Nouvelles instances participatives et contre-pouvoirs : Fung et Wright «revisités» à partir des expériences marseillaises et québécoises
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé.Selon Fung et Wright, la mise en place d'une gouvernance participative impliquerait l'apparition de contre-pouvoirs spécifiques, différents de ceux qui caractérisent les espaces politiques «agonistiques» dans lesquels opèrent les mouvements sociaux. Nous discutons ces conclusions à partir d'une comparaison des rôles joués par des comités de citoyens à Marseille et à Québec dans l'émergence et l'activité d'instances participatives nouvelles. À l'inverse des deux auteurs, nous soulignons que, dans certains cas au moins, la mise en place d'une gouvernance plus participative ne saurait se passer de l'existence de mouvements sociaux, et que certaines des «qualités» que Fung et Wright prêtent aux contre-pouvoirs spécifiques des nouvelles instances participatives peuvent favoriser, au contraire, des logiques de cooptation, néfastes aux pratiques de la démocratie participative. Nous terminons cette discussion par une réflexion plus générale sur les façons de penser le conflit en science politique et sur leur pertinence épistémologique et heuristique. Abstract.According to Fung and Wright, the establishment of participatory governance involves specific stakeholders, different from those characterizing the “antagonistic” political spaces in which social movements operate. We discuss these conclusions via a comparison of roles played by citizens' committees in Marseille and Quebec City in the emergence of new participatory instances. Contrary to the two authors, we stress that, at least in certain cases, the establishment of more participatory governance could not occur without the existence of social movements. More precisely, some features that Fung and Wright attribute to participatory stakeholders could, on the contrary, favour co-optation, harmful to the practices of participatory democracy. We complete this discussion with a more general overview of ways of perceiving the conflict in political science and their epistemological and heuristic relevance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".