Democracy and participation in Singapore : a case study

A typical characteristic of the ongoing practice of democracy in Singapore has been described by some scholars as 'illiberal democracy'. Noting that Singapore 's brand of democracy operates within a 'dominant, one-party system', other scholars cushioned such a democratic practice by their reference to 'semi-democracy', 'controlled democracy, 'guided democracy, and 'communitarian democracy'. However, despite the demonstration that there are many restrictions in the type of democracy that exists in Singapore, the benefits are numerous. Singapore is the only country in the world to have transformed itself from a developing country to a developed country in less than only forty years. But its slower move towards a culture ofparticipation must move as quickly as globalization does if it is to remain in relevant and legitimate democracy. If the younger generation understands that they should have the right to a voice before the government acknowledges it, the transition could be more tumultuous than necessary.

Directing democracy : competing interests and contested terrain in the John Lewis Partnership

The John Lewis Partnership is one of Europe’s largest models of employee ownership and has been operating a form of employee involvement and participation since its formation in 1929. It is frequently held up as a model of best practice (Cathcart, 2013) and has been described as a ‘workers’ paradise’ (Stummer and Lacey, 2001). At the beginning of 2012, the Deputy Prime Minister of the UK unveiled plans to create a ‘John Lewis Economy’ (Wintour, 2012). As John Lewis is being positioned at the heart of political and media discussions in the UK about alternatives to the corporate capitalist model of enterprise, it is vital that more is known about the experience of employee involvement and participation within the organisation. This article explores the ways in which the practice of employee involvement and participation has changed in John Lewis as a result of competing employee and managerial interests. Its contribution is a contemporary exploration of participation in the John Lewis Partnership and an examination of the ways in which management and employees contested the meaning and practice of employee involvement and participation as part of a ‘democracy project’, which culminated in significant changes and degeneration of the democratic structures.

The John Lewis model reveals the tensions and paradoxes at the heart of workplace democracy

Politicians of all parties have been keen to promote the ‘John Lewis model’ of industrial organisation, emphasising its features of employee ownership and workplace democracy. Dr Abby Cathcart’s research into the company shows that management and workers have different visions of what ‘partnership’ means, with ongoing struggle taking place via the organisation’s democratic structures. This, she argues, has stark implications for other organisations with partnership models that are less robust.

Online or conventional democracy? The Ashgrove election and networked journalism

This study focuses on new media use in democratic discourse, specifically in the Queensland state electoral division of Ashgrove, 2011. This site was chosen to make an enquiry into the place of mass media in public decision- making, asking the question: did online media provide an extension of democracy, and what would be journalism’s role in democratic discourse? The study utilises a survey of 280 constituents, a review of pertinent news coverage, and extensive interviews with a panel of informants. In the outcome, it found those most equipped to utilise online media showed a lack of will to get involved in deeper political, social engagements. It also sees younger demographics forming news habits, not usually in step with traditional political avenues, based on familiarity with online processes, while consciously marginalising the need for trustworthiness in this set- ting. These issues are considered together with one leading proposal as to where the future of new media might be heading. It assesses the notion of professional and amateur collaboration by employing the model articulated by Beckett, called ‘networked journalism’.

Crime, justice and social democracy : proceedings of the second international conference, 2013, volume 1

The refereed papers contained in this set of conference proceedings were presented at the 2nd International Conference on Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, hosted by the Crime and Justice Research Centre, Faculty of Law, QUT. The conference attracted an impressive list of internationally distinguished keynote and panel speakers from the United Kingdom, United States, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and this time Latin America, as well as high quality paper submissions.

