Publication: Pensar el sorteo. Modos de selección, marcos deliberativos y
principios democráticos
Authors
Courant, Dimitri
item.page.secondaryauthor
item.page.director
Publisher
Universidad de Murcia. Servicio de Publicaciones
publication.page.editor
publication.page.department
Description
Abstract
¿Cómo pensar el sorteo con eficacia? Mi propuesta es construir una teoría general del sorteo, abordándolo de forma comparativa, para averiguar cuáles son las constantes teóricas entre la gran diversidad empírica de sus usos particulares. En primer lugar, comparo el sorteo a los otros tres modos de selección: elección, nombramiento o cooptación y certificación. En segundo lugar, analizo los marcos deliberativos, es decir, “quién decide qué y cómo”. Tercero, distingo cuatro principios democráticos del sorteo: igualdad, imparcialidad, representatividad y legitimidad. Mi primera
hipótesis es que el sorteo amplía considerablemente la igualdad, imparcialidad y representatividad. La segunda de mis hipótesis radica en que
el sorteo es el único método de selección con una forma específica de humildad-legitimidad, mientras que los tres restantes modos de selección producen una superioridad-legitimidad que declara superior al representante por encima del representado a través del proceso de selección.
How could we be thinking sortition efficiently? My proposal is to construct a general theory of sortition in a comparative approach. A broad study seems necessary in order to grasp the theoretical constants, despite the empirical diversity of sortition concrete uses. First, I shall compare sortition to the three other selection modes: election, nomination and certification. Second, I will analyse the deliberative frameworks, that is to say “who decides what how”. Third, I will distinguish four democratic principles of sortition: equality, impartiality, representativeness and legitimacy. My first research hypothesis is that sortition is likely to offer a greater equality, impartiality and representativeness. My second hypothesis is that sortition is the only method of selection producing a specific form, a humility-legitimacy when the three other selection modesare producing a superiority-legitimacy, where the principal is declared superior to the agent through the selection process.
How could we be thinking sortition efficiently? My proposal is to construct a general theory of sortition in a comparative approach. A broad study seems necessary in order to grasp the theoretical constants, despite the empirical diversity of sortition concrete uses. First, I shall compare sortition to the three other selection modes: election, nomination and certification. Second, I will analyse the deliberative frameworks, that is to say “who decides what how”. Third, I will distinguish four democratic principles of sortition: equality, impartiality, representativeness and legitimacy. My first research hypothesis is that sortition is likely to offer a greater equality, impartiality and representativeness. My second hypothesis is that sortition is the only method of selection producing a specific form, a humility-legitimacy when the three other selection modesare producing a superiority-legitimacy, where the principal is declared superior to the agent through the selection process.
publication.page.subject
Deliberación , Democracia , Igualdad , Imparcialidad , Legitimidad , Representación , Selección , Sorteo , Deliberation , Democracy , Equality , Impartiality , Legitimacy , Representation , Selection , Sortition
Citation
item.page.embargo
Collections
Ir a Estadísticas
Sin licencia Creative Commons.