Två-statslösning för den Palestinska Myndigheten är en återkommande diskuterad väg bort ifrån konflikten i Mellanöstern. För Palestinas del har den mångåriga politiska och väpnade kampen för existensberättigande varit deras första argument i statsbyggnadsprocessen vilken har kantats av ”sexdagarskrig”, ”Yom-kippur-krig”, ”Al-Aqsa intifada” och stenkastning. Genom en fallstudie där jag har operationaliserat Barry Buzans teori om statsbildning så har jag under sökt dokumenten ”Oslo Agreement” och ”A Performanced-Based Roadmap to a Permanent Two-State Solution to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict”, om statsbildning baserat på dessa är möjlig. Resultatet av undersökningen är att teorin bakom de statsbildande komponenterna har kunnat operationaliseras och genom detta visat att territoriet, den nationella identiteten och palestinska strategiska områden är de mest förekommande statsbildande beståndsdelarna. Generellt citeras dokumenten fortfarande i statsbyggnadsprocessen men förtroendet att bygga staten Palestina på dessa, uppfattar jag vara urholkad. Sökord: ”Palestine State Building”, ”Statebuilding”, ”Statebuilding Buzan”, ”Statsbildning”.

No description available.

February through March, 2005, I conducted a Minor Field Study (MFS) in Lao PDR together with a fellow-student. We were interested in a project in Laos called GPAR Luang Prabang, in which Sida, UNDP and the Lao Government are trying to improve the governance system in Laos. Luang Prabang is the province in the northern parts of Laos where the good governance-project were being implemented. The main interest in this study concerns democracy aid in the shape of good governance and local ownership in development aid. Good governance is a highly debated topic in aid-literature, both because of the explosion of good governance projects the last ten or so years and because of the ambiguity that lies in the concept good governance. Different aid-actors give different meanings to good governance. Two definitions stand out: First there is the “narrow” definition that focuses on the economical steering of a country’s resources. The second, or “broad” definition of good governance, focuses on democratic aspects of the concept. Areas like participation, transparency, accountability and rule of law are high-lighted here. Different actors in the aid-society thus have different definitions of the concept. Whether democracy aid works and becomes sustainable relies, according to the literature, on how well the partners in an aid-project can foster local ownership. Ownership means that the recipient is in control of the policy process, from highlighting a problem to implementing the solutions. The starting point in this thesis is the question whether the ambiguity in good governance- definitions constrains ownership in the policy process. Also, in democracy aid there is an interesting paradox: How can a project that aims at changing political power-structures be driven by those who have the most to gain from these structures? My study shows that when the partners in an aid-project are unable to settle for one definition of good governance, ownership is hard to reach. If the partners can not reach an agreement at an early stage in the process, ownership will suffer and sustainability will be hard to reach.February through March, 2005, I conducted a Minor Field Study (MFS) in Lao PDR together with a fellow-student. We were interested in a project in Laos called GPAR Luang Prabang, in which Sida, UNDP and the Lao Government are trying to improve the governance system in Laos. Luang Prabang is the province in the northern parts of Laos where the good governance-project were being implemented.The main interest in this study concerns democracy aid in the shape of good governance and local ownership in development aid. Good governance is a highly debated topic in aid-literature, both because of the explosion of good governance projects the last ten or so years and because of the ambiguity that lies in the concept good governance. Different aid-actors give different meanings to good governance. Two definitions stand out: First there is the “narrow” definition that focuses on the economical steering of a country’s resources. The second, or “broad” definition of good governance, focuses on democratic aspects of the concept. Areas like participation, transparency, accountability and rule of law are high-lighted here. Different actors in the aid-society thus have different definitions of the concept. Whether democracy aid works and becomes sustainable relies, according to the literature, on how well the partners in an aid-project can foster local ownership. Ownership means that the recipient is in control of the policy process, from highlighting a problem to implementing the solutions. The starting point in this thesis is the question whether the ambiguity in good governance- definitions constrains ownership in the policy process. Also, in democracy aid there is an interesting paradox: How can a project that aims at changing political power-structures be driven by those who have the most to gain from these structures? My study shows that when the partners in an aid-project are unable to settle for one definition of good governance, ownership is hard to reach. If the partners can not reach an agreement at an early stage in the process, ownership will suffer and sustainability will be hard to reach.

