Suchergebnisse

The paper focuses on the conceptualization of party patronage. The analysis of the usage of the term party patronage reveals several challenges: scholars from different fields use different definitions of party patronage, in addition same phenomena can be described by different concepts making it difficult to compare data from different surveys or analysis. Furthermore the term itself must be revised continuously as it can become out dated due to changing aspects of party patronage in modern world. To clarify the usage of term party patronage it is important to define contiguous phenomenon such as clientelism, politicization, state capture, pork barrel and corruption. Hence this paper suggests slightly modified conceptualization used by Kopecky et al.: party patronage as power of political parties to make personnel decisions in the public sector for Lithuanian social sciences. Party patronage is defined by three dimensions: who makes the decision, what are the decisions and where those decisions are made? In case of party patronage political parties acts as collective patrons and they make decisions of the personnel matter (hiring, promoting and transferring of public servants) in public sector. This conceptualization enables to show differences between party patronage and contiguous phenomenon. In short clientelism should be understood as an electoral resource of the political party, while party patronage should be understood as an organizational and governmental resource. Concept of politicization is closely connected to party patronage, however politicization is more suitable for public administrative studies as it is directed to the separation of bureaucrats and politicians while party patronage in political science puts attention on the political power of parties to make personal decisions. State capture is defined as systematic influence of business to government in order to obtain favorable legal and regulatory decisions. [.]

The paper focuses on the conceptualization of party patronage. The analysis of the usage of the term party patronage reveals several challenges: scholars from different fields use different definitions of party patronage, in addition same phenomena can be described by different concepts making it difficult to compare data from different surveys or analysis. Furthermore the term itself must be revised continuously as it can become out dated due to changing aspects of party patronage in modern world. To clarify the usage of term party patronage it is important to define contiguous phenomenon such as clientelism, politicization, state capture, pork barrel and corruption. Hence this paper suggests slightly modified conceptualization used by Kopecky et al.: party patronage as power of political parties to make personnel decisions in the public sector for Lithuanian social sciences. Party patronage is defined by three dimensions: who makes the decision, what are the decisions and where those decisions are made? In case of party patronage political parties acts as collective patrons and they make decisions of the personnel matter (hiring, promoting and transferring of public servants) in public sector. This conceptualization enables to show differences between party patronage and contiguous phenomenon. In short clientelism should be understood as an electoral resource of the political party, while party patronage should be understood as an organizational and governmental resource. Concept of politicization is closely connected to party patronage, however politicization is more suitable for public administrative studies as it is directed to the separation of bureaucrats and politicians while party patronage in political science puts attention on the political power of parties to make personal decisions. State capture is defined as systematic influence of business to government in order to obtain favorable legal and regulatory decisions. [.]

The paper focuses on the conceptualization of party patronage. The analysis of the usage of the term party patronage reveals several challenges: scholars from different fields use different definitions of party patronage, in addition same phenomena can be described by different concepts making it difficult to compare data from different surveys or analysis. Furthermore the term itself must be revised continuously as it can become out dated due to changing aspects of party patronage in modern world. To clarify the usage of term party patronage it is important to define contiguous phenomenon such as clientelism, politicization, state capture, pork barrel and corruption. Hence this paper suggests slightly modified conceptualization used by Kopecky et al.: party patronage as power of political parties to make personnel decisions in the public sector for Lithuanian social sciences. Party patronage is defined by three dimensions: who makes the decision, what are the decisions and where those decisions are made? In case of party patronage political parties acts as collective patrons and they make decisions of the personnel matter (hiring, promoting and transferring of public servants) in public sector. This conceptualization enables to show differences between party patronage and contiguous phenomenon. In short clientelism should be understood as an electoral resource of the political party, while party patronage should be understood as an organizational and governmental resource. Concept of politicization is closely connected to party patronage, however politicization is more suitable for public administrative studies as it is directed to the separation of bureaucrats and politicians while party patronage in political science puts attention on the political power of parties to make personal decisions. State capture is defined as systematic influence of business to government in order to obtain favorable legal and regulatory decisions. [.]

The paper focuses on the conceptualization of party patronage. The analysis of the usage of the term party patronage reveals several challenges: scholars from different fields use different definitions of party patronage, in addition same phenomena can be described by different concepts making it difficult to compare data from different surveys or analysis. Furthermore the term itself must be revised continuously as it can become out dated due to changing aspects of party patronage in modern world. To clarify the usage of term party patronage it is important to define contiguous phenomenon such as clientelism, politicization, state capture, pork barrel and corruption. Hence this paper suggests slightly modified conceptualization used by Kopecky et al.: party patronage as power of political parties to make personnel decisions in the public sector for Lithuanian social sciences. Party patronage is defined by three dimensions: who makes the decision, what are the decisions and where those decisions are made? In case of party patronage political parties acts as collective patrons and they make decisions of the personnel matter (hiring, promoting and transferring of public servants) in public sector. This conceptualization enables to show differences between party patronage and contiguous phenomenon. In short clientelism should be understood as an electoral resource of the political party, while party patronage should be understood as an organizational and governmental resource. Concept of politicization is closely connected to party patronage, however politicization is more suitable for public administrative studies as it is directed to the separation of bureaucrats and politicians while party patronage in political science puts attention on the political power of parties to make personal decisions. State capture is defined as systematic influence of business to government in order to obtain favorable legal and regulatory decisions. [.]

