Political participation and citizen engagement: beyond the mainstream

References

• Bang, H. P. 2009. “‘Yes We Can’: Identity Politics and Project Politics for a Late-Modern World.” Urban Research and Practice 2 (2): 117–137. doi: 10.1080/17535060902979022
   Google Scholar
• Bang, H. P. 2011. “The Politics of Threat: Late-Modern Politics in the Shadow of Neo-Liberalism.” Critical Policy Studies 5 (4): 434–448. doi: 10.1080/19460171.2011.628065
   Google Scholar
• Bang, H. P., and E. Sorensen. 1999. “The Everyday Maker: A New Challenge to Democratic Governance.” Administrative Theory and Practice 21 (3): 325–341.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, L. W., and A. Segerberg. 2012. “The Logic of Connective Action: Digital Media and the Personalization of Contentious Politics.” Information, Communication and Society 15 (5): 739–768. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2012.670661
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blakely, G., and B. Evans. 2009. “Who Participates, How and Why in Urban Regeneration Projects? The Case of the New City of East Manchester.” Social Policy and Administration 43 (1): 15–32. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9515.2008.00643.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brubaker, R., and F. Cooper. 2000. “Beyond Identity.” Theory Culture and Society 29 (1): 1–47. doi: 10.1023/A:1007068714468
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler, Judith. [1990] 1999. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Castells, Manuel. 2012. Networks of Outrage and Hope. Social Movements in the Internet Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chadwick, A. 2007. “Digital Network Repertoires and Organizational Hybridity.” Political Communication 24: 283–301. doi: 10.1080/10584600701471666
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dalton, R. 2008. “Citizenship Norms and the Expansion of Political Participation.” Political Studies 56 (1): 76–98. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00718.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dalton, R., and M. Wattenberg. 2000. Parties Without Partisans: Political Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Halupka, M. 2014. “Clicktivism: A Systematic Heuristic.” Policy and Internet 6 (2): 115–132. doi: 10.1002/1944-2866.POI355
   Google Scholar
• Halupka, M. 2015. “Anonymous and the Theory of the Everyday Maker: Understanding the Changes of Contemporary Political Participation.”
   Google Scholar
• Hay, C. 2007. Why We Hate Politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hendriks, F., and P. Tops. 2005. “Everyday Fixers as Local Heroes: A Case Study of Vital Interaction in Local Governance.” Local Government Studies 31 (4): 475–490. doi: 10.1080/03003930500136899
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hooghe, M., and J. Oser. 2015. “The Rise of Engaged Citizenship: The Evolution of Citizenship Norms among Adolescents in 21 Countries between 1999 and 2009.” International Journal of Comparative Sociology 56 (1): 29–52. doi: 10.1177/0020715215578488
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karpf, D. 2010. “Online Political Mobilization from the Advocacy Group's Perspective: Looking Beyond Clicktivism.” Policy and Internet 2 (4): 7–41. doi: 10.2202/1944-2866.1098
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, M. J., and H. Bang. 2015. “Digitally Networked Movements as Problematization and Politicization.” Policy Studies 36 (6): 573–589.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lasswell, H. 1958. Politics: Who Gets What When How? With Postscript. London: Meridian Books.
   Google Scholar
• Leftwich, A. 2004. What is Politics? Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Li, Y., and D. Marsh. 2008. “New Forms of Political Participation: Searching for Expert Citizens and Everyday Makers.” British Journal of Political Science 38: 247–72. doi: 10.1017/S0007123408000136
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marsh, D., T. O'Toole, and S. Jones. 2007. Young People and Politics in the UK: Apathy or Alienation? London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Marsh, D., and A. Vromen. 2013. “Everyday Makers with a Difference? Contemporary Cases of Political Participation.”
   Google Scholar
• Norris, P. 2002. Democratic Phoenix: Reinventing Political Activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rowe, P. 2015. “MamaBakers as Everyday Makers: The political is personal.” Policy Studies 36 (6): 623–639.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowe, P., S. Ercan, M. Halupka, and D. Marsh. 2015. “Beyond Dualisms in the Study of Political Participation.”
   Google Scholar
• Stoker, G. 2006. Why Politics Matters: Making Democracy Work. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Tormey, S., and R. A. Feenstra. 2015. “Reinventing the Political Party in Spain: The Case of 15M and the Spanish Mobilisations” Policy Studies 36 (6): 590–606.
   Google Scholar
• Vromen, A., and C. Coleman. 2011. “Online Movement Mobilisation and Electoral Politics. The Case of GetUp!” Communication, Politics and Culture 44 (2): 76–94.
   Google Scholar
• Vromen, A., and C. Coleman. 2013. “Online Campaigning Organisations and Storytelling Strategies: GetUp! in Australia.” Policy and Internet 5 (1): 76–98. doi: 10.1002/poi3.23
   Google Scholar