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.
帕特南的汤药 白凤 这期决定改变以往的小清新,推荐一本貌似晦涩阅读体验不会太好的好书:罗伯特·帕特南《使民主运转起来》。大学时代,迷恋的社会学著作很多,《使民主运转起来》就是其中一本,最近又重温。至于原因,看看各大报纸头条内容,你懂的。 在...
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 评分 评分此书明明是三人合作,被记得的似乎却只有帕特南,所以舞台还是很重要。从政治学的视角看来,立论和结构都很清楚,也富有启发性。但是,总让人觉得颇有循环论证的感觉——或者说,总给人感觉好的地方什么都好,坏的地方什么都坏。总之,觉得社会资本和民主运转之间的相关关系肯定存在,但是因果关系究竟如何,则还需进一步仔细讨论。
评分此书明明是三人合作,被记得的似乎却只有帕特南,所以舞台还是很重要。从政治学的视角看来,立论和结构都很清楚,也富有启发性。但是,总让人觉得颇有循环论证的感觉——或者说,总给人感觉好的地方什么都好,坏的地方什么都坏。总之,觉得社会资本和民主运转之间的相关关系肯定存在,但是因果关系究竟如何,则还需进一步仔细讨论。
评分此书明明是三人合作,被记得的似乎却只有帕特南,所以舞台还是很重要。从政治学的视角看来,立论和结构都很清楚,也富有启发性。但是,总让人觉得颇有循环论证的感觉——或者说,总给人感觉好的地方什么都好,坏的地方什么都坏。总之,觉得社会资本和民主运转之间的相关关系肯定存在,但是因果关系究竟如何,则还需进一步仔细讨论。
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。
评分大概看了两章,对这个topic不了解,所以读起来不觉得轻松。。
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