Claudia Chwalisz - Böcker

The social and economic shifts of the past few decades have hardened deeply held scepticism and distrust of ‘the establishment’. In an age of historically low party membership and identification, voter volatility, rising abstentionism and greater individualism, mainstream parties are struggling to be representative.This book is about the turbulent political scene unfolding in Britain and across western Europe. It focuses on why large swathes of voters feel that politics does not work and how this fuels support for insurgent parties and actors. Drawing on new survey data in the UK, interviews and international case studies, this book shows that people are concerned with the process of politics, not merely its performance. They have a genuine desire for greater political participation in the decision-making process. Setting out a range of democratic innovations to reconnect people with politics, it contends that populism is a warning signal to parties and governments to revisit their approaches to governance and representation. New forms of political engagement should not feel like a threat to formal political systems, but rather as much-needed additions that enrich democracy.

The concept of predistribution is increasingly setting the agenda in progressive politics. But what does it mean? The predistributive agenda is concerned with how states can alter the underlying distribution of market outcomes so they no longer rely solely on post hoc redistribution to achieve economic efficiency and social justice. It therefore offers an effective means of tackling economic and social inequality alongside traditional welfare policies, emphasising employability, human capital, and skills, as well as structuring markets to promote greater equity. This book examines the key debates surrounding the emergence and development of predistributive thought with contributions from leading international scholars and policy-makers.

We live in a time when trust in government and politicians is in short supply. People claim to be tired of ‘experts’ and the divide between facts and opinion has been blurred. The art of offering simple solutions to complex problems is tipping the scale away from nuanced, multifaceted answers founded on compromise.Within this context, governments nonetheless need to make difficult decisions, whether it is developing budgets, aligning priorities, or designing long-term projects. It is often impossible to make everybody happy, and the messy business of weighing trade-offs takes place. While sometimes these tricky policy dilemmas are relegated to independent commissions or inquiries, or lately to referendums, a better method exists for solving them. This study of almost 50 long-form deliberative processes in Canada and Australia makes the case that adding informed citizen voices to public decision-making leads to more effective policies. By putting the problem to the people, giving them information, time to discuss the options, to find common ground and to decide what they want, public bodies gain the legitimacy to act on hard choices.