Search Results

The past fifteen years have seen declining public support for European integration, and widespread suggestions that a legitimacy crisis faces the European Union (EU). Many in the EU have believed that this problem could be effectively tackled by vesting greater powers in the European Parliament (EP), the Union's only directly-elected institution. The central argument of this book is that, while considerable efforts have been made to increase the status of the EP, it is in crucial respects a failure as a representative body. This failure is grounded in the manner in which the parliament is elected. The electoral systems used for EP elections in many EU countries are, the book argues, actively obstructive of Europe's voters being represented in the way that they are most likely to respond positively towards. While the behaviour of EP members is shaped strongly by the electoral systems under which they are elected (which vary across the twenty-five member states of the EU), the electoral systems currently in place push most of them to behave in ways contrary to what citizens desire. Drawing on public opinion data, surveys of MEPs and considerable qualitative interview evidence, this book that the failure of parliamentary representation in the EU has a strong foundation in electoral institutions.

The book proposes a unifying conception which shows that the differences between ‘majoritarian’, ‘consensus’ and other forms of representative democracy are superficial compared to what unites them. The common element is the empowerment of the median voter by making the party (s)he votes for the median party in the legislature. Comparative evidene covering 21 democracies from 1950-1995 is assembled to check out the descriptive credentials of this idea, in contrast to the government mandate which forms the normal description and justification of democracy as providing ‘a necessary link between popular preferences and public policy’. Although, spontaneous majorities rarely emerge, median voter - median party correspondences do (72% of all governments, 82% under PR). Policy correspondence, distortion, long term bias, and responsiveness are examined in both static and dynamic terms. They reveal that underneath short-term fluctuations, the long-term equilibrium positions of governments and median voters map each other closely. Many other questions about democracy are also raised and investigated — economic and retrospective voting (‘ kicking the rascals out’): policy incrementalism, etc. — giving the book an appeal to different groups of specialists in political science. The comparative data on voting, on electoral party and government preferences, and on actual policy outputs are unsurpassed with regards to comprehensiveness over nations and time.

Elections in Africa is the first volume of a series of election data handbooks published by OUP; it covers all the 53 states in Africa. Elections have always been an integral part of post‐independence African politics and have assumed the utmost importance in the course of recent democratization processes. However, comparative research on political development in Africa lacks reliable electoral data. Elections in Africa fills this gap. Following the overall structure of the series, an initial comparative introduction on elections and electoral systems is followed by chapters on each state of the region. These contributions examine the evolution of institutional and electoral arrangements from independence to the present (1999), and provide systematic surveys of the up‐to‐date electoral provisions and their historical development. Exhaustive statistics on national elections (presidential, parliamentary, and constitutional assembly), referendums and coups d’état are included within each chapter; these cover electoral bodies and voting, electoral participation of parties and alliances, vote distribution, parliamentary composition, and power holders. The data are presented in the same systematic manner for all countries in order to provide electoral statistics in line with internationally established standards of documentation, so that the data can be easily compared. The book, therefore, provides a definitive and comprehensive set of data on elections in order to facilitate comparative research. Together with the other books of this series, Elections in Africa is a highly reliable resource for historical and cross‐national comparisons of elections and electoral systems worldwide.

A number of contemporary democracies have introduced measures to ensure a more equitable representation of women and/or ethnic minority citizens within elected assemblies. These measures have included the use of gender quotas in the selection of parliamentary candidates, and the use of ‘race‐conscious’ districting to increase the electoral chances of ethnic minority representatives. Drawing on a distinction between the politics of ideas and the politics of presence, this book explores and defends the case for such measures. The politics of ideas considers accountability in relation to declared polices and programmes, and sees the sex or race of the representative as a matter of relative indifference. In the politics of presence, by contrast, the gender or ethnic composition of elected assemblies becomes a legitimate matter of democratic concern. This book addresses the concern that the case for political presence could encourage essentialist understandings of group identity or group interest. It argues against an either/or alternative between the politics of ideas and the politics of presence and for a new combination of these two models of representation.

