Search results

Open Access (free)
Rainer Bauböck in dialogue
Series: Critical Powers
Editor: Rainer Bauböck

This book addresses the major theoretical and practical issues of the forms of citizenship and access to citizenship in different types of polity, and the specification and justification of rights of non-citizen immigrants as well as non-resident citizens. It also addresses the conditions under which norms governing citizenship can legitimately vary. The book discusses the principles of including all affected interests (AAI), all subject to coercion (ASC) and all citizenship stakeholders (ACS). They complement each other because they serve distinct purposes of democratic inclusion. The book proposes that democratic inclusion principles specify a relation between an individual or group that has an inclusion claim and a political community that aims to achieve democratic legitimacy for its political decisions and institutions. It contextualizes the principle of stakeholder inclusion, which provides the best answer to the question of democratic boundaries of membership, by applying it to polities of different types. The book distinguishes state, local and regional polities and argues that they differ in their membership character. It examines how a principle of stakeholder inclusion applies to polities of different types. The book illustrates the difference between consensual and automatic modes of inclusion by considering the contrast between birthright acquisition of citizenship, which is generally automatic, and naturalization, which requires an application.

Uses and Misuses of International Humanitarian Law and Humanitarian Principles

organisation but an authorised agent of states and the promoter of an international treaty whose primary stakeholders and ultimate executors are diplomats and soldiers. As such, the ICRC is responsible for discussing with states the lawful, questionable or unlawful ways of killing of human beings. That is its primary role, and that is what it does. It is hard to see why any NGOs should agree to help them promote that kind of death sentence. The Principles: Compass or Symbol? ‘Humanitarian principles’ are also invoked by organisations claiming adherence to IHL, which point to

Journal of Humanitarian Affairs
A Focus on Community Engagement

set up checkpoints to check vehicles for local authorities: ‘If the Chief makes the mistake of going through the Luma he has another thing coming!’ In the weeks that followed, Kambians blamed local stakeholders and the Chief for failing to communicate the closure. A slogan painted on one of the local coffee shops ( attaya base ) in Bamoi – ‘Ebola Phase II: it didn’t work’ – connected the riots with broader suspicions surrounding the outbreak and authorities’ complicity. The new case had been another opportunity to ‘eat Ebola money’. The riots were seen as a sign

Journal of Humanitarian Affairs
Staff Security and Civilian Protection in the Humanitarian Sector

to illuminate the inclusions and exclusions in each field of practice. Second, in drawing attention to a distinction that is mostly uncritically accepted, the comparison aims to stimulate a conversation about its appropriateness. A small body of literature asks why each of these fields of practice – staff security and civilian protection – is the way it is, with some work seeking to explain variation over time or across different agencies (see, for example, Bradley, 2016 ; Bradley, forthcoming ; Neuman, 2016a ; Schneiker, 2012 ; Taithe, 2016 ). I draw on this

Journal of Humanitarian Affairs
Open Access (free)
A pluralist theory of citizenship

inclusion. Before this, I consider the general “circumstances of democracy” that consist in normative background assumptions and general empirical conditions under which democratic self-government is both necessary and possible. Section 4 contextualizes the principle of stakeholder inclusion, which provides the best answer to the question of democratic boundaries of membership, by applying it to polities of different types. I distinguish state

in Democratic inclusion
Open Access (free)

promoted by including externally affected interests in decisions made by particular governments and by democratizing global governance regimes through the inclusion of non-state actors and policy stakeholders (Macdonald 2008 ). Globalizing national decision-making and democratizing global decision-making in this way on issues such as climate change, refugee protection, global poverty relief, international criminal justice, trade and finance is

in Democratic inclusion
Some questions for Rainer Bauböck

, empirical researchers and policy-makers alike. Those gifts are clearly on display here as Bauböck explores the virtues and limitations of three different principles of democratic inclusion: all affected interests (AAI), all subject to coercion (ASC) and all citizenship stakeholders (ACS). Bauböck argues that the three principles complement one another, with each providing legitimation for a different set of democratic institutions and practices

in Democratic inclusion

Introduction Rainer Bauböck's “Democratic Inclusion: A Pluralistic Theory of Citizenship” is characteristically incisive. In this essay and elsewhere (e.g. Bauböck 2003, 2007 ), he has liberated normative political theory from the girdle of territorial boundary conditions. If ever it was, it is obviously no longer possible to posit a world of perfectly segmented national communities. For normative theory to remain

in Democratic inclusion

demoi where citizens can cast multiple vertical votes on several levels and, on the other hand, to the demoi of independent states with overlapping membership. (ibid.: 2428) This gestures to a stronger view, namely that the stakeholder principle supports a requirement of inclusion in authorial membership of the demos for stakeholders, where we may surmise this requirement would be

in Democratic inclusion

democratic inclusion. They “cannot be accepted as comprehensive answers to the democratic boundary problem, since they fail to provide a principle for the legitimate constitution of such polities and claims to inclusion in them” (p. 27). Thus they are to be seen less as rival alternative justifying principles for defining the demos than as complementary to the more comprehensive citizen stakeholder approach. Thus, in his account

in Democratic inclusion