Abstract
Two separate sets of data derived from recent scholarship on the subject are
examined to show that the term 'democracy' is problematically used in certain
empirical political analyses. The first data set concerns thirty articles published by the
journal Political Analysis between the years 2005 and 2010. The second data set is a
body of 30 prominent monographs and edited volumes dealing substantively with
'democracy' from the years 2006 to 2011. Twenty-five out of thirty articles in the first
data set do not explicitly define what is meant by the use of 'democracy' to the reader.
Twenty-nine out of thirty works in the second data set provide subjective
conceptualisations of 'democracy' to the reader which is parochial rather than postfoundationally
universal. This work proposes that the practice of using a 'disclaimer' is
a positive step to solving this problem. When a concept cannot be delivered in a
universal framework, it makes a difference to err on the side of caution and make clear
to the reader the subjective quality of a term like 'democracy'.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 68-92 |
Number of pages | 25 |
Journal | Public Administration and Policy |
Volume | 15 |
Issue number | 2 |
Publication status | Published - 2012 |