Article Information

THE PHENOMENON OF CIVIC PARTICIPATION IN SCIENTIFIC DISCOURSE: THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL BACKGROUND OF THE RESEARCH

Yuliya Ukhanova (Ukhanova4@rambler.ru)

Vologda Research Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Vologda, Russia

Citation: Ukhanova Y. (2020) «Fenomen grazhdanskogo uchastiya v nauchnom diskurse: teoreticheskiye i metodologicheskiye osnovaniya issledovaniya [The phenomenon of civic participation in scientific discourse: theoretical and methodological background of the research]. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsialnoy antropologii [The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology], 23(3): 25–50. https://doi.org/10.31119/jssa.2020.23.3.2 (in Russian)

Abstract. The attention of the world research practice nowadays is focused on the issues of citizens’ participation in solving public problems and society’ self-organization. On the one hand, this is due to the growth of civil and social activity of the population. On the other hand, it is caused by the erosion of public confidence in the institutions of representative democracy and people’s alienation from power and politics. In Russian society the issues related to civil participation are no less relevant. Over the past 15–2 0 years, the country has accumulated a lot of problems of a socio-economic nature, which manifest themselves at the socio-psychological level as well. According to Russian experts, the reason for this is the existing institutional conditions, including weak initiative and culture of civil society (R. Grinberg, V. Polterovich, L. Yakobson, L. Polishchuk et al.), in this regard, one of the key directions for solving the country’s domestic problems can be the development of public-state partnership and, accordingly, civil participation — a process through which public organizations, initiative groups or individuals are involved in relations with the state and other socio-political institutions in order to solve socially significant problems. Given the above, it is obvious that civic participation is one of the most important resources for social development today. The purpose of this research is to conceptualize the theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of the civil participation issue, presented in the works of foreign and domestic scientists. Special attention is paid to the experience of applying methodological tools by social and humanitarian scientists to measuring the level, factors and potential of population’s inclusion in the practice of civil participation. The study of the world and Russian experience in measuring civic participation contributes to the further disclosure of the potential of this phenomenon in solving socially significant problems of the local community. Ultimately, the solution of these tasks is aimed at improving the interaction between society and the government, increasing public trust, and reducing social tension in Russia.

Keywords: Civic participation, political participation, practice of social self-organization, resource development, local community.

Acknowledgements: The reported study was funded by RFBR, project number 19-111-50482.

References

Adler R.P., Goggin J. (2005) What Do We Mean By «Civic Engagement»? Journal of Transformative Education, 3(3): 236–253.

Akermi R., Triki A. (2017) The green energy transition and civil society in Tunisia: Actions, motivations and barriers. Energy Procedia, 136: 79–84.

Alesina A., La Ferrara E. (2000) Participation in Heterogeneous Communities. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(3): 847–904.

Almond G., Verba S. (1963) The Civic Culture. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

Anggraeni M., Gupta J., Hebe J.L., Verrest M. (2019) Cost and value of stakeholders participation: A systematic literature review. Environmental Science & Policy, 101: 364–373.

Anosov S.S. (2018) Regional'nye usloviya social'noj aktivnosti grazhdanskih iniciativ [Regional conditions for the activity of social initiatives]. Izvestiya Irkutskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya Politologiya. Religiovedenie [The Bulletin of Irkutsk State University. Series «Political Science and Religion Studies], 23: 47–54 (in Russian).

Arnstein S. (1969) Lestnica grazhdanskogo uchastiya [A Ladder of Citizen Participation] Zhurnal Amerikanskogo instituta gradostroitelej [Journal of the American Institute of Urban Planners], 35(4): 216–224. [http://lithgow-schmidt.dk/sherry-arnstein/ru/ladder-of-citizen-participa... ] (accessed: 05.08.2019) (in Russian).

Berger B. (2009) Political Theory, Political Science and the End of Civic Engagement. Perspectives on Politics, 7(02): 335–350.

Blackstock K.L., Kelly G.J., Horsey B.L. (2007) Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability. Ecol. Econ., 60: 726–742.

Chado J., Johar F.B. (2016) Public Participation Efficiency in Traditional Cities of Developing Countries: A Perspective of Urban Development in Bida, Nigeria Procedia. Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 219(31): 185–192.

Chambers R. (2007) Who Counts? The Quiet Revolution of Participation and Numbers. IDS working paper. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies.

Cornwall A. (2008) Unpacking Participation: models, meanings and practices. Community Development Journal, 43(3): 269–283.

Dalton R.J. (2006) Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Washington: CQ Press;

Davis J. (1998) “Participatory” research for development projects: a comparison of the community meeting and household survey techniques. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 47(1): 73–94.

Ekman J., Amnå E. (2012) Political participation and civic engagement: towards a new typology. HUMAN AFFAIRS, 22: 283–300.

Etzioni A. (1968). Mobilization as a macro sociological conception. The British Journal of Sociology, 19(3): 243–253.

Etzioni A. (1968) The active s society. New York: Free Press.

