Изабери језик:
Тема броја

ДРУШТВЕНЕ НАУКЕ И САВРЕМЕНИ ПОЛИТИЧКИ ПРОЦЕСИ

ДИРЕКТНА ДЕМОКРАТИЈА И ЊЕНЕ ПОСЛЕДИЦЕ НА СИСТЕМ ПОЛИТИЧКОГ ПРЕДСТАВЉАЊА

Др Петар Матић
Др Александра Мировић Јанковић

Сажетак

У овом раду аутори анализирају утицај директне демократије на систем политичког представљања. Током протеклих декада долази до постепене ерозије поверења грађана у класичне представничке институције. У том контексту, овај заокрет се може тумачити као нека врста постепеног преласка од представничке ка директној демократији. Ипак, такав демократски идеал је тешко достижан у савременим условима те се данас директна демократија превасходно види као допуна класичних институција представничке демократије. Ови трендови, проширили су авеније за грађане, који више партиципирају у креирању јавних политика, у оквиру општег оквира представничке демократије у коме парламенти настављају да играју централну улогу. Политичка култура којој доприноси директна демократија не промовише политичке партије. Напротив, она умањује њихову улогу у политичком систему. То се најупечатљивије види на примеру избора, пошто је у системима са распрострањеном употребом механизама директне демократије излазност на изборе мања.

кључне речи:

