| 1. |
-
Allas rätt till bostad : Marknadens begränsningar och samhällets ansvar
- 2022
-
Samlingsverk (redaktörskap) (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Alla behöver någonstans att bo. Bostaden är så central för vår välfärd att vi ser den som en mänsklig rättighet. Bostadsfrågan skär in i flera olika politikområden och kan diskuteras från vitt skilda utgångspunkter. Var – och hur – vi bor påverkar i hög grad vårt handlingsutrymme och våra framtidsutsikter. De ojämlika förutsättningarna på bostadsmarknaden är en av de tydligaste klassmarkörerna i dagens Sverige.I antologin "Allas rätt till bostad" analyserar 28 bostads- och urbanforskare från olika akademiska discipliner svensk bostadspolitik, dess förutsättningar, historiska utveckling och konkreta resultat. En socialt medveten bostadspolitik behöver inte minst förhålla sig till den växande ojämlikheten i det svenska samhället. Men den bostadspolitik som har förts, med privatiseringar och vinstkrav även på offentligt ägda bolag, har tvärtom fått klyftorna att växa. Hyresrätten är till exempel idag klart missgynnad jämfört med bostadsägandet. Antologins texter diskuterar också – bland mycket annat – den betydelse bostadsbidraget, besittningsskyddet, byggindustrin och barnkonventionen kan ha i ett vidare bostadspolitiskt perspektiv.Bostadspolitiken är en ödesfråga för många människor och för ett demokratiskt samhälle. Antologin visar att det krävs mer debatt och politisk fantasi och större rättvisa i bostadsfrågan än vi ser i dag.
|
|
| 2. |
- Bengtsson, Bo, 1947-, et al.
(författare)
-
Allas rätt till bostad : introduktion
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Allas rätt till bostad. - Göteborg : Daidalos. - 9789171736604 ; , s. 11-22
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 3. |
- Holdo, Markus, 1984-
(författare)
-
A relational perspective on deliberative systems : Combining interpretive and structural analysis
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Critical Policy Studies. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1946-0171 .- 1946-018X. ; 14:1, s. 21-37
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Deliberative systems theory suggests that a democratic society works well when citizens’ experiences and views, as expressed in various forms and sites of communication, are connected and taken up by other citizens as well as policy-makers. Pluralism, which is not always easily reconciled with high-quality deliberation in every instance, is seen as instrumental to the realization of democratic values and sound decision-making. This perspective raises new methodological challenges, such as (1) identifying sites of communication that serve important functions in a deliberative system, (2) connecting different sites and (3) assessing their impact. Recent scholarship has found that these challenges can be fruitfully met by applying interpretive methodology, which, like deliberative systems theory, aims to understand social interactions on their own terms, and not by measuring their correspondence to theoretical ideal-types. However, for theory development, as well as to help improve actual deliberative systems, researchers also need to make generalizable inferences. This paper develops a relational approach that combines interpretive methods with structural theory, which allows researchers to assess and explain the deficiencies, as well as the opportunities, that citizens experience. The principles of relational analysis are illustrated by research on citizen deliberation about urban riots.
|
|
| 4. |
- Holdo, Markus, 1984-
(författare)
-
An inclusive and participatory approach to counter-radicalization? : Examining the role of Muslim associations in the Swedish policy process
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Ethnicities. - : Sage Publications. - 1468-7968 .- 1741-2706. ; 21:3, s. 477-497
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Policies on preventing radicalization and recruitment to violent Islamist organizations have been widely criticized for reinforcing negative stereotypes of Muslims as a group. Sweden has stood out by international comparison by announcing an approach built on inclusion and participation, especially with regard to Muslim civil society. But what does it mean to make a policy process inclusive and participatory? How can values of inclusion and participation be combined with efficient implementation and realization of policy goals, especially in a policy area where discourse and practice have tended to reinforce patterns of exclusion and discrimination? This article develops a framework that puts the roles of participants at the center: what expectations, boundaries and capacities come with an invitation to participate? Based on interviews with actors involved in the Swedish policy process, including Muslim civil society leaders, the study suggests that participation, in this case, meant primarily being present, thereby confirming commitment and stakeholder status and contributing legitimacy, and providing instrumental knowledge and communication networks. While Muslim representatives were often not expected to be more involved, some indicated that they themselves hesitated to go beyond these roles for several reasons. They expressed a concern that merely having opinions or critique could be interpreted as 'radical' and as not accepting the idea that Muslims as a group should have special responsibilities for preventing radicalism. One way of overcoming such obstacles is through subtle, indirect exercises of influence that allow policy-makers and administrators to anticipate the concerns and interests of affected groups without requiring their direct participation.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Holdo, Markus, 1984-
(författare)
-
Contestation in Participatory Budgeting : Spaces, Boundaries, and Agency
- 2020
-
Ingår i: American Behavioral Scientist. - : SAGE Publications. - 0002-7642 .- 1552-3381. ; 64:9, s. 1348-1365
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Local political leaders as well as international organizations have embraced participatory budgeting in response to problems of political exclusion and citizens' dissatisfaction with representative democracy. This article provides a framework to highlight important aspects of thepoliticsof participation. The framework allows scholars to explore how factorsexternalto spaces of participation interact with aspects of participationwithinthem. The framework conceptualizes participatory budgeting as political spaces, whose boundaries are shaped by ideologies, interests, and patterns of social exclusion. In dynamic spaces, such boundaries are constantly renegotiated and contestation helps maintain their openness. In static spaces, by contrast, predefined boundaries are imposed on participants who may accept or reject them. Empirical examples of participatory budgeting illustrate the usefulness of this framework. The article ends by discussing key avenues for further research.
