Suchergebnisse

Includes supplements. ; Includes supplements. ; Mode of access: Internet. ; Organ of the Proportional Representation League (called, 1914-1920, American Proportional Representation League). ; The Proportional representation review (v. 1-3) was issued in Chicago from Sept. 1893 to Mar. 1896, when it ceased. In Dec. 1901, it was revived as a department of the Direct legislation record with which it continued till Jan. 1906, when it became the Proportional representation department of the Equity series.

Vol. 16 omitted in numbering. ; Publication suspended June 1915-Mar. 1919. ; Vols. 1-17 also called nos. 1-44. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Continued as a department of: Direct legislation record and the proportional representation review. ; "A quarterly magazine, devoted to the reformation of the method of electing representatives." ; Title from cover. ; Mode of access: Internet. ; Revived and absorbed Dec. 1901 as part of: Direct legislation record and the proportional representation review.

Reprinted in part from various periodicals. ; Binder's title. ; Några ord till försvar för det hvilande representationsförslaget, af L. D. G.--Slutsatser i representationsfragan, af Hugo Hamilton.--Ytterligare bidrag till det hvilande representationsförlagets granskning, af tvenne reformvänner.--Satser angaende det från Riksdagen 1862-1863 hvilande förslag till national- representationens ombildning.--Tillsater i representationsfrågan af "Satsernas" författare.--Om Tidsandan och dess syftemal.--Allmänna välfärds-utskottet och de vilseledde. Också en adress till svenska folket, av C. W. Ringborg.--Omröstningen och folkviljan, af C. W. Ringborg. ; Mode of access: Internet.

International audience ; The standard opposition between political representation and participation is based on an exclusive conception of representation (excluding those represented). But a concept of representation that is inclusive can be understood, most notably through the history of representation before representative government succeeded in nineteenth-century France. Instead of preventing the direct participation of those represented, inclusive representation stimulates it. Inclusion through representation may first appear through the politicization of citizens, by their judging the action of representatives inside the institutions of representative government, or through the constructing of alternative representative devices outside these institutions. Inclusive representation may also specifically include dominated groups, inside or outside representative government institutions. Finally, inclusive representation may rest on processes of subjectivation, through which excluded social groups become political subjects.

International audience ; The standard opposition between political representation and participation is based on an exclusive conception of representation (excluding those represented). But a concept of representation that is inclusive can be understood, most notably through the history of representation before representative government succeeded in nineteenth-century France. Instead of preventing the direct participation of those represented, inclusive representation stimulates it. Inclusion through representation may first appear through the politicization of citizens, by their judging the action of representatives inside the institutions of representative government, or through the constructing of alternative representative devices outside these institutions. Inclusive representation may also specifically include dominated groups, inside or outside representative government institutions. Finally, inclusive representation may rest on processes of subjectivation, through which excluded social groups become political subjects.

Drawing on Durkheim's terms collective and individual representations, the concept of social representations (SR) was developed by Serge Moscovici in 1961 in his study of everyday understandings of psychoanalysis in France. In the last 50 years SR has become an established field within social and cultural psychology. As a whole, this research demonstrates that social representations are systems of communication and social influence that constitute the social realities of different groups in society. They serve as the principal means for establishing the shared knowledge, common practices and affiliations that bind social members together (Duveen, 2001) and thereby act to support systems of inclusion and exclusion. [excerpt from the Introduction] ; N/A

Cover title. ; "Reprinted from Citizen and Country, Sept., 1898." ; Electronic reproduction. ; Mode of access: Internet. ; 44

Democracy can entail the representation of discourses as well as persons or groups. We explain and advocate discursive representation; explore its justifications, advantages, and problems; and show how it can be accomplished in practice. This practice can involve the selection of discursive representatives to a formal Chamber of Discourses and more informal processes grounded in the broader public sphere. Discursive representation supports many aspects of deliberative democracy and is especially applicable to settings such as the international system lacking a well-defined demos.

Democracy can entail the representation of discourses as well as persons or groups. We explain and advocate discursive representation; explore its justifications, advantages, and problems; and show how it can be accomplished in practice. This practice can involve the selection of discursive representatives to a formal Chamber of Discourses and more informal processes grounded in the broader public sphere. Discursive representation supports many aspects of deliberative democracy and is especially applicable to settings such as the international system lacking a well-defined demos.

