Process vs. Outcome? How to Evaluate the Effects of Participatory Processes on Legitimacy Perceptions

被引:49
作者
Werner, Hannah [1 ]
Marien, Sofie [1 ]
机构
[1] Katholieke Univ Leuven, Dept Polit Sci, Leuven, Belgium
基金
欧洲研究理事会;
关键词
participatory process; procedural fairness; legitimacy; decision making; losers' consent; PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS; POLITICAL TRUST; DIRECT DEMOCRACY; DECISION-MAKING; MINI-PUBLICS; CITIZENS; VOICE; ACCEPTANCE; LOSERS;
D O I
10.1017/S0007123420000459
中图分类号
D0 [政治学、政治理论];
学科分类号
0302 ; 030201 ;
摘要
The potential for participatory processes to address deficits in perceptions of legitimacy is strongly debated. This letter discusses how to evaluate the effects of participatory procedures. It argues that participatory processes should not be compared to normative ideals about how citizens should behave, but rather to the status quo of representative decision making. The authors use the example of winner-loser gaps in perceptions of fairness to illustrate the importance of evaluation frameworks, drawing on twelve experiments from the Netherlands and Sweden (total N = 5,352). The study shows that the choice of benchmarks matters substantially for the interpretation of process effects. When comparing participatory processes to the status quo of representative decision making, it finds higher fairness perceptions for a participatory process than for a representative process across all twelve experiments, even when the outcomes are unfavourable.
引用
收藏
页码:429 / 436
页数:8
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]  
Achen Christopher, 2016, Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government
[2]  
Anderson ChristopherJ., 2005, Losers' consent: elections and democratic legitimacy
[3]  
[Anonymous], Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2009, Employee Engagement: A Review of Current Thinking
[5]   Legitimacy from Decision-Making Influence and Outcome Favourability: Results from General Population Survey Experiments [J].
Arnesen, Sveinung .
POLITICAL STUDIES, 2017, 65 :146-161
[6]   Good decisions, bad decisions: the interaction of process and outcome in evaluations of decision quality [J].
Arvai, Joseph L. ;
Froschauer, Ann .
JOURNAL OF RISK RESEARCH, 2010, 13 (07) :845-859
[7]   How elections change the way citizens view the political system: Campaigns, media effects and electoral outcomes in comparative perspective [J].
Banducci, SA ;
Karp, JA .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 2003, 33 :443-467
[8]  
Barber B., 1984, Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age
[9]   What can deliberative mini-publics contribute to democratic systems? [J].
Beauvais, Edana ;
Warren, Mark E. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL RESEARCH, 2019, 58 (03) :893-914
[10]   A four-component model of procedural justice: Defining the meaning of a "fair" process [J].
Blader, SL ;
Tyler, TR .
PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN, 2003, 29 (06) :747-758