Etzioni A. (1996) The Responsive community: a communitarian perspective. 1995 Presidential address. American Sociological Review, 61(1): 1–11.

Feng Z., Cramm J.M., Jin C., Twisk J. & Nieboer A.P. (2020) The longitudinal relationship between income and social participation among Chinese older people. SSM — Population Health [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2020.100636 ] (accessed: 05.04.2020).

Foa R.S., Mounk Y. (2017) The signs of deconsolidation. Journal of Democracy, 28(1): 5–16.

Galickaya E.G., Ivanova I.I., Petrenko E.S. (2014) Izmerenie cennostnyh orientacij grazhdanskogo mirovozzreniya: indeks grazhdanskogo klimata [Measuring the value orientations of the civic worldview: the civic climate index]. Sociologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological research], 2: 116–121 (in Russian).

Hallett C. (1987) Critical Issues In Participation Association of Community Workers, Sheffield.

Hassan L., Hamari J. (2020) Gameful civic engagement: A review of the literature on gamification of e-participation. Government Information Quarterly, 37(3): 1–21.

Holmskaya M.R. (1999) Politicheskoe uchastie kak ob"ekt issledovaniya: obzor otechestvennoj literatury [Political participation as an object of research: a review of Russian literature]. Polis. Politicheskie issledovaniya [Polis. Political Studies], 5: 170–176 (in Russian).

Hong Y. (2018) Resident participation in urban renewal: Focused on Sewoon Renewal Promotion Project and Kwun Tong Town Centre Project. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 7: 197–210.

Jho W., Jae S.K. (2015) Institutional and technological determinants of civil e-Participation: Solo or duet? Government Information Quarterly, 32(4): 488–495.

Kaase M., Marsh A. (1979) Political action repertory: changes over time and a new typology. In: Barnes S.H., Kaase M. (eds.) Political Action: Mass Participation in Five Western Democracies. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications: 137–166.

Kaase M., Marsh A. (1979). Political Action. A Theoretical Perspective. In: Barnes S.Н., Kaase M. (eds.) Political Action: Mass Participation in Five Western Democracies. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications: 27–56.

Kumar N., Raghunathan K., Arrieta A., Jilani A., Agnes R. (2019) Quisumbing Social networks, mobility, and political participation: The potential for women’s self-help groups to improve access and use of public entitlement schemes in India. World Development, 114: 28–41.

Levasseur M., Richard L., Gauvin L., Raymond E. (2010) Inventory and analysis of definitions of social participation found in the aging literature: Proposed taxonomy of social activities. Soc Sci Med, 71(12): 2141–2149.

Mersiyanova I.V., Korneeva I.E. (2017) Vliyanie doveriya na uchastie rossiyan v blagotvoritel'nosti [The impact of trust on Russians’ participation in charities]. Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: Ekonomicheskie i social'nye peremeny [Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes], 2: 145–159 (in Russian).

Milbrath L.W., La Goel M. (1977) Political Participation. How and Why People Get Involved in Politics. Chicago: RandMcNally.

Musch А., Streit А. (2020) (Un)intended effects of participation in sustainability science: A criteria-guided comparative case study. Environmental Science & Policy, 104: 55–66.

Naranjo-Zolotov M., Oliveira T., Casteleyn S., Irani Z. (2019) Continuous usage of e-participation: The role of the sense of virtual community. Government Information Quarterly, 36: 536–545.

Naranjo-Zolotov M., Oliveira T., Cruz-Jesus F., Martins J., Xavier N. (2019) Examining social capital and individual motivators to explain the adoption of online citizen participation. Future Generation Computer Systems, 92: 302–311.

Nikovskaya L.I., Skalaban I.A. (2017) Grazhdanskoe uchastie: osobennosti diskursa i tendencii real'nogo razvitiya [Civic Participation: Features of Discourse and Actual Trends of Development]. Polis. Politicheskie issledovaniya [Polis. Political Studies], 6: 43–60 (in Russian).

Nikovskaya L.I., Yakimets V.N. (2020) O sostoyatelnosti institutov i mexanizmov municipalnoj publichnoj politiki (na primere Respubliki Tatarstan) [On the consistency of institutions and mechanisms of municipal state policy (on the example of the Republic of Tatarstan] Vestnik Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Istoriya. Politologiya. Sociologiya [Voronezh State University Bulletin. Series: History. Political science. Sociology], 2: 26–37 (in Russian).

Norris P. (2002) Democratic Phoenix: Reinventing Political Activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Okali C., Sumberg J., Farrington J. (1994) Farmer participatory research: rhetoric and reality. London: Overseas Development Institute.

Petukhov V.V. (2019) Grazhdanskoe uchastie v sovremennoj Rossii: vzaimodejstvie politicheskih i social'nyh praktik [Civil Participation in Contemporary Russia: Interaction of Political and Social Practices]. Sotsiologicheskiye issledovaniya [Sociological research], 12: 3–14 (in Russian).

