Academic literature on the topic 'Models of democracy'

Over recent years, there has been an intense and polarised debate about the extent of democratisation in Turkey, although this has tended to be defined in institutional terms (for example, in the supposed reduction in military tutelage of the political system and the institutional recognition of minority rights). This study seeks to widen the terms of reference by examining the current challenges confronted by the Turkish media within the media-democracy relationship and, using the Kurdish question as a case study, examines the extent to which mainstream Turkish Media are contributing to deliberative democracy. It also seeks to identify where the Turkish media should be most appropriately located within competing models of media and democracy. This analysis of the challenges confronted in achieving and protecting media freedoms in Turkey is based on three empirical exercises. Semi-structured elite interviews were conducted with representatives from most of the mainstream media organisations in the country. Interviews were also conducted with political party representatives, NGO members and academics to ascertain their opinions of the media s democratic performance and credentials and also explore the extent to which they engage with journalists and news organisations routinely in their work. Finally, a content analysis of the coverage/content of two specific events related to the Kurdish Issue (the launch of the Kurdish language TV Channel TRT6 and Uludere Airstrike) in five mainstream Turkish newspapers was conducted. The interviews reveal sharply contrasting views about the extent to which democratisation processes are progressing in Turkey, and identify a range of barriers that continue to inhibit the democratic performance of the mainstream media (e.g. commercialization, state censorship, and other forms of political pressure). The detrimental impact of these factors is to a large degree confirmed by the content analysis of coverage of the Kurdish issue, but the analysis also shows that news output does contain a degree of diversity and difference. For this reason, it is not appropriate to conceive of the Turkish media as acting entirely as a closed message system for political elites.

Given current environmental crises, many citizens have taken personal concern towards the issues and seek to become involved in the solutions. The integration of democracy and knowledge production plays an important role in this situation, in order to include the values and interests of citizens in the traditionally scientifically driven world of natural resource management. Public participation in natural resource management has manifested in a variety of ways given societal and environmental circumstances, as well as political legislation of nations. Emergent models bear many similarities and difference, which creates the opportunity to understand how models can learn from one another. This research studies two cases of public participation in natural resource management, with two different models of participation: Ontario, Canada with a primarily top-down participation model, and the communities around Lake Tämnaren, Sweden, with their bottom-up model. This research seeks to understand if the models of participation affect the outcomes of the projects and how democracy plays a role in the different models. To compare these two cases, interviews were conducted (12 participants in Canada and 6 participants in Sweden), along with field observations and document analysis. Results of the research indicate the models of participation have different challenges and advantages to once another, but the main obstacle in both scenarios relates to the support in terms of finances and resources available to the projects. The research concludes there is a need for bottom-up approaches to public participation in order to sustain deliberative democracy in the projects, but with top-down support there is much more immediate action taken towards solving issues at hand.

This item is only available in print in the UCF Libraries. If this is your Honors Thesis, you can help us make it available online for use by researchers around the world by following the instructions on the distribution consent form at http://library.ucf.edu/Systems/DigitalInitiatives/DigitalCollections/InternetDistributionConsentAgreementForm.pdf You may also contact the project coordinator, Kerri Bottorff, at kerri.bottorff@ucf.edu for more information.<br>Bachelors<br>Sciences<br>Political Science

This thesis is the result of the author's long-term interest in the inner workings of self-governing and other "high involvement" orchestra organizations. This interest was "sparked" by her work in the general survey of professional symphony orchestras in East and West Germany, the U.S., and U.K. conducted with Allmendinger and Hackman in the early 1990s. The findings of that research led to a general understanding of how symphony orchestras were structured, supported and led in those countries during that time period. In her own work, the author goes beyond that broad foundation in order to generate original research that illuminates how (and how well) a rare form of orchestra functions (i.e., the self-governing orchestra) and what roles musicians take within them. After a description of the rise of concert orchestras in Germany, the United States, and Great Britain and a review of the pertinent literature, four particular orchestras are then discussed in-depth: the Colorado Symphony Orchestra (Denver, Colorado USA), the Orpheus Chamber Orchestra (NYC, NY, USA), the Berlin Philharmonic (Berlin, Germany), and the London Symphony Orchestra (London, U.K.). For this study, the author uses a mutli-method research strategy to help her discover and analyze the most important issues of high involvement orchestra organizations. These issues are related to an orchestra's direction, structure, leadership and membership. The findings reveal the similarities and differences between the four orchestras studied and the dominant model of orchestra organization. The findings also indicate what role national context has played (that is, historical tradition, labor and tax laws, and level of public support) in the development of musician-involved orchestras. In discussing the weaknesses of these more democratic orchestral systems, the author identifies seven "traps" or difficulties that must be dealt with in order to attain a truly functional and sustainable level of self-governance. These include: ample time to fully develop the organization's systems and structures, having the capacity to deal with financial pressures, fostering commitment (both individual and collective commitment), managing the tradeoff between broad participation versus efficiency, the need for widespread trust and technical knowledge, the ability to handle internal power struggles, and to conduct peer reviews. In arguing the other side of the issue, the author discusses the advantages of self-governing systems. These include: a profound and widespread sense of "ownership" throughout the organization (not just in the executive offices or the board room as is the case with the dominant model) which positively affects employee commitment and motivation, less mental stress for musicians because they have a legitimate voice in organizational affairs, a sense of common purpose that "we are all on the same team, pulling in the same direction," rewards are more collective than individual so everyone shares in the success or failure of the group, there is more participation in decision making and less hierarchy, and, finally, player job satisfaction is heightened in qualitative terms. The author concludes that national context does matter in explaining the genesis of the four organizations under study, but finds, more importantly, that each orchestra's particular direction, structure, membership and leadership configurations are the critical variables to both understanding and assessing how well they will function as high involvement organizations and what role musicians will play in them.