Референце

    1. Altman David, Direct Democracy Worldwide, Cambridge University Press, 2011.
    2. Andeweg Rudy B., “Beyond Representativeness? Trends in Political Representation”, European Review, vol. 11, no. 2, Academia Europaea, Cambridge Journals, UK, 2003.
    3. Barber Benjamin, Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1984.
    4. Barry Brian, „Political Accomodation and Consocional Democracy“, British Journal of Political Science, 5, No. 4, 1975.
    5. Benz Matthias, Stutzer Alois, “Are Voters Better Informed When They Have a Larger Say in Politics?”, Public Choice, 119, no. 1-2, Springer Publishing, 2004.
    6. Bernauer Julian, Vatter Adrian, “Can’t Get no Satisfaction with the Westminster Model? Winners, Losers and the Effects of Consensual and Direct Democratic Institutions on Satisfaction with Democracy”, European Journal of Political Research, vol. 51, no. 4, John Wiley and Sons, 2011, стр. 435-468.
    7. Binder Michael M., Getting it right or playing it safe?: confusion, the status quo bias and correct voting in direct democracy, UC San Diego Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2010, Internet, http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/9dt906b8.pdfH, 06/10/2017.
    8. Boehmke, Frederick J., Bowen, Daniel C., “Direct Democracy and Individual Interest Group Memebership”, Journal of Politics, vol. 72, no. 3, Cambidge Journals, Southern Political Science Association, 2010, стр. 659-671.
    9. Bowler Shaun, Donovan Todd, Karp Jeffrey, Popular Attitudes Toward Direct Democracy, Internet, http://faculty.wwu.edu/donovat/bdkapsa03.pdfH, 03/09/2017.
    10. Braunstein Richard, “Initiative and Referendum Voting: Governing through Direct Democracy in the United States”, American Legal Institutions, LFB Scholarly Publications, New York.
    11. Budge Ian, “Direct & Representative Democracy: Are They Necessarily Opposed?”, International Conference on Engaging Communities, 14-17 August 2005, Brisbane, Australia, Internet, http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/UN/UNPAN021106.pdfH, 05/10/2017.
    12. Butler David, Ranney Austin (eds.), Referendums Around the World: The Growing Use of Direct Democracy, AEI Press, Wahington DC, 1994.
    13. Catt Helena, Democracy in Practice, Routledge, New York, 1999.
    14. Cebula Richard J., “Does Direct Democracy Increase Voter Turnout? Evidence from the 2004 General Election”, American Journal of Economics and Sociology, American Journal of Economics and Sociology Inc, vol. 67, no. 4, 2008.
    15. Charron Nicholas, “Government Quality and Vertical Power-Sharing in Fractionalized States”, Publius, vol. 39, no. 4, Oxford University Press, 2009.
    16. Childres Matt, Binder Mike, “Engaged by the Initiative? How the Use of Citizen Initiatives Increases Voter Turnout”, Political Research Quarterly, vol. 65, no. 1, Sage Publications, 2012.
    17. Crepaz Markus M. L., “Global, Constitutionaland Partisan Determinants of Redistribution in OECD Countries”, Comparative Politics, vol. 34, no. 2, Ph.D Program in Political Science of the City University of New York, 2002.
    18. Dahl Robert, Democracy and its Critics, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1989.
    19. Dalton Russell, “Review Symposium: Parties, Partisanship, and Democratic Politics”, Perspectives on Politics, 7, no. 3, Cambridge Journals, American Political Science Association, 2009.
    20. Dalton, Russell J., Scarrow, Susan E., Cain, Bruce E., “Advanced Democracies and the New Politics”, Journal of Democracy, vol. 15, no. 1, The John Hopkins University Press, 2004.
    21. Dalton Russell J., Scarrow Susan E., Cain Bruce J., “New Forms of Democracy? Reform and Transfomation of Democratic Institutions” in: Bruce J. Cain, Russell J. Dalton, Susan E. Scarrow (eds.), Democracy Transformed? Expanding Political Opportunities in Advanced Industrial Democracies, Oxford University Press, New York, 2003.
    22. Dalton Russell J., Burklin Wilhelm, Drummond Andrew, “Public Opinion and Direct Democracy”, Journal of Democracy, vol. 4, 2001.
    23. Damore David F., Nicholson Stephen P., “Mobilizing Interests: Group Participation and Competition in Direct Democracy Elections”, Political Behaviour, vol. 36, no. 3, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2014.
    24. Direct Democracy: International IDEA Handbook, IDEA, 2008.
    25. Donovan Todd, Tolbert Caroline J., Smith Daniel A., “Priming Presidential Votes by Direct Democracy”, The Journal of Politics, vol. 70, no. 4, Southern Political Association, 2008.
    26. Donovan Todd, Tolbert Caroline, Smith Daniel, Parry Janine, “Did Gay Marriage Elect George W. Bush?”, paper prepared and presented on 2005 State Politics Conference, 14-15. 05. 2005, East Lansing, USA.
    27. Downs Anthony, An Economic Theory of Democracy, Harper & Row, New York, 1957.
    28. Dyck Joshua, Seabrook Nicholas R., “Mobilized by Direct Democracy: Short-Term Versus Long-Term Effects and the Geography of Turnout in Ballot Measure Elections”, Social Science Quаrterly, vol. 91, no. 1, Willey-Blackwell, 2010.
