch between social dynamics and its representation in the parliamentary arena, ranging from the role of communist historical legacies and the impact of nation-building and war in the 1990s, towards considering the way in which major political parties were influenced by European political party families and the European integration process more broadly. Overall, the analysis suggests that in Croatia structural conditions are conducive to a socioeconomic cleavage, but that interests on their own cannot trigger collective social action -- effective representation must be fought for through political articulation and mobilisation. Adapted from the source document.