“National Campaigns for a European Choice” by Annakaisa Suni. Independent work (15credits) in Political Science, Advanced Course, Spring 2010. Supervisor: Sten Berglund. The aim of this study is to describe and compare the European Parliament’s communicationcampaigns in Finland and Sweden before the 2009 European elections. The study aims to answerthe following questions:1. How were the campaigns planned and implemented?2. How did the campaigns adapt to the media’s needs?3. How did structural, environmental and resource factors influence the campaigns? This is a comparative study with two cases, which were chosen using a most similar –design.The material consists of qualitative interviews at European Parliament Information Offices inHelsinki and Stockholm and of campaign documents produced by the European Parliament. The campaigns in Finland and Sweden were both part of a Pan-European institutional campaign.They were both characterised by a high level of professionalisation and also a high level ofmedia adaptation when it comes to timing and format, but not when it comes to content. Onnational level, there were some important differences. In Sweden, the campaign was more clearlyoriented towards distinctive target groups and used less face-to-face-campaigning towards thelarge audience. The political climate in Sweden matched the institutional campaign better than inFinland; the discussion was issue-oriented whereas in Finland the focus was on individualcandidates and on ”what’s best for Finland”.

No description available.

This study attempts to answer the question of whether the propaganda of the Swedish political parties ”Socialdemokraterna”, and/or ”Sverigedemokraterna”, used for the election to the European parliament 2009, are to be viewed as populistic. Furthermore, is the propaganda to viewed as included in the ”Classical populism”, the ”New populism”, both, or none of the above genres? With a theoretical approach deriving from earlier works on the subject Classical/New populism from a number of writers, the study uses empirical and qualitative text analysis to study the parties propaganda. For each of the two genres of populism an ideal type is set up, which is used to define their core elements. The empirical material is then put in relation to these two ideal types as a reference point, so that it can be examined systematically. The main result of the study concludes that none of the two ideal types matches the information that can be read out from the party ”Socialdemokraterna”´s election propaganda, and that it therefore is to be regarded as neither ”Classical” nor ”New” populism. ”Sverigedemokraterna”´s propaganda on the other hand, displays all of the characteristics that are defined by the theory used in the study as ”New populism”.

This essay is about democracy and how a democracy index can be used as a tool to illustratethe gap between reality and ideal. The purpose of this study can be expressed by two researchquestions: Does the Economist Intelligence Unit's (EIU) democracy index illustrate thedistance between reality and the ideal of democracy presented by Dahl? and Can the EIU'sdemocracy index be modified by a) internal adjustments and b) using the variables includedin World Economic Forum’s (WEF) equality index? By using a combination of theories (Dahl’s theory of democracy, Rawls theory of justice andchosen theories critical to liberal democracy) as an analytical framework the following twoquestions have been answered:1) Which of the variables included in the EIU's democracy index have the potential to capturethe level of political equality?2) Which of the variables included in the WEF’s equality index have the potential to capturethe degree of political equality? By using a quantitative method the study’s third and last question has been answered:3) How strong is the rank correlation between the EIU’s democracy index and the WEF’sequality index, that is; how strong is the rank correlation coefficient (rho)? The data presented by the WEF’s equality index indicate that women are systematicallydiscriminated against as a group. From a democratic perspective the EIU may need tomeasure inequalities at a group level in order to capture the lack of political equality betweenindividuals. By reformulating some of the EIU’s variables, by revising the EIU’s point systemand by using the variables included in the WEF's equality index to extend EIU’s democracyindex, the chances of capturing the gap between reality and the ideal of democracy presentedby Dahl would likely increase.

The purpose of this paper is to study the subject Islam and Democracy and see what commonalities exist between the two ideas and traditions of thoughts. The subject is topical and often highlighted by the media in the West. The Islamic voices that we hear today is certainly not democratic, given the violence and hatred carried out by Islamic extremists against the West. The investigation of this paper have shown a different direction when there are other voices such as those investigated reformist thinkers who argue that Islam has many democratic elements, and even that Islam is more suitable than democracy. According to the reformists is model of an Islamic state is democratic and legitimate. The research is based on a comprehensive overview of Islam, Sharia Law, the development of political Islam and the reformers by the reformers and advocates for the theoretical point of democracy many democratic elements exist in the reformers islamic modell and traditions of thought.  the sovereignity of god more suitable than sovereignty of the people. Governancevision of an Islamic state. The conclusion shows a comparison between the Islamic modeland the result shows that. Democracy works with different ideass such as socialism, liberalism, conservatism, etc., so why should it not be possible to reconcile Islam and democracy?