A pressing question at the forefront of current global political debates is: how can we salvage the democratic project in the context of globalization? In recent years, political activists have mounted high-profile campaigns for the democratization of powerful international institutions such as the World Bank and IMF, and for greater ‘corporate accountability’. In turn, many of the NGOs linked to these campaigns have themselves faced demands for greater democratic legitimacy. Through reflecting on the democratic dilemmas surrounding the political power of global NGOs, this book challenges the state-centric theoretical assumptions that have underpinned the established democratic theories of both ‘cosmopolitan’ and ‘communitarian’ liberals. In particular, it challenges the widespread assumption that ‘sovereign’ power, ‘bounded’ (national or global) societies, and ‘electoral’ processes are essential institutional foundations of a democratic system. The book then re-thinks the democratic project from its conceptual foundations, posing a number of questions. What needs to be controlled? Who ought to control it? How could they do so? In answering these questions, the book develops a theoretical model of representative democracy that is focused on plural (state and non-state) actors rather than on unitary state structures. It elaborates a democratic framework based on the new theoretical concepts of public power, stakeholder communities, and non-electoral representation, and illustrates the practical implications of these proposals for projects of global institutional reform.

In an era of disaffection from traditional political institutions and the rise of transnational politics, the need to rethink political representation – who speaks for whom and with what authority – has taken on a new and practical urgency. This book offers and defends an innovative approach to the topic, built around the straightforward but versatile idea of the ‘representative claim’. Representation is defined broadly as a dynamic process of claim‐making, and not solely an institutional fact deriving from election. The book shows how the idea of the representative claim provides critical purchase where conventional approaches reach their analytical limits. The elaboration of the representative claim is conducted against the background of a systematic critique of prominent existing theories. The crucial aesthetic, cultural and performative sides of representation are developed as part of its political dimension, and the key concepts are put to work in examinations of cases of non‐elective representation, political parties, and the representation of women and ‘nature’. Concluding with a detailed account of what can make representative claims democratically legitimate, the book shows how our ideas of democracy are disrupted and revised when we embrace the notion of representation as the making and reception of claims.

This book explores the complex relationship between women’s presence and impact in two strikingly different, consecutive congresses. Drawing on hundreds of elite interviews and archival information, the case studies of three highly visible policy areas (reproductive rights, women’s health, and health care policy) move beyond the question of ‘Do women make a difference?’ to confront the oft-ignored, contested issues surrounding gender difference and impact: its probabilistic nature, contested legitimacy, and disputed meaning. The analysis enhances understanding of how gendered forces at the individual, institutional, and societal levels combine to reinforce and redefine gendered relationships to power in the public sphere, and suggests strategies to strengthen substantive representation of women.

Mediatic representation has become an integral part of politics and policy. The dominance of incident-oriented media formats has led students of politics and media to fear a trend of ‘dumbing down’: the privileging of style over content. This book takes issue with the ‘dumbing down’ thesis both on theoretical and empirical grounds. In particular it investigates how an authoritative governance is possible in crisis-ridden circumstances in a mediatized environment. Maarten Hajer comes up with a communicative understanding of authority, creating a new basis for an authoritative governance in a world marked by political and institutional fragmentation. Extending his discourse-analytical framework, Hajer uses both discursive and dramaturgical methods to study policy makers in their struggle for authority. Three elaborate case studies provide a wealth of details of the dynamics of authority in today's mediatized polity and the peculiar role of crisis and incidents in this. The message of the book is that in the age of mediatization governance needs to be performed. Hajer illuminates contours of a new authoritative governance that encompass different elements than usually get represented in the media or indeed in textbooks on media studies, public policy, or governance. The book shows new ways to recombine traditional government of standing institutions to notions of network governance. The book thus provides new ideas about authoritative governance which is based on the need to actively create relations with a variety of publics.

During the early part of the last century, F. G. Frobenius raised, in his lectures, the following problem (called the Diophantine Frobenius Problem FP): given relatively prime positive integers a1, . . . , an, find the largest natural number (called the Frobenius number and denoted by g(a1, . . . , an)) that is not representable as a nonnegative integer combination of a1, . . . , an. It turned out that the knowledge of g(a1, . . . , an) has been extremely useful to investigate many different problems. A number of methods, from several areas of mathematics, have been used in the hope of finding a formula giving the Frobenius number and algorithms to calculate it. The main intention of this book is to highlight such ‘methods, ideas, viewpoints, and applications’ for as wide an audience as possible. This book aims to provide a comprehensive exposition of what is known today on FP.