MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2202656142 · doi:10.1177/002070201006500410

Review: The Global Commonwealth of Citizens <i>Toward Cosmopolitan Democracy</i>

2010· article· en· W2202656142 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Andrew S. Thompson

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy Analysis · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueEuropean Union Policy and Governance
Établissements canadiensBalsillie School of International AffairsUniversity of Waterloo
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCommonwealthPolitical scienceDemocracyGlobal governanceMultilateralismHuman rightsPolitical economyGlobalizationCivil societyLegitimacyPublic administrationSociologyLawPolitics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

THE GLOBAL COMMONWEALTH OF CITIZENS Toward Cosmopolitan Democracy Daniele Archibugi Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008. 317 pp, US$30.95 cloth ISBN 978-0-691-13490-1We live in an system that is inherently undemocratic. Many of world's organizations - the United Nations, NATO, the financial institutions - are products of a post- World War Two era and no longer reflect 21st- century power realities. And as recent protests in Toronto showed, the G20 - the world's new forum on matters of economic governance - maybe more representative than its predecessor, the G7/8, but it is no better at giving voice the world's most marginalized populations. Indeed, if humanity is address the major global challenges of our time - climate change, poverty, mass human rights violations, pandemics, and war - the forces of globalization wul need be better managed and more inclusive. But how? In his book The Global Commonwealth of Citizens, Daniele Archibugi suggests that the potential for a more just and inclusive order lies in a new approach global governance that connects individuals decisions made at the level, which, as the book's subtitle suggests, is rooted in a approach democratic governance whose authority and legitimacy rest in the collective wul and participation of citizens, the commonwealth.Archibugi envisions the not as it is but as it could be. The book is an ambitious and provocative exercise in futurology, its explicit aim being to inspire the creation of a better (13). In its first half, Archibugi presents his case for cosmopolitan democracy; in the second, he suggests how it could conceivably be applied in practice. So what would a cosmopolitan democracy entau? According Archibugi, there are a number of essential components: The first is citizen control over the use of force, the rationale being that an system that aUows for popular participation is likely be a more peaceful system. The second is the acceptance of cultural diversity, again following the rationale that violent conflict is less likely when minority rights are recognized and respected. The third and fourth involve, respectively, strengthening the self-determination of peoples and monitoring the internal affairs of states. And the fifth calls for participatory management of global problems that aUow for citizen involvement in decision-making (88-89).At its core, The Global Commonwealth of Citizens is about checking power in an system in which might makes right. The cosmopolitan democracy project calls for an end what Archibugi refers as international oligarchism (73), in which states that practice democratic ideals at home are not required do so internationaUy (79). He envisions a global constitutionalism in which the powerful are bound by respect for human rights and the rule of law, which is enforced through supra-national or metagovernment institutions, including an judiciary (98, 119, 129).Whereas the first half of the book is a tight defence of the potential of a liberal order not unlike the European Union, the second half is not nearly as crisp. For example, Archibugi envisions a revitalized UN whose main purpose would be enforce law. This is not an unreasonable proposition. Indeed, efforts strengthen the UN human rights system since the end ofthe Cold War have been designed do exactly that, aiming enforce human rights law either through better monitoring and reporting or through the establishment of an criminal justice system. But he also suggests that the UN might one day establish a world parliamentary made up of elected individuals that would serve as an advisory body the main organs ofthe UN, namely the general assembly and the security council (168-77). …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,869
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0020,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,014
Tête enseignante GPT0,345
Écart entre enseignants0,332 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations43
Publié2010
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy AnalysisMême sujetEuropean Union Policy and GovernanceTravaux en français237 207