Participación ciudadana y democracia localla influencia del contexto político y social : estudio comparado Bogotá y Madrid

Resum

The citizen participation, understood as the direct influence of citizens upon a decision-making process, may take place within mechanisms of voluntary institutionalized participation. Such mechanisms have been increasing since the eighties and have been widely implemented by local governments in different places of the world in order to strengthen, among others, the local democracy. The outcomes of these participatory instruments and their democratic consequences have raised many questions among academics increasing their interest about the topic. Therefore, the concern has focused on identifying the potential factors that influence on their democratizing effects as well as, on the extent of their success. I argue that factors such as political- institutional context and social actors, especially associations, are key determinants to explain the outcomes of the participatory mechanisms. First, the political- institutional variable has a decisive role in shaping the degree of influence of associations upon decision making at the local government. Related to this variable, I analyzed political parties and the party system, the model of local political management and decentralisation. Second, the associations through the dense networks of civic engagement produce cooperation and explain the collective action. The examination of the interactions between these two variables allows understanding the local citizen participation and of the particular type of governance and patterns of cooperation, or conflict, between local authorities and citizens. This doctoral research tests the argument through an empirical study in two cities: Bogota and Madrid. The results reveal that social and political variables affect the performance of the participatory mechanisms and shape the citizen participation with different results. In addition, these social and political variables can generate path dependence hard to overcome that limits the democratic effects of the participatory instruments. The comparative research findings from this study contribute to the body of knowledge related to the academic literature of both social capital and neoinstitutionalism.