Pimoljinda T., Siriprasertchok R. (2017) Failure of public participation for sustainable development: A case study of a NGO's development projects in Chonburi province Kasetsart. Journal of Social Sciences, 38(3): 331–336.

Polishchuk L. (2011) Ekonomicheskoe znachenie social'nogo kapitala [The economic value of social capital]. Voprosy ekonomiki [Economic Issues], 12: 46–65 (in Russian).

Putnam R. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1): 65–78.

Raihani N.J. (2013) Nudge politics: efficacy and ethics. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(972): 1–4.

Reutov E.V. (2015) Potencial grazhdanskogo uchastiya v formirovanii regional'nogo solidarnogo obshchestva [The potential of civic participation in the formation of a regional solidarity society]. Belgorod: Epicentr (in Russian).

Sæbo O., Rose J., Flak L.S. (2008) The shape of e-Participation: Characterizing an emerging research area. Government Information Quarterly, 25(3): 400–428.

Shatalova A., Tykanova E. (2018) Neformal’nyye praktiki uchastnikov publichnykh slushaniy (sluchay Sankt-Peterburga) [Informal practices of the public hearing participants (the case of Saint Petersburg)]. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsialnoy antropologii [The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology], 21(4): 63–84 (in Russian).

Shcherbakova I.V. (2017) Osobennosti territorii prozhivaniya kak faktor grazhdanskogo uchastiya [Territory of Residence as a Factor of Civic involvement]. Sotsiologicheskiy Zhurnal [Sociological Journal], 23(3): 64–79.

Skalaban I.A. (2017) Obshchestvennoe uchastie: teoriya i praktika social'nogo konstruirovaniya [Public participation: theory and social practice of design]. Novosibirsk: Novosibirskij gosudarstvennyj tekhnicheskij universitet (in Russian).

Skalaban I.A., Spenser S.B. (2012) Strategii obshchestvennogo uchastiya liderov formal'nyh i neformal'nyh ob"edinenij [Strategies for public participation of leaders of formal and informal associations]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Sociologiya. Politologiya [Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science], 1(17): 158–170 (in Russian).

Sokolov A.V. (2020) Osobennosti kollektivnyh dejstvij v sovremennoj Rossii: dinamika, cifrovizaciya i rezul'taty [Features of collective action in modern Russia: dynamics, digitalization and results]. Socialnye i gumanitarnye znanija [Social and humanitarian knowledge], 6(1): 30–45 (in Russian).

Sokolov A.V., Frolov A.A. (2018) Usloviya grazhdanskoj aktivnosti v Yaroslavskoj oblasti: specifika municipal'nogo urovnya [Conditions for civic engagement in the Yaroslavl Region: the specifics of the municipal level]. PolitBook, 4: 85–102 (in Russian).

Stelzle B., Rainer J., Noennig A. (2017) Database for Participation Methods in Urban Development. Procedia Computer Science, 112: 2416–2425.

Stolle D., Hooghe M. (2005) Inaccurate, Exceptional, One-Sided or Irrelevant? The Debate about the Alleged Decline of Social Capital and Civic Engagement in Western Societies. British Journal of Political Science, 35: 149–167.

Thaler R.H., Sunstein C.R. (2003) Libertarian paternalism. American Economic Review, 93(2): 175–179.

Theocharis Y., Deth J. (2018) The continuous expansion of citizen participation: a new taxonomy. European Political Science, 10(1): 139–163.

Ukhanova Y.V. (2020) Profsoyuznye organizacii kak subyekt grazhdanskogo uchastiya (opyt Vologodskoj oblasti) [Trade union organizations as a subject of civic participation (experience of the Vologda Oblast)]. Sotsiologicheskiye issledovaniya [Sociological research], 46(1): 54–64 (in Russian).

Usloviya aktivizatsii grazhdanskogo uchastiya v malykh i srednikh gorodakh Rossii [Conditions for enhancing civic participation in small and medium-sized cities of Russia] (2014) Moscow: Fond «Obshchestvennoe mnenie» [http://soc.fom.ru/special/grazhdanskoe-uchastie-v-malyh-i-srednih-goroda... ] (accessed: 28.05.2020) (in Russian).

Verba S., Nie N.H. (1972) Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Why M.T. (2019) E-participation systems fail: The case of Estonia's Osale.ee. Government Information Quarterly, 36(3): 546–559.

Yakimets V.N., Nikowskaya L.I. (2019) Grazhdanskoe uchastie, mezhsektornoe partnerstvo i internet-tekhnologii publichnoj politiki [Civil participation, Intersectoral Partnership and Internet Technologies of Public Policy] Socialnye i gumanitarnye znanija [Social and Humanitarian Knowledge], 5(3): 208–2 23 (in Russian).

Zadorin I.V. (2010) Vlast' i obshchestvo v Rossii: razvitie vzaimodejstviya i povyshenie effektivnosti grazhdanskogo uchastiya [Power and society in Russia: developing interaction and increasing the effectiveness of civic participation]. Moscow: Cirkon (in Russian).