|
|
| 7. |
- Holdo, Markus, 1984-
(författare)
-
Cooptation and non-cooptation : elite strategies in response to social protest
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Social Movement Studies. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1474-2837 .- 1474-2829. ; 18:4, s. 444-462
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The risk of cooptation – of being absorbed by powerful elites without gaining new advantages – is an important concern in studies of social movements and social change. Through cooptation, elites undermine movements by stripping them of their credibility as agents of change. This paper aims to explain why, despite its powerful rationale, cooptation does not occur more frequently. Building on political process theory and relational sociology, it demonstrates that cooptation appears rational only on the condition that cooperation is valued lower than political domination. But elite-movement interaction may result in mutually strategic relationships that are conditional on each side’s recognition of the other’s interest. Two empirical cases illustrate this possibility: the US Civil Rights Movement and Latin American participatory budgeting. In both cases, the actors involved chose a strategy of "mutually assured autonomy" over cooptation.
|
|
| 8. |
- Holdo, Markus, 1984-
(författare)
-
Deliberative Capital : Recognition in Participatory Budgeting
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Critical Policy Studies. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1946-0171 .- 1946-018X. ; 10:4, s. 391-409
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This article suggests (1) that deliberative democrats seeking to understand the conditions of inclusion in the public sphere should reconsider whether deliberative 'skills,' 'competence,' and 'capacity' are adequate to capture what effective participation requires, (2) that they would understand this differently, and better, by thinking in terms of deliberative capital, a concept more sensitive to how norms condition recognition of legitimate speakers, (3) that interpretive inquiries focused on practices in concrete deliberative fields can enrich our understanding of the conditions of inclusion. This article presents an account of participatory budgeting in Rosario, Argentina, based on observations and interviews with participants, and focuses on interpreting the meanings that participation has for citizen 'councilors'. It finds that deliberative practices produce alternative sources of recognition, on the basis of which members of the field of deliberation expect recognition also outside the field. The concept of deliberative capital brings to the fore the symbolic values of deliberative practices and provides an alternative view on how they matter for participation in the wider public sphere.
|
|
| 9. |
- Holdo, Markus, 1984-, et al.
(författare)
-
Do citizens use storytelling or rational argumentation to lobby politicians?
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Policy and politics (Print). - : Policy Press. - 0305-5736 .- 1470-8442. ; 47:4, s. 543-559
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- What should count as legitimate forms of reasoning in public deliberation is a contested issue. Democratic theorists have argued that storytelling may offer a more accessible form of deliberation for marginalised citizens than ‘rational argumentation’. We investigate the empirical support for this claim by examining Swedish citizens’ use of storytelling in written communication with the political establishment. We test whether stories are used frequently, as well as by whom, and how they are used. We find that storytelling is (1) rare, (2) not more frequent among people with nonmainstream views, and (3) used together with rational argumentation. In line with some previous research, we show that stories still play other important roles: authorising the author, undermining political opponents and, most often, further supporting arguments made in ‘rational’ form. The results suggest that people rely more on rational argumentation than storytelling when expecting interlocutors to be hostile to their views.
|
|
| 10. |
- Holdo, Markus, 1984-
(författare)
-
Field Notes on Deliberative Democracy : Power and Recognition in Participatory Budgeting
- 2014
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The theory of deliberative democracy suggests that public discourse should be guided by reasonable arguments. In real life, power relations not only obstruct free exchanges of reasons but also shape our understandings and expectations of what it means to provide reasons and to speak with authority. Struggles over power and recognition are necessary parts of deliberation. This thesis asks how groups that are marginalized in public discourse can act to demand recognition in public sphere deliberation.The thesis draws on work by Pierre Bourdieu to make the argument that actors can use various kinds of capital to advance their interests in public deliberation. Based on research on participatory budgeting in the city of Rosario, Argentina, the thesis demonstrates that state-sponsored arenas of deliberation can work as strategic social fields that ground struggles for recognition in new forms of capital. On the basis of “deliberative capital” participants can demand recognition from fellow citizens and political decision-makers. The case study of Rosario’s participatory budget demonstrates that participating citizens expected public recognition for their commitment to deliberative values. The study shows, moreover, that local politicians had reasons to respect participants’ independence from the government. Participatory budgeting could serve the political purpose of legitimizing the government on the condition that participants were recognized as independent actors who work in the interest of their neighborhoods.These arguments are presented in three essays, each making distinct contributions to debates on deliberation and inclusion. The first essay makes a theoretical argument for utilizing Bourdieu’s concepts of field, investment and capital in theorizing on public deliberation. The second essay provides an empirically grounded argument for thinking of empowerment in terms of deliberative capital. The third essay demonstrates a mechanism of non-cooptation that should be of wider relevance to debates about the merits of deliberative governance projects in urban politics. Taken together, the essays demonstrate that citizens can capitalize on an interest in legitimizing power through deliberation by conditioning their participation.
|
|
