Advertisement

The Demand for Accountability and Public Fragmentation

  • Gergana DimovaEmail author
Chapter
  • 186 Downloads
Part of the Challenges to Democracy in the 21st Century book series (CDC)

Abstract

This chapter suggests that the debate about public demand for government accountability is misguided. Currently, it is too focused on inquiring whether the public expects too little or too much accountability from the government. Instead, public demand for accountability should be explored through the lens of public fragmentation. The chapter summarises the diverse scholarship on public fragmentation. It suggests that the public is fragmented because of party de-alignment, modernisation, marketisation and the mutually opposing forces of globalisation and decentralisation. The main implication is that the notion of the diversity of the public challenges the principle of the aggregation of preferences.

Keywords

Accountability Demand Public Fragmentation Sovereignty State Globalisation 

References

  1. Baumgartner, Frank R., et al. 2009. Lobbying and Policy Change: Who Wins, Who Loses, and Why. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bennett, W. Lance. 2003. Lifestyle Politics and Citizens Consumers: Identity, Communication and Political Action in Late Modern Society. In Media and the Restyling of Politics, ed. J. Corner and D. Pels, 137–150. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Biezen, Ingrid van, and Thomas Poguntke. 2014. The Decline of Membership-Based Politics. Party Politics 20 (2): 205–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Castells, Manuel. 2012. Networks of Outrage and Hope: Social Movements in the Internet Age. Polity Press.Google Scholar
  5. Crouch, Colin. 2004. Post-democracy. Polity Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dadgar, Ali. 2015. Book Review: The End of Representative Politics by Simon Tormey. The LSE Review of Books, October 15. Available at http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lsereviewofbooks/2015/10/15/book-review-the-end-of-representative-politics-by-simon-tormey/. Accessed March 18, 2017.
  7. Dalton, Russell J., Susan E. Scarrow, and Bruce E. Cain. 2003. Democracy Transformed? Expanding Political Opportunities in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. The Economist. 2010. The Party’s (Largely) Over, October 21. Available at http://www.economist.com/node/17306082.
  9. Egeberg‚ Morten. 2008. European Government(s); Executive Politics in Transition? West European Politics 31 (1–2): 235–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Evans, Geoffrey (ed.). 1999. The End of Class Politics? Class Voting in Comparative Context. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Hanley, Seán, and Allan Sikk. 2011. The Rise of Liberal Populism in Central and Eastern Europe. ECPR General Conference. Reykjavik: Iceland.Google Scholar
  12. Hanley, Seán, and Allan Sikk. 2016. Economy, Corruption or Floating Voters? Explaining the Breakthroughs of Anti-Establishment Reform Parties in Eastern Europe. Party Politics 22 (4): 522–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hobbes, Thomas. 2008 (1651). The Leviathan. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Huntington, Samuel. 2004. Who Are We?: America’s Great Debate. Free Press.Google Scholar
  15. Inglehart, Ronald. 1997. Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43 Societies. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Keane, John. 2009. Monitory Democracy and Media-Saturated Societies. Griffith Review 24. Participation Society.Google Scholar
  17. Keane, John. 2011. A Productive Challenge Unelected Representatives Can Enrich Democracy. WZB Mitteilungen Heft 131.Google Scholar
  18. Keane, John. 2013. Democracy and Media Decadence. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Kohli, Atul. 1991. Democracy and Discontent: India’s Growing Crisis of Governability. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Krastev, Ivan. 2013. The Rise and Fall of Democracy? Meritocracy? Russia in Global Affairs, June 29. Available at http://eng.globalaffairs.ru/number/The-Rise-and-Fall-of-Democracy-Meritocracy-16030. Accessed February 7, 2015.
  21. Krastev, Ivan. 2017. The Rise of the Paranoid Citizen. The New York Times, March 18.Google Scholar