Online interactions, collaborations, and user-generated content are increasing at an exponential rate, and the rapid adoption of these Web 2.0 applications is putting an ever increasing pressure on public entities to adapt and adopt. �Governing bodies are exploring the benefits and possibilities of Web 2.0 applications, and are developing strategies for integration into the public process. Previous studies have researched the promising use of these tools in planning and community development departments serving the largest cities in the United States. Relatively little study has been done on the use and incorporation of these tools in planning and community development departments that serve smaller, less densely populated areas; areas that by their remote or sparsely populated nature could benefit greatly from easily accessed information exchange. The purpose of this work is to provide a benchmark study for how online, e-participation tools are currently used within planning and community development departments serving communities of 100,000 in population or less. The research also analyzes the demographic characteristics of the populations served by the departments using e-participation tools to explore developing trends in use. Finally, the study examines current barriers for incorporation of these tools into public processes, and attempts to offer developing and future solutions to these barriers. The goal of this research is to help planning departments serving relatively small populations make informed choices as how to best incorporate web-based, e-participation tools into their public process and daily functions.<br>Master of Urban and Regional Planning

How can institutional change aimed at including civil society contribute to the quality of democracy? More specifically, what is the impact of participatory decentralization on the prospects for democratic deepening at the local level? How do these newly created participatory public spaces affect the nature of state-society relationships? The dissertation first proposes that, if the indicators of success are redefined to account for the complexity of the state-society relationships, we find that current participatory decentralization experiences have various levels of success at sustaining a deep transformation of traditional clientelistic relationships in practice. This variation is observed on two dimensions: the nature of mobilization processes participatory institutions encourage and, more importantly, the level of autonomy enjoyed by participants in their interactions with the state partners within these institutions. Four types of relationships can emerge, all having a differentiated impact on the ability of civil society to enter the social construction of a more inclusive citizenship regime with an accountable local state: clientelism, disempowering co-option, fragmented inclusion and 'democratizing' cooperation. Drawing from the comparative case study of participatory budgeting in Belo Horizonte and Recife (Brazil), and of participatory planning in León and Nezahualcóyotl (Mexico), I argue that state-society cooperation has more potential than the other types to facilitate social inclusion patterns, greater state accountability and, consequently, the deepening of democracy. State-society cooperation entails collective grassroots mobilization patterns that contribute to empowering civil society actors who are autonomously organized to mediate between the state and society in order to formulate collective demands on the state through the formal channels of participation.<br>After establishing the range of possible outcomes for the implementation of participatory decentralization reforms in Latin America, this dissertation undertakes to understand the sociopolitical conditions necessary for local participatory governance institutions to have a positive impact on the social construction of inclusive citizenship rights (social, civil and political) through the development of cooperative interactions between society and the local state. What are the conditions sustaining the development of collective social mobilization and higher autonomy, and thereby of cooperative relationships? My findings first show that in contexts where the historical patterns of mobilization have generally been dominated by individualism and the particularistic nature of demands, the design of participatory institutions is central as it can provide the incentives for collective forms of mobilization to emerge. Second, and more importantly, my findings highlight the importance of going beyond a mere institutional analysis to look at the local sociopolitical context. The level of political competition, the balance of powers within civil society, and the perceptions state and social actors have of their own role in the participatory process are all factors that constrain and influence actors' practices and underlying strategies in appropriating participatory mechanisms, thereby determining the level of autonomy participants enjoy within these institutions.