No description available.

SAMMANFATTNING Vi har inspirerats av en föreläsning av Jennifer Gibson från University of Toronto. I denna presenterades hur man förankrat beslut kring prioriteringar hos medborgarna, och hur man därigenom undvikit kraftiga negativa reaktioner. Det etiska ramverket byggde på den deliberativa demokratiteorin. Erfarenheterna av processen visade att det fanns möjlighet att få acceptans och legitimitet bland medbor-garna för svåra prioriteringar, så kallade wicked-issues. Syftet med uppsatsen var att ta reda på om och hur deliberativa metoder är ett sätt att hantera wicked-issues. Den övergripande frågeställningen är: Vilka kännetecken bör en medborgardialog ha för att vara framgångsrik? För att få svar på frågeställningarna undersöktes följande fall som vi valt ut som star cases: Barcelona, Lewisham, Toronto, Norrbottens läns landsting och Landstinget i Östergötland. Vi beskriver även andra praktiska exempel som får utgöra ytterligare erfarenhetsbas i studien. I arbetet med att identifiera viktiga framgångsfaktorer har vi använt oss av fem forskare inom deliberativ demokratiteori; Habermas, Räftegård, Fishkin, Dryzek och Dahl. Med utgångspunkt i deras teorier har vi tagit fram en analysmodell som innehåller fyra huvudområden; kontext, arrangemang, dialog och effektivitet. Dessa fyra områden innehåller i sin tur ett antal egenskaper. Analysmodellen har använts i en jämförande analys av de valda casen. Vårt resultat visar att nödvändiga kännetecken för att medborgardialogen ska vara framgångsrik är: • Syftet är att samla synpunkter och att diskutera. • Wicked-issues finns i kontexten. • Besluten fattas i ordinarie beslutsinstans • Medborgardialogen genomförs som öppna offentliga möten, dialoger till riktade grupper och dialog via informationsteknologi • Öppet för alla och till berörda av frågeställningen • Tidigt genomförd i processen • Systematiken är delvis utvecklad • Underlag för beslut om prioriteringar • Dialogen är öppen, jämlik, ansvarig och dialogisk • Dialogen är delvis kunskaps- och erfarenhetsbaserad Inte nödvändiga kännetecken är: • Lagstiftning • Parallell intern dialog i organisationen / ABSTRACT This study has been inspired by a lecture given by Jennifer Gibson from University of Toronto. She described how the health care providers had been able to avoid black headlines by public engagement in priority setting. They had used an ethical framework based on the theory of deliberative democracy. Experiences from Toronto gave us a hint of a way to achieve acceptance and legitimacy even for tough decisions concerning priority setting and other wicked-issues. The aim of the study is to find out if and how deliberative methods are a way to deal with wicked-issues. Our main purpose is to point out the qualities of a successful deliberation. In order to get the answer to our scientific questions we examined star cases from Barcelona, Lewisham, Toronto, the County Council of Norrbotten and the County Council of Östergötland. The study also includes ex-periences from public consultations elsewhere. We have studied theories of the scientists Habermas, Räftegård, Fishkin, Dryzek and Dahl in order to identify the key elements of the theory of deliberative democracy. We have chosen four main compo-nents from these theories and put them together in a model that describes the process of public consul-tations. This model has been used to analyze and compare the cases. The four components for delibera-tion are context, arrangements, dialogue and effectiveness. Our results show that necessary variables to make a successful dialogue are: • The purpose is to listen and discuss. • Wicked-issues is a component in the context. • Decisions are taken in ordinary forums • Citizen consultation through open public meetings, dialogues with stakeholders and using information technology • Open for everybody and for those who are concerned by the issues • Early in the process • Partly developed systemathic structure • Decisions of priority settings • An open, equal, responsible dialogue • The dialogue is partly evidencebased Not necessary variables are: • Legislation A parallel dialogue within the organisation