Democracy and the Project of Liberal Inclusion

Democracy is a multi-dimensional concept, ranging from definitions based exclusively on institutional frameworks (for example, Held, 2005, Przeworski, Alvarez, Cheibub and Limongi, 2000) to complex and integrated measures that include political and civil rights, democratic practices, values and, finally, a diverse set of institutional arrangements in society, including welfare, education, industrial relations and the legal system (Inglehart and Welzel, 2005, Jaggers and Gurr, 1995, O'Donnell, Cullel and Iazetta, 2004). This reflects the range of and distinction between merely formal electoral democracy and genuinely 'effective liberal democracy' (Inglehart and Welzel, 2005: 149), where democracy is firmly embedded not only in its institutions but in the values of its citizenry. Evidence from cross-national research confirms that formal democratic institutions, different dimensions of effective democracy, and democratic values are indeed strongly linked (Inglehart and Welzel, 2005: 154, Jaggers and Gurr, 1995: 446). Democracy is more than just a set of institutions, rules and mechanisms: it is a set of core values engrained in the 'lived experience' of its citizens. Core values of democracies are individual autonomy and egalitarianism, tolerance of diversity, and freedom from oppression for both individuals and institutions. Democracies restrain their governments by the rule of law and grant its citizens equal access to and equal treatment by legal institutions. Among these institutions, criminal justice and the treatment of those who violated rules and regulations represent sensitive seismographs for the quality of effective democracies, and the ways how democracies realise their core values.

Informed democracy : information experiences during the 2012 Queensland election

This chapter presents the preliminary findings of a qualitative study exploring people’s information experiences during the 2012 Queensland State election in Australia. Six residents of South East Queensland who were eligible to vote in the state election participated in a semi-structured interview. The interviews revealed five themes that depict participants’ information experience during the election: information sources, information flow, personal politics, party politics and sense making. Together these themes represent what is experienced as information, how information is experienced, as well as contextual aspects that were unique to voting in an election. The study outlined here is one in an emerging area of enquiry that has explored information experience as a research object. This study has revealed that people’s information experiences are rich, complex and dynamic, and that information experience as a construct of scholarly inquiry provides deep insights into the ways in which people relate to their information worlds. More studies exploring information experience within different contexts are needed to help develop our theoretical understanding of this important and emerging construct.

Putting people in planning: participatory democracy, community building and social inclusion

Like other Western nations, since the nineteenth century Australia has been a representative democracy, in which citizens elect parliamentary representatives to make decisions and develop policies on their behalf (see chapter 5). These representatives are supported in their decision making by an ‘arm’s-length’, ‘techno-bureaucratic administration’, which includes experts such as environmental planners (Fung and Wright 2003, p. 3). However, as the issues for decision-making become increasingly complex, and societies increasingly diverse, the idea of citizen participation in decision-making is ever more accepted. There is now a significant body of political theory arguing for a more participatory model of democracy (participatory democracy), a model that strives to create opportunities for all members of a society to contribute meaningfully to decisions about the matters affecting their lives.

Prison rates, social democracy, neoliberalism and justice reinvestment

This chapter will begin with a brief summary of some recent research in the field of comparative penology. This work will be examined to explore the benefits, difficulties and limits of attempting to link criminal justice issues to types of advanced democratic polities, with particular emphasis on political economies. This stream of comparative penology examines data such as imprisonment rates and levels of punitiveness in different countries, before drawing conclusions based on the patterns which seem to emerge. Foremost among these is that the high imprisoning countries tend to be the advanced western liberal democracies which have gone furthest in adopting neoliberal economic and social policies, as against the lower imprisonment rates of social democracies, which variably have attempted to temper free-market economic policies in various ways. Such work brings both social democracy and neoliberalism into focus as issues for, or subjects of, criminology. Not in the sense of new ‘brands’ of criminology but rather as an examination of the connections between the political projects of social democracy and neoliberalism, and issues of crime and criminal justice. In the new comparative penology, social democracy and neoliberalism are cast in opposition, simultaneously raising the questions of to what extent and how adequately both social democracy and neoliberalism have been constituted as subjects in criminology and whether dichotomy is the only available trope of analysis?

The Global Financial Crisis : Neo-Liberalism, Social Democracy, and Criminology

This chapter begins with a discussion of the economic, political, and social context of the recent global financial crisis, which casts into relief current boundaries of criminology, permeated and made fluid in criminology's recent cultural turn. This cultural turn has reinvigorated criminology, providing new objects of analysis and rich and thick descriptions of the relationship between criminal justice and the conditions of life in ‘late modernity’. Yet in comparison with certain older traditions that sought to articulate criminal justice issues with a wider politics of contestation around political economies and social welfare policies of different polities, many of the current leading culturalist accounts tend in their globalized convergences to produce a strangely decontextualized picture in which we are all subject to the zeitgeist of a unitary ‘late modernity’ which does not differ between, for example, social democratic and neo-liberal polities, let alone allow for the widespread persistence of the pre-modern. It is argued that that contrary to this globalizing trend there are signs within criminology that life is being breathed back into social democratic and penal welfare concerns, habitus, and practices. The chapter discusses three of these signs: the emergence of neo-liberalism as a subject of criminology; a developing comparative penology which recognizes differences in the political economies of capitalist states and evinces a renewed interest in inequality; and a nascent revolt against the ‘generative grammar’, ‘pathological disciplinarities’, and ‘imaginary penalities’ of neoliberal managerialism.