The paper focuses on the conceptualization of party patronage. The analysis of the usage of the term party patronage reveals several challenges: scholars from different fields use different definitions of party patronage, in addition same phenomena can be described by different concepts making it difficult to compare data from different surveys or analysis. Furthermore the term itself must be revised continuously as it can become out dated due to changing aspects of party patronage in modern world. To clarify the usage of term party patronage it is important to define contiguous phenomenon such as clientelism, politicization, state capture, pork barrel and corruption. Hence this paper suggests slightly modified conceptualization used by Kopecky et al.: party patronage as power of political parties to make personnel decisions in the public sector for Lithuanian social sciences. Party patronage is defined by three dimensions: who makes the decision, what are the decisions and where those decisions are made? In case of party patronage political parties acts as collective patrons and they make decisions of the personnel matter (hiring, promoting and transferring of public servants) in public sector. This conceptualization enables to show differences between party patronage and contiguous phenomenon. In short clientelism should be understood as an electoral resource of the political party, while party patronage should be understood as an organizational and governmental resource. Concept of politicization is closely connected to party patronage, however politicization is more suitable for public administrative studies as it is directed to the separation of bureaucrats and politicians while party patronage in political science puts attention on the political power of parties to make personal decisions. State capture is defined as systematic influence of business to government in order to obtain favorable legal and regulatory decisions. Pork barrel politics means direction of funding and legislation towards certain constituency or geographical region. Corruption should be understood as abuse of authority and power for personal gain. ; Siekiant tirti socialinius reiškinius, juos būtina konceptualizuoti. Vienas iš būdų, kuriuo politinės partijos išnaudoja valstybę ir pelnosi iš jos, – partinis patronažas. Taigi susiduriama su didelėmis konceptualizavimo problemomis. Dėl to kyla sunkumų šį reiškinį analizuoti empiriškai. Straipsnyje nagrinėjama partinio patronažo reiškinio konceptualizacijos problema, siūlomas partinio patronažo kaip politinių partijų galios priimti personalo sprendimus viešajame sektoriuje konceptualizavimas. Vartojant tokį apibrėžimą, atskiriamas partinis patronažas nuo artimų jam reiškinių: klientelizmo, politizacijos, valstybės užvaldymo ir kt., ir sudaromos prielaidos tolesnei reiškinio operacionalizacijai ir empiriniams tyrimams Lietuvoje.

Political corruption in Japan is a very important issue. According to the Global Corruption Barometer 2009 survey Japanese perceived political parties, public officials and civil servants to be the institutions which are the most affected by corruption. In addition, governmental measures against corruption are regarded to be ineffective and inadequate to the real situation. Japanese have keen concern toward Japanese political parties, intransparent activity of politicians and preventive measures taken by government. The purpose of this research is to examine political corruption phenomena in contemporary Japanese politics. Research questions are what are the structure, scale, and causes of political corruption in Japan during 2001-2009. For answering to these research questions first of all it is discussed the concept and definition of political corruption itself. Article overviews previous political corruption studies in Japan from the time of Second World War to the recent times, including the report of the Transparency International National Integrity System. In third chapter of article the scale, the varieties and the main practitioners of political corruption in Japan are to be analyzed. It reveals the biggest political corruption scandals in Japanese politics in given time-period. Last chapter focuses on the explanation of political corruption mechanism in Japan and in particular relationship with clientelism practises. Combination of primary and secondary sources led me to make the following conclusions on the main political corruption tendencies in Japan during 2001-2009. First, the Asahi Shimbun front page content analysis indicates that 2002 and 2007 are special years in the context of corruption studies because in those years published the largest number of political corruption articles and the biggest number of the new themes on the political corruption issue revealed. Second, the common point of the three most significant political corruption scandals during 2001-2009 is that all of them have the relationship with political finance issue and in particular a suspicion on the violation of the PFRL. This finding reaffirms the NIS statement that political finance is one of the top priority issues in Japanese corruption scheme. Third, illegal political donation and influence peddling are the most frequent types of corruption in Japan during the period of 2001-2009. Fourth, main practitioners of political corruption in Japan were the LDP members from the House of Representatives. In addition, in as many as nine cases the Diet member secretaries were involved in political corruption scandals. The Diet member secretaries play an important role in political corruption scheme because they are often responsible for the political fund management. Fifth, the most vulnerable institution to political corruption seems to be Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries and Ministry of Construction. Finally, article concludes that political corruption in Japan, to some extent, could be explained through the analysis of political clientelism. Adapted from the source document.

