Back
Purpose of the research group, background of the research
In democratic political systems, the main actors of representative democracy are party leaders, elected parliamentarians and cabinet members. But besides decisions taken by actors of representative democracy there are other ways of decision-making in a democratic political system. Participatory and deliberative democracy focuses mainly on decision-making mechanisms and procedures initiated by citizens and non-governmental organizations that, in addition to the institutions of representative democracy, aiming to improve the social acceptance and effectiveness of political decisions through the involvement of citizens. In response to the crisis of representative democracy, a great number of participatory programs and deliberative forums have been established worldwide from Brazil (the famous Porto Alegre participation budget program) through countries of the American continent, Europe, India, to South Africa. The study of democratic reform experiments became subject of international political scientific research.
Research on democratic innovations focuses on successful practices and methods aimed at changing democratic governance and political structures to improve them. The research collects new empirical evidence to better understand the reason why Hungarian political parties do (or do not) promote democratic innovations. The aim of the research is to assess MPs opinion about democratic innovations that create new relationships among voters and representatives.
In Hungary, the spread of democratic innovations to complement the institutions of representative democracy is limited. Established practices (e.g. national and local referendum) are operated by party politicians instead of citizens. Governance at national and local level is not influenced by the intent of working with society, and communities also face limited demands of citizens for involvement in decision-making. As a result, Hungary is one of the cases where the spread of democratic innovations is less successful. However, a number of practices have been developed to ameliorate decision making within the parties (online decision-making forums), to coordinate candidate selection (primaries), or to organize consultations at national (national consultation) and local level (community budget program established by the XIX distirct of Budapest). In addition to some case studies, there was no systematic, internationally comparable research conducted in Hungary. As part of an international project, the research intends to examine the topic among elected representatives of Hungarian parties. What is the major research question? Describe here briefly the problem to be solved by the research, the starting hypothesis, and the questions addressed by the experiments.
From previous databases with parliamentarians, we are familiar with the views of parliamentarians and local government representatives concerning democracy. However, we know almost nothing about their openness to new initiatives within their parties. There is little evidence about their judgement about the democratic nature of decision-making mechanisms within their party. There is no information on what the parties' elected officials and parliamentarians think about the role of these democratic innovations, how much they judge useful them for their party's operation or their own activities. Knowing this information, we can get an idea of the decision-making mechanisms (online platforms) that have developed within the various parties. Research can also reveal new information about new candidate selection procedures (primaries) and about MPs perception on forums, areas where they support citizens' initiatives. Summary and aims of the research for the public
The research team is aims to answer to the following questions:
The main question of the research is what new tools have been put in place within Hungarian parties and what new institutions have been introduced at national and local levels since 2000?
The research also examines what parliamentarians think about different domestic democratic innovations and how they perceive the political abilities of Hungarian voters to engage in democratic innovations. The hypothesis of the research is that in those parties where democratic innovations within the party has been achieved, MPs are more positive about the role of democratic innovations and the competences of the citizens than the representatives of the parties that did not encounter democratic innovations before. In the light of international research it is also suggested that left-wing parties are more open to democratic innovations than right-wing parties. The research assumes that, due to the polarization of Hungarian party politics, the government / opposition fracture also affects the assessment of democratic innovations.
From previous political science studies we know that the need to involve citizens in decision-making in Hungary has appeared both at national level (referendum, national consultation) and at local level (local referendums, civil round tables, civic councils, local participatory budget mechanisms). However, we know almost nothing about what the parties' leaders and parliamentarians think about the role of these institutions, how they judge them from the perspective of their party's work or their own work, and whether they consider them to be a challenge for representative democracy or not? The research analyzes the above issue in frame of an international cooperation.
Funding:
The research is funded by the NKFIH “OTKA” Postdoctoral Excellence Program (PD_19).
Team member(s): Daniel Oross, PhD - Principal Investigator