Why do some democratic governments succeed and others fail? In a book that has received attention from policymakers and civic activists in America and around the world, Robert Putnam and his collaborators offer empirical evidence for the importance of "civic community" in developing successful institutions. Their focus is on a unique experiment begun in 1970 when Italy created new governments for each of its regions. After spending two decades analyzing the efficacy of these governments in such fields as agriculture, housing, and health services, they reveal patterns of associationism, trust, and cooperation that facilitate good governance and economic prosperity.
Robert D. Putnam is the Peter and Isabel Malkin Professor of Public Policy at Harvard, where he teaches both undergraduate and graduate courses. Professor Putnam is a member of the National Academy of Sciences, a Fellow of the British Academy, and past president of the American Political Science Association. In 2006, Putnam received the Skytte Prize, one of the world's highest accolades for a political scientist. Raised in a small town in the Midwest and educated at Swarthmore, Oxford, and Yale, he has served as Dean of the Kennedy School of Government.
He has written fourteen books, translated into twenty languages, including the best-selling Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, and more recently Better Together: Restoring the American Community, a study of promising new forms of social connectedness. His previous book, Making Democracy Work, was praised by the Economist as "a great work of social science, worthy to rank alongside de Tocqueville, Pareto and Weber." Both Making Democracy Work and Bowling Alone are among the most cited publications in the social sciences worldwide in the last half century.
今天看完了从政治学角度研究社会资本问题的名著---《使民主运转起来》,感觉还不错,不光大量的调查资料让人敬佩和信服,但就对问题的分析来说也是非常精辟的。这本书虽然翻译的不是很好,但还是非常容易理解的,得出的结论也很有说服力。本书的缘起是作者抓住意大利开始地...
评分 评分 评分用社会资本的概念来解释意大利南部北部不同的民主发展情况,中国一方面是君主专制,这是没有社会资本的,但一方面我们又强调家族概念,社会资本又是很强的,所以我们一段时期内的商业是发展很快的,家族企业很多,但民主精神却由于几千年的皇权压制没有发展起来,导致现在公民...
评分1970年,意大利开始实施一项制度改革,将中央政府手中的权力下放到地区政府。作者借由这个契机进行了一段长达20多年的研究,以期确定地区自治制度究竟是否能有所成效。 研究结果展现了一系列耐人寻味的事实: 首先,人们在政治主张上趋向于中间派,不可调和的冲突大幅下降。 其...
去年被要求看的书(太长+数据太多=不看)今年刷了几个书评了事。关于社会资本不同导致同样下放权利到南北意大利不同地方政府,皿煮运转的不同。好像放到我国做实验也会是差不多的结果嘛,把南北对调一下,我国南北经济意识各方面都跟意大利南北是反的。
评分1 4 6
评分从视野格局和经验材料上讲堪称完美。唯一有一个不太对劲之处是微观的机制和宏观的相关之间的联系似乎论证得不够强。微观的社会资本和微观的合作之间的因果机制很清楚,宏观的地区civic tradition和地区治理效率之间的相关也很清楚,但是小的association的作用如何传导到宏观的民主化呢?public-spiritedness&egalitarian value spawned by networks of civic engagement大概是传导带,可是具体怎么传导的没有详细说明。不过当然开创性作品也不能把事情都做完了……
评分主要内容和点评有长篇书评涵盖:http://book.douban.com/review/5378567/ 我不再赘言。方法论和资料累积上的扎实与耐心让人惊叹。一个余下的兴趣点是本书似乎更多地把精力放在国家—社会关系上,没有深挖中央政府修宪、成立大区层级的政府,对重新激发意大利北部公民美德传统、进而巩固当地民主政体和社会经济发展的重要意义。全国性的民主政体效率低下、易腐败、与地方选民疏远,过于狭隘的地方和社区民主又容易形成民粹思潮和各民主单位间的相互拆台(在意大利这种地方裙带和家族纽带特强的地方尤其如此)、也解决不了全国性的问题,那么中等层级的民主开放(美国的州、意大利的大区)可能是一个相对折中的好选择,在调和地方和全国民主矛盾方面具有的作用在这本书中得到了比较好的验证。
评分从视野格局和经验材料上讲堪称完美。唯一有一个不太对劲之处是微观的机制和宏观的相关之间的联系似乎论证得不够强。微观的社会资本和微观的合作之间的因果机制很清楚,宏观的地区civic tradition和地区治理效率之间的相关也很清楚,但是小的association的作用如何传导到宏观的民主化呢?public-spiritedness&egalitarian value spawned by networks of civic engagement大概是传导带,可是具体怎么传导的没有详细说明。不过当然开创性作品也不能把事情都做完了……
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2026 book.wenda123.org All Rights Reserved. 图书目录大全 版权所有