A conceptual framework for assessing power and governance in contemporary democracy

Mukesh Shankar Bharti

doi:10.35765/hp.2287

Published : 2022-09-29

Vol. 13 No. 44 (2022)

A conceptual framework for assessing power and governance in contemporary democracy

Mukesh Shankar Bharti

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3693-7247

DOI: https://doi.org/10.35765/hp.2287

Section: Thematic Articles

Abstract

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: The objective of the article is to define the conceptual framework of the contemporary governmental system and its style of functionality to strengthen democratic values, norms, and the rule of law. The purpose of the article is to elaborate governance that shares state power to facilitate the democratic rights of the people in the contemporary world.

THE RESEARCH PROBLEM AND METHODS: This article aims to analyse the power and governance in the current structure of democracy. The article evaluates the dynamics of contemporary democracy and how the government shapes the power for better governance. Future research highlights the conceptual framework of the qualitative approach and relies on discourse analysis to find out the outcomes of this study. The study uses a theoretical approach to examine contemporary governance, different approaches and how to build socio-political cooperation.

THE PROCESS OF ARGUMENTATION: It discusses various aspects of modern democracy in the context of the governability of those who hold power. Furthermore, the article argues how the states are shaping modern democracy. How a new political order pioneers the norms of the state through its governance. What is the legitimate principle of the work for the new political order?

RESEARCH RESULTS: As a result, the article tries to find out that modern democracy is running under a populist government in various countries in the world. The emergence of ultra-right-wing power groups diminished the norms of liberal democracy.

CONCLUSIONS, INNOVATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The article highlights the points as a conclusion of democracy facing many challenges in the new populist governance worldwide. The contemporary global communities are trying to make governance for peace, prosperity, and respect for the humanities but and on the other hand, international communities are failed in some places i. e. Afghanistan.

Keywords

Modern Democracy, Power and Governance, Government and Politics, International Organisation, Populism.

Details

References

Indicators

Authors

Download files

PDF

Zasady cytowania

Altmetric indicators

Licence

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a CC BY-ND licence that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are asked to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access). We advise to use any of the following reserach society portals:

References

Andeweg, R.B., & Irwin, G.A. (2005). Governance and Politics in the Netherlands. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.

Azmat, F. (2005). Good Governance and Market-based Reforms: A Study of Bangladesh. International Review of Administrative Sci-ences, 71(4), 625–638.

Bäckstrand, K. (2006). Multi-stakeholder Partnerships for Sustaina-ble Development: Rethinking Legitimacy, Accountability and Ef-fectiveness. European Environment, 16, 290–306.

Behn, R. (2001). Rethinking Democratic Accountability. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Bekkers, V.J.J.M., & Homburg, V.M.F. (2002). Administrative super-vision and information relationships. Information Polity, 7(2–3), 129–141.

Bernstein, S., & Cashore, B. (2004). Non-state Global Governance: Is Forest Certification a Legitimate Alternative to a Global Forest Convention? In J. Kirton & M. Treiblock (Eds.), Hard Choices, Soft Law: Combining Trade, Environment, and Social Cohesion in Global Governance (pp. 33–64). Aldershot: Ashgate Press.

Björk, P., Bostedt, G., & Johansson, H. (2003). Governance. Lund: Stu-dentlitteratur.

Bovens, M.A.P., Derksen, W., Witteveen, W., Becker, F., & Kalma, P. (1995). De Verplaatsing van de Politiek: Een Agenda voor Democrati-sche Vernieuwing. Amsterdam: Wiardi Beckman Stichting.

Chambers, S. (2003). Deliberative democratic theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 6, 307–326.

Dryzek, J.S. (1990). Discursive Democracy – Politics, Policy, and Politi-cal Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dryzek, J.S. (2000). Deliberative Democracy and Beyond. Liberals, Crit-ics, Contestations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dryzek, J., & Torgerson, D. (1993). Democracy and the policy scienc-es: A progress report. Policy Sciences, 26, 127–137.

Edelenbos, J., & Klijn, E.H. (2006). Managing stakeholder involve-ment in decision-making: a comparative analysis of six interac-tive processes in The Netherlands. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(3), 417–446.

Elster, J. (1998). Deliberative Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-versity Press.

Habermas J. (1996). Three Normative Models of Democracy. In Ben-habib S. (Ed.), Democracy and Difference. Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Hanberger, A. (2001). Policy and program evaluation, civil society, and democracy. American Journal of Evaluation, 22(2), 211–228.