The object of this master thesis is the rise of indigenous peoples in Latin America, particularly in the Andean region. The main question is which factors determine the rise of indigenous peoples and their becoming important social and political protagonists in this region. The goal of this thesis thus is to analyze the factors, which have determined both the rise of indigenous movements in Ecuador and Bolivia and the weakness of comparable movements in Peru. The dominant theoretical model in the analysis of indigenous movements in Latin America is the model of political opportunity structure. According to this model the rise of a social movement is determined by two types of variables, namely structural and organizational ones. The favorable international context and changes in the political regime (structural variables) determine a more open political space where social movements can appear. For this purpose the existence of an organizational network and practice are necessary. According to this model, the (re)democratization at the end of the 20th century created a more open political system and shifted it to a neoliberal economical model, which worsened the economical situation and lead to the dissatisfaction of the region's marginal groups. The previous existence of networks of the church, the political left and other organizations in the rural zones helped to form the strong movements of indigenous people to express the discontent with the unfinished neoliberal reforms. Though this model answers the question when indigenous movements appear, it cannot answer the question why they arise. The model lacks both the historical perspective and the state variable. The argument of this master thesis is that the state's formation process, which does not include the Indian communities and its cultural practices, increases the likelihood of the appearance of indigenous movements. In this work the state's formation process is understood as the complex variable of the state's geographical, institutional and cultural–ideological penetration. On the way of finding the solution to the main problem additional questions arise: what type of relation exists between the state and indigenous and what place do these communities take within the national community? In answering these questions the historical comparative analysis of Ecuador, Bolivia and Peru is conducted. The main findings of the analysis show that until the middle of the 20th century the weak geographical and institutional penetration of the Andean states not only created state clientelism but also favorable conditions for maintaining cultural traditions and communal practices of indigenous communities. Even though this feature is important in the analysis of the rise of indigenous movements it is not sufficient for explaining why we can see the politicization of ethnical identity in Ecuador and Bolivia while there is silence in Peru. The analysis of the position of indigenous people in the national community shows that the decisive variable is the cultural dimension and the relation between Indian and national mestizo cultures. In Ecuador and Bolivia the contraposition between white people and Indian ones is maintained, while in the case of Peru the national political elite used the symbols of Indian culture which have become a part of the national symbols. Thus the distance between indigenous communities and the state is smaller in Peru. Here the indigenous communities feel like a part of the nation. The variable of the state formation process is understood as a complex variable of geographical, institutional and cultural penetration. It has a bigger explanatory power in answering to the question why the indigenous people rise in some countries while in others they do not. It emphasizes not on the variable of the more open political system, but on the importance of the state variable and the historical perspective of Latin American development.

The object of this master thesis is the rise of indigenous peoples in Latin America, particularly in the Andean region. The main question is which factors determine the rise of indigenous peoples and their becoming important social and political protagonists in this region. The goal of this thesis thus is to analyze the factors, which have determined both the rise of indigenous movements in Ecuador and Bolivia and the weakness of comparable movements in Peru. The dominant theoretical model in the analysis of indigenous movements in Latin America is the model of political opportunity structure. According to this model the rise of a social movement is determined by two types of variables, namely structural and organizational ones. The favorable international context and changes in the political regime (structural variables) determine a more open political space where social movements can appear. For this purpose the existence of an organizational network and practice are necessary. According to this model, the (re)democratization at the end of the 20th century created a more open political system and shifted it to a neoliberal economical model, which worsened the economical situation and lead to the dissatisfaction of the region's marginal groups. The previous existence of networks of the church, the political left and other organizations in the rural zones helped to form the strong movements of indigenous people to express the discontent with the unfinished neoliberal reforms. Though this model answers the question when indigenous movements appear, it cannot answer the question why they arise. The model lacks both the historical perspective and the state variable. The argument of this master thesis is that the state's formation process, which does not include the Indian communities and its cultural practices, increases the likelihood of the appearance of indigenous movements. In this work the state's formation process is understood as the complex variable of the state's geographical, institutional and cultural–ideological penetration. On the way of finding the solution to the main problem additional questions arise: what type of relation exists between the state and indigenous and what place do these communities take within the national community? In answering these questions the historical comparative analysis of Ecuador, Bolivia and Peru is conducted. The main findings of the analysis show that until the middle of the 20th century the weak geographical and institutional penetration of the Andean states not only created state clientelism but also favorable conditions for maintaining cultural traditions and communal practices of indigenous communities. Even though this feature is important in the analysis of the rise of indigenous movements it is not sufficient for explaining why we can see the politicization of ethnical identity in Ecuador and Bolivia while there is silence in Peru. The analysis of the position of indigenous people in the national community shows that the decisive variable is the cultural dimension and the relation between Indian and national mestizo cultures. In Ecuador and Bolivia the contraposition between white people and Indian ones is maintained, while in the case of Peru the national political elite used the symbols of Indian culture which have become a part of the national symbols. Thus the distance between indigenous communities and the state is smaller in Peru. Here the indigenous communities feel like a part of the nation. The variable of the state formation process is understood as a complex variable of geographical, institutional and cultural penetration. It has a bigger explanatory power in answering to the question why the indigenous people rise in some countries while in others they do not. It emphasizes not on the variable of the more open political system, but on the importance of the state variable and the historical perspective of Latin American development.