Sortition: ¿A Disruptive Innovation to Deal with the Representation Crisis or Just an Entelechy?
No. 6 (2021-02-01)Author(s)
-
Yenny Andrea Celemín CaicedoUniversidad de los Andes (Colombia)
Abstract
The paper does a critical approach to the possibility of constitute legislatures through sortition as innovative compound mechanism instead of elections, as a formula to face the so-called crisis of democratic representation. Although there are certain advantages of this innovative proposal for reinforce plurality and diversity in democratic and deliberative processes, sortition as proposal also have some perils and limitations. Nevertheless, there is a possibility to include sortition nor to substitute election but to complement and improve them. Realization of innovation during legislative processes in which sortition has a central role, and conformation of mini publics integrate by people randomly selected can ensure accountability processes of the legislative actions.
References
Arnold, Douglas. The Logic of Congressional Action. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993.
Bouricius, Terrill. “Why Hybrid Bicameralism Is Not Right for Sortition”. En Legislature by Lot: Transformative Designs for Deliberative Governance, editado por JonhGastil y Erik OlinWright. London: Verso, 2018.
Bouricious, Terrill. “Democracy Through Multi-Body Sortition: Athenian Lessons for the Modern Day”. Journal of Public Deliberation (2013) 1-19.
Bandes, Susan. “Emotion and deliberation: the autonomous citizen in the social World”. Nomos, Vol 53 (2013) 189-211.
Celemín, Yenny Andrea. “Participación Ciudadana en escenarios digitales: ¿es controlada por los jueces?”. Razón Crítica, No 5 (2018) 81-107.
Christensen, Clyton. The innovator’s dilemma. Boston: Harvard Bussines Review Press, 1997.
Dahl, Robert. La democracia y sus críticos. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992.
Delannoi, Gil, Dowlen, Oliver y Stone, Peter. The Lottery as democratic Institution. Paris: Sciences Po, 2013. https://www.tcd.ie/policy-institute/assets/pdf/Studies_Policy_28_web.pdf.
Elster, John. “Accountability in Athenian Politics”. En Democracy, Accountability and Representation. Editado por: AdamPrzeworski, SusanStokes y BernardManin. Boston (USA): Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Escobar, Oliver y Elstub, Stephen. “Forms of mini publics”. https://newdemocracy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/docs_researchnotes_2017_May_nDF_RN_20170508_Forms OfMiniPublics.pdf
Gastil, John y Olin Wright, Erik. Legislature by Lot: Transformative Designs for Deliberative Governance. London: Verso, 2018.
Hopp, Christian; KaminskiJermain; SalgeTorse y AntonsDavid. “Disruptive Innovation: Conceptual Foundations, Empirical Evidence, and Research Opportunities in the Digital Age”. Journal of Product Innovation Management 35 (2018), 446-457.
Manin, Bernard. Los principios del Gobierno Representativo. Madrid: Alianza, 2008.
Michels, Ank y Binnema, Harmen. “Deepening and Connecting Democratic Processes. The opportunities and pitfalls of mini publics in renewing democracy”. Social Sciences 7 (2018) 1-13.
Molewijk, Bert, Kleinlugtenbelt, Dick y Widdershoven, Guy. “The role of emotions in moral case deliberation: Theory, Practice and Methodology”. Bioethics 25 (2011) 383-394.
Ovejero, Félix. ¿Idiotas o Ciudadanos?: el 15 M y la Teoría de la Democracia. Madrid: Montesinos, 2013.
Moreno Pestaña, José Luís. “Los desafíos del sorteo a la democracia, los desafíos de la democracia al sorteo”. Diamon, Revista Internacional de Filosofía 72 (2017) 7-21.
Palacios, Alfonso. Concepto y Control del Procedimiento Legislativo. Bogotá: Universidad Externado, 2005.
Palacios, Alfonso. “Redes sociales y medios de comunicación en internet: riesgos y desafios para el sistema de democracia representativa”, En El Estado Constitucional en Jaque, editado por FloralbaPadrón y MagdalenaCorrea. Bogotá: Universidad Externado de Colombia, 2018.
Przeworski, Adam. ¿Qué esperar de la democracia?. Buenos Aires: Siglo XIX, 2010.
Przeworski, Adam. “La democracia como resultado contingente de los conflictos”. En Constitucionalismo y Democracia, editado por JonhElster y RuneSlagstad. México: Fondo del Cultura Económica, 1999, 89-110.
Ruiz, José María. Esencialismo democrático. Madrid: Trotta, 2010.
Serafin, Alexei, “El uso del sorteo, participación política y democracia. Una lección para México”. En https://www.academia.edu/37529923/uso_del_sorteo_participaci%c3%93n_pol%c3%8dtica_y_democracia._una_lecci%c3%93n_para_m%c3%89xico_1_sortition_political_participation_and_democracy._a_lesson_for_mexico.
Setälä, Maija. “Connecting deliberative mini-publics to representative decision making”, European Journal of Political Research 56 (2017).
Setälä, Maija. “Representative Democracy”. Referendums and Representative Democracy. Editado por MaijaSetälä and TeoSchiller. New York: Routledge, 2009.
Sood, Ashish y TellisGerard. “Demystifying Disruption: A New Model for Understanding and Predicting Disruptive Technologies”. Marketing Science (2011).
Stone, Peter. “Sortition, voting, and democratic equality”. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 19:3, (2016) 339-356. En DOI: 10.1080/13698230.2016.1 144858
Sutherland, Keith. “The two sides of representative coin”. Studies in Social Justice Vol. 5 (2011) 197-211.
Van Reybrouck, David. Contra las elecciones. Cómo salvar la democracia. Madrid: Taurus, 2017.
Waldron, Jeremy. Derecho y Desacuerdos. Madrid: Marcial Pons, 2005.
Wood, Asmi y Levi, Ron. “A Mini-Public of Academics: Experimenting with Deliberative Democracy and Indigenous Cultural Competency in Legal Education”. Legal education Review Vol 8 issue 2 (2018): 2-17.
Zovatto, Daniel. “El financiamiento electoral: subvenciones y gastos”. Tratado de derecho electoral comparado de América Latina. Editado por DieterNohlen, DanieñZovatto, JesúsOrozco y JoséThompson. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2007.
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Yenny Andrea Celemín Caicedo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.