Hanberger, A. (2009). Democratic Accountability in Decentralised Gov-ernance, 32(1), 1–22. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2008.00220.x

Held, D. (2003). From executive to cosmopolitan multilateralism. In D. Held & M. Koenig-Archibugi (Eds.), Taming Globalization: Fron-tiers of Governance (pp. 160–186). Oxford: Polity Press.

Held, D. (2006). Models of Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Hirst, P. (1994). Associative Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Hirst, P. (2000). Democracy and governance (J. Pierre, Ed.; pp. 13–35). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

House, E.R., & Howe, K.R. (1999). Values in evaluation and social re-search. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

Hupe, P., & Edwards, A. (2012). The accountability of power: De-mocracy and governance in modern times. European Political Sci-ence Review, 4(2), 177–194. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773911000154

Jessop, B. (1998). The rise of governance and the risks of failure: The case of economic development. International Social Science Journal, 50(155), 29–45.

Keohane, R.O. (2003). Global Governance and Democratic Account-ability. In D. Held & Koenig-Archibugi (Eds), Taming Globaliza-tion: Frontiers of Governance (pp. 130–159). Wiley.

Kjaer, A. (2004). Governance. Cambridge and Malden MA: Polity Press.

Koenig-Archibugi, M. (2006). Introduction: Institutional diversity in global governance. In M. Koenig-Archibugi (Ed.), New modes of governance in the global system (pp. 1–30). Palgrave Macmillan.

Kooiman, J. (2000). Societal Governance: Levels, Models, and Orders of Social-political Interaction. In J. Pierre (Ed.), Debating Govern-ance: Authority, Steering, and Democracy (pp. 138–164). Oxford: Oxford Press.

Lijphart, A. (1999). Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Per-formance in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven, CT, and London: Yale University Press.

Lindvall, J., & Rothstein, B. (2006). The fall of the strong state. Scan-dinavian Political Studies, 29(1), 47–63.

March, J.G., & Olsen, J.P. (1995). Democratic Governance. New York: The Free Press.

O’Dwyer, C., & Ziblatt, D. (2006). Does Decentralisation Make Gov-ernment More Efficient and Effective? Commonwealth and Com-parative Politics, 44(3), 326–343.

Pateman C. (1970). Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Pierre, J., & Peters, G. (2000). Governance, politics and the state. New York, Basingstoke: Macmillan.

Renn, O., Webler, T., Rakel, H., Dienel, P., & Johnson, B. (1993). Public participation in decision making: a three-step procedure. Policy Sciences, 26(3), 189–214.

Schumpeter J. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Harper.

Smismans, S. (2004). Law, Legitimacy, and European Governance: Func-tional Participation in Social Regulation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Stoker, G. (2018). Governance as theory: five propositions. Interna-tional Social Science Journal, 68(227–228), 15–24.

Susskind, L. (2004). Environmental Diplomacy: Negotiating More Effec-tive Global Agreements. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Tomsic, M., & Vehovar, U. (2006). Kakovost Vladanja v starih in novih clanicah evropske unije [The Quality of Governance in Old and New EU Member-states]. Teorija in Praksa, 43(3–4), 386–405.

van Kersbergen, K., & van Waarden, F. (2004). Governance’ as a Bridge between Disciplines: Cross-disciplinary Inspiration Re-garding Shifts in Governance and Problems of Governability, Accountability and Legitimacy. European Journal of Political Re-search, 43, 143–171.

Wagenaar, H. (2007). Governance, complexity, and democratic par-ticipation: How citizens and public officials harness the complex-ities of neighborhood decline. The American Review of Public Ad-ministration, 37(1), 17–50.

Weber, E.P. (1999). The Question of Accountability in Historical Perspective: From Jackson to Contemporary Grassroots Ecosys-tem Management. Administration & Society, 31, 451–494.

Weber, M. (1947). The Theory of Social and Economic Organizations (translated by A.M. Henderson and T. Parsons). Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

Zovko, I. (2006). International Law-making for the Environment: A Question of Effectiveness. In Marko Berglund (Ed.), Interna-tional Environmental Law-making and Diplomacy Review 2005 (pp. 109–128). Joensuu: Department of Law, University of Joensuu.

Total abstract views : 226

PDF Downloads : 179