International audience ; This chapter explores some of the normative implications of the constructivist turn in the theory and practice of representative democracy, taking as its point of departure the constructivist framework of representative claims set by Michael Saward. Saward's account succeeds from a descriptive point of view, but does not provide us with normative criteria to evaluate whether a given representative claim is democratic. This chapter finds in the standard account of representation by Hanna Pitkin a conception of representation as composition, which provides a strong democratic criterion to evaluate representation. It distinguishes between two ideal-typical conceptions of representation compatible with constructivism: representation as imposition, developed most notably by Pierre Bourdieu, in which the represented get their social identities from their representative; and representation as proposition, in which the represented acquire in the process of representation not just their identity but also some agency to judge it – a view of representation that is at the core of pragmatic sociology. The conclusion suggests possible criteria for representation as proposition and propose inclusiveness as a democratic criterion that can form the basis of an alternate ideal of representation, inclusive representation.

International audience ; This chapter explores some of the normative implications of the constructivist turn in the theory and practice of representative democracy, taking as its point of departure the constructivist framework of representative claims set by Michael Saward. Saward's account succeeds from a descriptive point of view, but does not provide us with normative criteria to evaluate whether a given representative claim is democratic. This chapter finds in the standard account of representation by Hanna Pitkin a conception of representation as composition, which provides a strong democratic criterion to evaluate representation. It distinguishes between two ideal-typical conceptions of representation compatible with constructivism: representation as imposition, developed most notably by Pierre Bourdieu, in which the represented get their social identities from their representative; and representation as proposition, in which the represented acquire in the process of representation not just their identity but also some agency to judge it – a view of representation that is at the core of pragmatic sociology. The conclusion suggests possible criteria for representation as proposition and propose inclusiveness as a democratic criterion that can form the basis of an alternate ideal of representation, inclusive representation.

This paper examines the extent to which conditions for the 'representative party government' model of representation exist in the EU. It suggests that, although application of the model is obviously limited, there is some support for its relevance. Using surveys of voters and candidates for the European Parliament the paper shows that some policy positions of representatives are constrained more by their party group than their nationality, and to some degree there is obvious congruence between the opinions of candidates and their voters. This is particularly so with respect to left–right orientation; far less with respect to European Monetary Union where elites appear much more enthusiastic than their electorates.

This paper considers basic constitutional questions about how to elect a legislature. Electoral systems that require blocks of voters to coordinate their votes create a need for pre-election leadership and raise barriers to entry against new parties. Such barriers to entry can rigidity the political systems and decrease the incentives for established political leaders to serve the public honestly and effectively. So we consider an axiom of coalitional straightforwardness, which asserts that an electoral system should minimize the need for pre-election coordination of voters who share simple dichotomous preferences. Axioms of nondivisiveness, neutrality of party labels, responsiveness, and homogeneity (or coalitional autonomy) are also formulated. It is shown that only two kinds of electoral systems satisfy these axioms: winner-take-all approval-voting systems (AV), and single-divisible vote-proportional-representation systems (PR). Thus, AV and PR are seen to be uniquely compatible in terms of the incentives for party structure that they create, although AV and PR may differ in their incentives for party positioning in issue space. Possible use of AV and PR together in a bicameral legislature is discussed.

This article seeks to build a bridge between the empirical scholarship rooted in the traditional theory of political representation and constructivist theory on representation by focusing on the authorization of claims. It seeks to answer how claims can be authorized beyond elections - selecting three democratic innovations and tracing claims through the claim-making process. Different participatory democratic innovations are selected - providing various claims and taking place in different institutional contexts, i.e., (elected) members of the Council of Foreigners Frankfurt; individual citizens in participatory budgeting procedures in Münster; and citizen's associations elected politicians in the referendum campaign in Hamburg. We first analyze the claims raised by the different claim-makers to identify their claimed constituency eligible to authorize claims. In the second step, we focus on the authorization by the claimed constituency and the relevant decision-making authority. The article finds that claim-making in democratic innovations is fractured and incomplete. Nevertheless, this is not the reason to dismiss democratic innovations as possible loci of representation; on the contrary, seen through the prism of claim-making, all representation – electoral and nonelectoral – is partial. Focusing on the authorization of claims in democratic innovations provides novel inferences about the potential and limits of democratic innovations for broadening democratic representation.