  22. Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2005. Direct Democratic Choice: The Swiss Experience. Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  23. Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2013. Democracy as a Moving Target. In Democracy in the Age of Globalization and Mediatization, ed. Hanspeter Kriesi, Daniel Bochsler, Jörg Matthes, and Sandra Lavenex. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  24. Kriesi, Hanspeter, Daniel Bochsler, Jörg Matthes, and Sandra Lavenex. 2013. Democracy in the Age of Globalization and Mediatization. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  25. Kuper, Andrew. 2006. Democracy Beyond Borders: Justice and Representation in Global Institutions. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Lawson, Kay, and Peter H. Merkl (eds.). 2014. When Parties Fail: Emerging Alternative Organizations. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Lijphart, Arend. 1979. Consociation and Federation: Conceptual and Empirical Links. Canadian Journal of Political Science 12 (3): 499–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lobo, Marina Costa, and John Curtice. 2014. Personality Politics?: The Role of Leader Evaluations in Democratic Elections. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Mill, John Stuart. 1991. Considerations on Representative Government. Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  30. Mouffe, Chantal. 2005. The Return of the Political. Verso Books.Google Scholar
  31. Olsen, Johan P. 2013. The Institutional Basis of Democratic Accountability. West European Politics 36 (3): 447–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Papadopoulos, Yannis. 2013. Democracy in Crisis?: Politics, Governance and Policy. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  33. Rancière, Jacques. 2007. On the Shores of Politics. Verso Books.Google Scholar
  34. Rosanvallon, Pierre. 2006. Democracy Past and Future. Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Rosanvallon, Pierre. 2008. Counter-Democracy: Politics in an Age of Distrust. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Rosanvallon, Pierre. 2011. Democratic Legitimacy: Impartiality, Reflexivity, Proximity. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Schmitt, Carl. 1988. The Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  38. Shigetomi, Shinichi (ed.). 2009. Protest and Social Movements in the Developing World. Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  39. Schmitter, Philippe. 2011. Diagnosing and Designing Democracy. Available at http://www.eui.eu/Documents/DepartmentsCentres/SPS/Profiles/Schmitter/DiagnosingAndDesigningDemocracy.pdf. Accessed February 2015.
  40. Sikk, Allan. 2009. Parties and Populism. CEPSI Working Paper. Available at http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ssees/docs/research-publications-documents/cepsi-working-papers/parties-and-populism.pdf. Accessed March 11, 2017.
  41. Smulovitz, Catalina. 2003. How Can the Rule of Law Rule? Cost Imposition Through Decentralized Mechanisms. In Democracy and the Rule of Law, ed. José María Maravall and Adam Pzeworksi. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Stiegler, Bernard. 2011. The Decadence of Industrial Democracies. Polity Press.Google Scholar
  43. Tormey, Simon. 2015. The End of Representative Politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  44. Urbinati, Nadia. 2014. Democracy Disfigured. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Warren, Mark. (ed.). 1999. Democracy and Trust. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Weingast, Barry R. 1997. The Political Foundations of Democracy and the Rule of the Law. American Political Science Review 91 (2): 245–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wolin, Shledon. 1996. Fugitive Democracy. In Democracy and Difference, ed. Sheila Benhabib. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Wolin, Sheldon. 2017. Democracy Incorporated: Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism-New Edition. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Проданов, Георги. 2014. „Качество на Демокрацията и Качество на Елитите”. в В: Канев, Добрин., Тодоров, Антоний (съст.) Качество на Демокрацията в България. Изток-Запад, София.Google Scholar
  50. Kръстева, Анна. 2014. „Граждански протести, Е-демокрация, Нови Мобилизации”. в В: Канев, Добрин., Тодоров, Антоний (съст.) Качество на Демокрацията в България. Изток-Запад, София.Google Scholar
  51. Динев, Ивайло. 2013. Между Негативня и Позитивния Протест. Култура. Available at http://www.kultura.bg/bg/article/view/20734. Accessed June 2017.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied Social Sciences, Forensics and PoliticsUniversity of WinchesterWinchesterUK

Personalised recommendations