<br>De quelle manière les réformes institutionnelles visant à l'inclusion de la société civile peuvent-elles contribuer à la qualité de la démocratie en Amérique latine? Plus précisément, quel est l'impact des réformes de décentralisation participative sur la nature des rapports État-société et l'approfondissement de la démocratie locale? La thèse suggère que lorsque les indicateurs de succès sont redéfinis afin de tenir compte de la complexité des rapports État-société, les expériences actuelles de décentralisation participative visant à promouvoir une transformation profonde des rapports clientélistes traditionnels présentent, dans la pratique, des degrés de réussite variables. Cette variation s'observe sur deux fronts : d'une part, la nature des processus de mobilisation encouragés par les institutions participatives et, d'autre part, le degré d'autonomie dont les participants jouissent dans leurs interactions avec les partenaires étatiques au sein de ces institutions. Quatre types de rapports peuvent émerger, ayant tous des conséquences différentes sur la capacité de la société civile de s'engager avec un état imputable dans la construction sociale de régimes de citoyenneté inclusifs : le clientélisme, la cooptation désengagée, l'inclusion fragmentée et la coopération 'démocratisante'. À partir de l'étude comparative du budget participatif de Belo Horizonte et Recife (Brésil) et de la planification urbaine participative de Nezahualcóyotl et León (Mexique), la thèse affirme que la coopération État-société est plus à même de faciliter l'inclusion sociale, d'améliorer l'imputabilité gouvernementale et, conséquemment, de contribuer à l'approfondissement de la démocratie. En effet, la coopération État-société est définie par des processus de mobilisation collective qui donnent du pouvoir à une société civile organisée et autonome afin de lui permettre d'agir comme médiateur d'intérêts entre<br>Après avoir établi les possibles résultats de l'implantation de réformes de décentralisation participative, cette thèse vise à identifier les conditions sociopolitiques nécessaires afin que ces réformes aient un impact positif sur la construction sociale des droits de la citoyenneté. Quelles sont les conditions favorisant le développement de relations coopératives au sein des institutions participatives, c'est-à-dire de processus de mobilisation collective et d'une plus grande autonomie pour les acteurs sociaux? Mes conclusions démontrent tout d'abord que, dans un contexte où les processus de mobilisation ont traditionnellement été définis par leur individualisme et leurs demandes particularistes, le design des institutions participatives est central puisqu'il peut offrir les incitatifs à l'émergence de mobilisations collectives. Par ailleurs, mes conclusions soulignent l'importance d'aller au-delà de l'analyse institutionnelle et de s'intéresser au contexte sociopolitique local. En effet, le degré de compétition politique, l'équilibre des pouvoirs au sein de la société civile et les perceptions entretenues par les acteurs au sujet de leurs rôles respectifs dans le processus participatif sont tous des facteurs agissant sur les stratégies et les comportements des acteurs sociaux et politiques au sein des institutions participatives et la prise en compte de ces facteurs permet de mesurer le degré d'autonomie dont jouissent les citoyens dans le processus de participation.

The Inter-American Democratic Charter (IDC) was adopted in 2001 by member states of the Organization of American States (OAS) as a renewed instrument for the defense of democracy, not only against traditional coup d´etat but also to face serious violations to horizontal accountability. The second assumption took into consideration, as a precedent, the political situation in Peru during Alberto Fujimori's administration (1995-2000), defined as a competitive authoritarian regime by Political Science and Constitutional Law scholars. However, during the last decade to the presentwe find in Latin America several countries with governments where the principle of checks and balances has been eroded as a result of measures adopted by their respective executive branch. This situation suggests the following concerns: The liberal democratic model of the IDC is in crisis? This model has been overcame by illiberal governments that privileges economic and social rights and restraints civil and political rights? Or both models a recondemned to coexist in the region?<br>La Carta Democrática Interamericana (CDI) fue adoptada en el año 2001 por los Estados miembros de la Organización de Estados Americanos (OEA)  como  un  instrumento  renovado  para  la  defensa  de la democracia, no sólo contra el golpe de Estado tradicional, sino también para hacer frente a las graves violaciones de la responsabilidad horizontal. El segundo supuesto consideró, como precedente, la situación política en el Perú durante el gobierno de Alberto Fujimori (1995-2000), el cual fue definido por los académicos de Ciencias Políticas y Derecho Constitucional como un régimen autoritario competitivo. Sin embargo, durante la última década hasta la actualidad hemos hallado en América Latina varios países con gobiernos en donde el principio de equilibrio de poderes ha erosionado como resultado de las medidas adoptadas por sus respectivas ramas ejecutivas. Esta situación sugiere las siguientes preocupaciones: ¿El modelo democrático liberal de la CDI se encuentra en crisis? ¿Este modelo ha sido vencido por los gobiernos liberales lo cuales privilegian a los derechos económicos y sociales y restringen los derechos civiles y políticos? ¿O ambos modelos están condenados a coexistir en la región?