Social media and e-democracy in Fiji, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu

This paper examines the extent social media is enabling e-democracy in Fiji, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu. The study conducts an interpretative case study approach interviewing active social media users, political actors, civil servants, civilians, civil society actors and tertiary students. The study also conducts a content analysis of popular “political social media” Facebook pages in these three countries. The findings of the study suggest that social media is playing a role in facilitating citizen engagement with governments, making governments accountable and providing a means for citizens to be informed, to discuss and share views on political matters. However, social media usage is evolving quite differently in these three countries and factors such as high levels of militarism (Fiji), high levels of corruption (Solomon Islands) and also rapid ICT development (Vanuatu) have contributed towards shaping the potential of social media as a democratic enabler and political tool in these countries.

From democracy in America to a la francaise accountability. Grasping the sociopolitical origins of accountability [De la démocratie en Amérique du Nord à l’accountability à la française]

Whilst native French speakers oftentimes collapse accountability to account giving, this paper outlines the shape of an accountability ala française. Reading Tocqueville’s (1835) work highlights that accountability as practiced in Anglo-Saxonc countries has been an offspring of American democracy. An accountability a la française would be characterised by conformance to a set or universal values, the submission of minorities to choices made by the majority, a means obligation as well as the rejection of transparency. [Alors que le francophone réduit généralement l’accountability à la reddition de comptes, cet article esquisse les contours d’une véritable accountability à la française. La lecture de Tocqueville (1835) révèle que l’accountability pratiquée dans les pays anglo-saxons trouve ses origines dans les fondements de la démocratie américaine. En France, l’accountability serait caractérisée par le respect d’un ensemble de valeurs universelles, l’adhésion des minorités aux choix majoritaires, l’absence de discriminations, une obligation de moyens et un rejet de la transparence.]

Crime, Justice and Social Democracy: Proceedings of the Second International Conference, 2013, volume 2

The refereed papers contained in this volume of conference proceedings were among those presented at the 2nd International Conference on Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, hosted by the Crime and Justice Research Centre, Faculty of Law, QUT, from 8 – 11 July 2013. The conference attracted an impressive list of speakers from Australasia, Europe, North America and Latin America. These seven papers can be viewed at the Crime and Justice Research Centre’s website at http://crimejusticeconference.com/publications/ as can Volume 1 representing another 26 selected papers from the conference. As with the papers contained in the first volume, this set of papers raises important questions about the links between crime, justice and social democracy, and continues the contribution that the Crime and Justice Research Centre makes towards engaging with these topics. We thank all those who submitted papers for review for this second volume of proceedings, as well as the peer reviewers for taking the time to review the papers, often within very tight timelines.

Surviving the electronic panopticon: New lessons in democracy, surveillance, and community in young adult fiction

The ability of new information and communication technologies to pierce previously impenetrable physical, personal, and social boundaries has particular relevance to contemporary society and young people as there is now more information that can be collected, accessed, and distributed about individuals and groups. The ability to know about each other has become a central feature of many young people’s lives. The need to know is further complicated by other questions – Who knows? What do they know? What are the implications of this knowledge?. These questions are a consequence of society having become more mobile and networked enabling increased surveillance, tracking, and spreading of dis/information. With the acceleration of new pervasive and immersive technologies, these questions have taken on a new urgency and significance that go beyond an Orwellian Big Brother scenario. This chapter extends Foucault’s notion of the panopticon to take account of the challenges of an AmI environment of smart networked devices. By drawing on examples of recent young adult fiction, I examine some of the ways in which these texts invite their readers to reflect and speculate on the uneasy relationship between surveillance and democracy and what this means for individual rights and freedom, and a sense of place and belonging.