Conflicts and paradoxes in the rhetoric of participation

References

• Allegretti, G. (2014). Participatory democracies: A slow march toward new paradigms from Brazil to Europe? In F. Lieberherr-Gardiol & G. Solinís (Eds.), Cities into the future (pp. 141–177). Chicoutimi: Université du Québec. Retrieved April 2015, from http://classiques.uqac.ca/contemporains/allegretti_giovanni/participatory_democracies/participatory_democracies.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ancelovici, M., Dafour, P., & Nez, H. (2016). Street politics in the age of austerity. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baiocchi, G., & Ganuza, E. (2016). Popular democracy: The paradox of participation. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barber, B. (1984). Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Blondiaux, L., & Sintomer, Y. (2002). L’impératif deliberative. Politix, 15(57), 17–35. doi: 10.3406/polix.2002.1205
   Google Scholar
• Bryan, F. M. (2004). Real democracy: The New England town meeting and how it works. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cooke, B., & Kothari, U. (2001). Participation: The New Tyranny? London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Crenson, M. A., & Ginsberg, B. (2004). Downsizing democracy: How America sidelined its citizens and privatized its public. Baltimore, MD: JHU Press.
   Google Scholar
• Font, J., Della Porta, D., & Sintomer, Y. (2014). Participatory democracy in Southern Europe. London: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Fung, A., & Wright, E. O. (2003). Deepening democracy. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Ganuza, E., Nez, H., & Morales, E. (2014). The Struggle for a voice: tensions between associations and citizens in Participatory Budgeting. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 38(6), 2274–2291. doi: 10.1111/1468-2427.12059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ganuza, E., & Frances, F. (2012). El círculo virtuoso de la participación. Madrid: CIS.
   Google Scholar
• Geissel, B., & Joas, M. (Eds.). (2013). Participatory democratic innovations in Europe: Improving the quality of democracy? Berlin: Barbara Budrich.
   Google Scholar
• Lascoumes, P., & Le Gales, P. (2007). Introduction: Understanding public policy through its instruments? From the nature of instruments to the sociology of public policy instrumentation. Governance, 20(1), 1–21. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0491.2007.00342.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leal, P. (2007). Participation: The ascendancy of a buzzword in the neo-liberal era. Development in Practice, 17(4/5), 539–548. doi: 10.1080/09614520701469518
   Google Scholar
• Lee, C. W., Mcquarrie, M., & Walker, E. T. (2015). Democratizing inequalities: Dilemmas of the new public participation. New York: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leighninger, M. (2006). The next form of democracy: How expert rule is giving way to shared governance—and why politics will never be the same. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Li, T. M. (2005). Beyond ‘the state’ and failed schemes. American Anthropologist, 107(3), 383–394. doi: 10.1525/aa.2005.107.3.383
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newton, K. (2012). Curing the democratic malaise with democratic innovations. In K. Newton & B. Geissel (Eds.), Evaluating democratic innovations: Curing the democratic malaise (pp. 3–20). Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ong, A. (2006). Neoliberalism as exception: Mutations in citizenship and sovereignty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Citizens as partners. (2000). Accessed December 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Pateman, C. (1970). Participation and democratic theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Peck, J., & Theodore, N. (2010). Mobilizing policy: Models, methods, and mutations. Geoforum, 41(2), 169–174. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2010.01.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poletta, F. (2005). How participatory democracy became white: Culture and organizational choice. Mobilization, 10(2), 271–288.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polletta, F. (2014). Is participation without power good enough? Introduction to ‘democracy now: Ethnographies of contemporary participation’. The Sociological Quarterly, 55(3), 453–466. doi: 10.1111/tsq.12062
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ranciere, J. (1998). Aux bords du politique. Paris: Gallimard.
   Google Scholar
• Rosanvallon, P. (2011). The democratic legitimacy: Impartilly, reflexivity, proximity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, N. (1996). The death of the social? Re-figuring the territory of government. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(3), 327–356.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sintomer, Y., Herzberg, C., & Röcke, A. (2008). Démocratie participative et modernisation des services publics:Les budgets participatifs en Europe. Paris: La Découverte.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, G. (2009). Democratic innovations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Swyngedouw, E. (2005). Governance innovation and the citizen: The Janus face of governnace-beyond-the-state. Urban Studies, 42(11), 1991–2006. doi: 10.1080/00420980500279869
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Talpin, J. (2012). Schools of democracy: How ordinary citizens (sometimes) become competent in participatory budgeting institutions. Colchester: ECPR Press.
   Google Scholar
• Villasante, R. T. (1995). Las democraciasparticipativas. Madrid: HOAC.
   Google Scholar