No description available.

This master’s thesis deals with the cultural diversity policies of Denmark and Sweden within the cultural sector. It attempts at explaining why these two “most-similar” scandinavian countries having in common the same cultural model, “the architect model”, opted for different policies when it came to cultural diversity: Assimilationism for Denmark and multiculturalism for Sweden. I show that though institutional and power-interest factors had an impact, ideas as “programmatic beliefs” (Sheri E. Berman 2001) or “frames” (Erik Bleich 2003) played the ultimate role. I evaluate their relative importance by analyzing the anthropological dimension of the countries cultural policies since 1969. The study confirms that at least in the cultural sector, Danish policies have been assimilationist and Swedish ones multiculturalist and proposes a new classification of terms.By investigating immigrants cultures, it fills a gap left by previous researchers working on a common Nordic cultural model.

<p>It has become popular for political scientists to discuss the transformation from government to governance and the networks’ greater influence on public policymaking. However, this debate lacks methodological, empirical and theoretical research about the relationship between governance networks and representative democracy. The main objective of this essay is to understand the relationship between governance networks and representative democracy through a case study of the governance network Leader Linné. The theoretical framework includes four analysis models about the relationship between governance networks and representative democracy that are analysed by five factors connected to representative democracy. Each model has a specific approach to the public policymaking in networks e. g. were the power lies, how the general interest is understood and the role of politicians. The essay is designed as a case study combined with interviews of participants from the network’s national, regional and local level. The result of the essay is that the relationship between the governance network and representative democracy is complemental, meaning that representative democracy makes the central decisions in society where secondary decisions are made through a combination of representative- and participate democracy introduced by Leader. In Leader Linné the general interest is formed at EU level and politicians have a managerial role.</p>

It has become popular for political scientists to discuss the transformation from government to governance and the networks’ greater influence on public policymaking. However, this debate lacks methodological, empirical and theoretical research about the relationship between governance networks and representative democracy. The main objective of this essay is to understand the relationship between governance networks and representative democracy through a case study of the governance network Leader Linné. The theoretical framework includes four analysis models about the relationship between governance networks and representative democracy that are analysed by five factors connected to representative democracy. Each model has a specific approach to the public policymaking in networks e. g. were the power lies, how the general interest is understood and the role of politicians. The essay is designed as a case study combined with interviews of participants from the network’s national, regional and local level. The result of the essay is that the relationship between the governance network and representative democracy is complemental, meaning that representative democracy makes the central decisions in society where secondary decisions are made through a combination of representative- and participate democracy introduced by Leader. In Leader Linné the general interest is formed at EU level and politicians have a managerial role.