    29. Freitag Marcus, “Bowling the State Back In: Political Institutions and the Creation of Social Capital”, European Journal of Political Research, vol. 45, no. 1, John Willey and Sons, 2006.
    30. Freitag Markus, “Structure Versus Culture: A Comparative Study of the Influence of Political Institutions and Cultural Modernization Factors on Voter Turnout in Swiss Sub-national Parliamentary Elections”, International Political Science Review, vol. 31, no. 4, Sage Publications, 2010.
    31. Freitag Markus, Stadelmann Steffen Isabelle, “Stumbling block or stepping stone? The influence of direct democracy on individual participation in parliamentary elections”, Electoral Studies, vol. 29, iss. 3, Elsevier Publishing, 2010.
    32. Frey Bruno S, “A Directly Democratic and Federal Europe”, Constitutional Political Economy, vol. 7, no. 4, 1996.
    33. Gerber Elisabeth R., The Populist Paradox: Interest Group Influence and the Promise of Direct Legislation, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1999.
    34. Hug Simon, “Some Thoughts about Referendums, Representative Democracy and the Separation of Powers”, Constitutional Political Economy, Springer Publishing, 2009.
    35. “Issues Relating to the Referendum Mechanism”, An Electoral Processes Team Working Paper, Idea International, September, 2004.
    36. Ladner Andreas, Brandle Michael, “Does Direct Democracy Matter for Political Parties? An Empirical Test in the Swiss Cantons”, Party Politics, vol. 5, no. 3, Sage Publications, London, Thousand Oakes, New Delhi, 1999.
    37. LeDuc Lawrence, “Referendums and Deliberative Democracy”, Electoral Studies, vol. 38, June, 2015, Elsevier Publishing, 2015.
    38. LeDuc Lawrence, “Referendums and Elections: How do Campaign Differ?”, in: David M. Farrell, Rudiger Schimtt-Beck (eds.), Do Political Campaigns Matter? Campaign Effects in Elections and Referendums, Routledge, London and New York, 2004.
    39. Leib Ethan J., Elmendorf Christopher S., “Why Party Democrats Need Popular Democracy and Popular Democrats Need Parties”, California Law Review, vol. 100, no. 1, 2012.
    40. Lijphart Arendt; Thinking about Democracy: Power Sharing and Majority Rule in Theory and Practice, Routledge, Taylor & Frances Group, London and New York, 2008.
    41. Lupia Arthur, “Shortcuts Versus Encyclopedias: Information and Voting Behavior in California Insurance Reform Elections”, American Political Science Review, 88, no. 1, 1994.
    42. Mirajinain Donald P, Comparative Direct Democracy: A Study of Institutions and Individuals, PhD Thesis, University of Nevada, 2013, (online), Internet, http://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3011&context=thesesdissertationsH, 30/09/2014.
    43. Norris Pipa, Driving Democracy: Do Power Sharing Institutions Work?, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2008.
    44. Pharr Susan J., Putnam Robert D. (eds.), Disaffected Democracies: What’s Troubling the Trilateral Countries?
    45. Pitkin Hanna, The Concept of Representation, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1967.
    46. Saward Michael, “Representative and Direct Democracy”, in: Understanding Democratic Politics: An Introduction (ed. Roland Axtmann), Sage Publications, London, 2003.
    47. Scarrow Susan E., “Direct Democracy and Institutional Change – A Comparative Investigation”, Comparative Political Studies, 34, August 2001, Sage Publications, 2001.
    48. Steffensen Jasper, “Local Government Organization and Finance: Uganda”, in: Anwar Shah (ed.), Local Governance in Developing Countries, The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, The World Bank, 2006.
    49. Stojanović Nenad, “Direct Democracy: a Risk or an Opportunity for Multicultural Societies? The Experience of the Four Swiss Multilingual Cantons”, International Journal on Multicultural Societies (IJMS), vol. 8, no. 2, 2006.
    50. Tolbert, Caroline J, Smith, Daniel A, “Representation and Direct Democracy in the United States”, Representation, vol. 42, no. 1, Routledge, Taylor & Frances, 2006.
    51. Tolbert Caroline J., McNeal Ramona S., Smith Daniel A., “Enhancing the Civic Engagement: The Effect of Direct Democracy on Political Participation and Knowledge”, State Politics & Policy Quarterly, vol. 3, no. 1, 2003.
    52. Tsebelis George, “Decision-Making in Political Systems: Veto Players in Presidentalism, Parliamentarism, Multicameralism”, British Journal of Political Science, vol. 25, no. 3, Cambridge University Press.
    53. Vatter, Adrian, Freitag, Markus, “The Contradictory Effects of Consensus Democracy on the Size of Government: Evedence from Swiss Cantons”, British Journal of Political Science, vol. 37, no. 2, Cambridge University Press.
    54. Verhurst Jos, Nijeboer Arjen, Direct Democracy: Facts and Arguments about the Introduction of Initiative and Referendum, Democracy International, Brussels, 2007.

     

периодика Српска политичка мисао 4/2017 УДК 321.7:[328+329 25-51
https://doi.org/10.22182/spm.5842017.2
Линк ка издању часописа Српска политичка мисао - 4/2017