Abstract Despite co‐production's potential to address democratic deficits, the role of representation in co‐production and its impact on public perceptions remain largely under‐analysed empirically. Employing a vignette survey design, this study tests how representation in co‐production affects citizens’ intentions to get involved. Our findings show that when a co‐production programme features demographically representative participants, willingness to co‐produce increases, but the presence of minority leadership alone does not significantly affect citizens’ willingness to participate. These results present the impact of participatory parity, input legitimacy, and initiatives that resonate with a community's experiences on willingness to co‐produce; however, they also challenge the long‐held assumption that mere symbolic displays of diversity by figureheads are sufficient to drive citizen participation. Points for practitioners The study suggests that practitioners should prioritise inclusive and representative participant selection in a co‐production programme to improve perceptions of fairness and procedural justice. While symbolic display of diversity is often valued, it may not be sufficient to encourage citizen involvement in co‐production. Initiatives should actively promote minority interests and focus on achieving tangible policy outcomes to avoid superficial representation by figureheads. Findings suggest that policy‐makers could improve citizen participation by providing clear, accessible information that resonates with participants’ experiences, as individuals more attentive to co‐production details respond differently.

This paper traces how right-wing populist media have shaped opposition to climate policy in the UK through the analysis of GB News coverage of the expansion of London’s Ultra-Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) in 2023. Although ULEZ was initially introduced as a public health measure for reducing air pollution, it became a political flashpoint through its framing as symbolic of a broader ‘war on drivers’. Drawing on the concept of ‘infrastructural populism’, this paper focuses on GB News coverage discussing the ULEZ scheme to understand this process. Two core narratives are identified. First, the backlash against ULEZ is presented in spatial terms, elevating London’s suburbs as a key site of opposition to the scheme and foregrounding resistance in how ULEZ reordered everyday mobilities in these areas. Second, the ULEZ scheme was positioned beyond its physical infrastructure and, instead, cast as a moral, populist battle with coverage presenting democratic and evidential deficits as part of a ‘war on drivers’. This paper highlights the need to understand contemporary backlash against climate policy as rooted in a growing infrastructural populism that positions new policies as technocratic interventions that reorder everyday life and create both spatial and procedural injustices.

India’s eight north-eastern states — Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim, and Tripura — constitute one of the most complex democratic laboratories in Asia. Situated at the intersection of ethnic heterogeneity, contested territorial sovereignty, colonial border legacies, and developmental asymmetry, these states present singular challenges to the theory and practice of liberal democratic governance. This paper undertakes a systematic analysis of the principal challenges confronting democratic consolidation in northeastern India. It identifies and examines six interlocking challenge domains: the persistence of armed insurgency and counter-insurgency, the politics of ethnic identity and territorial recognition, the structural democratic deficit embedded in institutional arrangements such as the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), migration and demographic anxiety, the crisis of developmental democracy and resource governance, and the emerging pressures of Hindu nationalist politics. Drawing on political science theory, historical sociology, and empirical case material, the paper argues that democratic challenges in the region cannot be reduced to a single explanatory variable but must be understood as a co-constitutive set of structural, institutional, and conjunctural factors. The paper concludes with a reform outlook that maps pathways toward deeper democratic consolidation.

Sweden is often seen as a role model country in terms of women’s descriptive political representation. Nevertheless, both women and men with a foreign-born background are still underrepresented in the Swedish parliament (Riksdag) and in municipality councils, indicating a democratic deficit. In this literature review, we examine studies which have been published 2000–2025 and focus on foreign-born men and women’s political representation in Sweden. Emphasis is put on both descriptives and underlying causes and correlates. The review, which is based on 20 studies, highlights a variety of themes and factors which are associated with Sweden’s high degree of political representation of female members of parliaments (MPs) in general, inclusive of some studies with an intersectional approach. For instance, discrimination and labor market integration are linked to both malign obstacles and benign possibilities for a more politically equal society. A complementary quantitative analysis suggests that high-income municipalities have a higher percentage of elected foreign-born women than foreign-born men.

ABSTRACT Future generations face a precarious political, economic, and environmental outlook that follows from decision making systems organized to reward short term gains while deferring their costs into the future. This article argues that the failure is primarily institutional rather than moral. Adults are accountable only to other adults, and there is no systematic mechanism of transgenerational accountability. This absence is guaranteed by a culture of generational segregation, within which children are confined to age stratified institutions while adults dominate the sites where economic and political norms are negotiated, producing a democratic deficit that conflicts with the principle that those affected by norms ought to participate in their formation. Youth encounter this exclusion as a kind of generational apartheid and often withdraw from democratic life, turn toward nihilism, or embrace reactionary politics. The exclusion of children is commonly justified through a definition of politics as rational deliberation over scarce resources, yet the most vital resources are materially abundant. Scarcity is instead produced through adult rent-seeking practices that restrict access and concentrate advantage, shaping the self-imposed problems addressed by political science and the assumptions of political philosophy. Across these literatures, accountability remains confined to contemporaneous adults, while appeals to future generations rely on moral commitments that are easily overridden by short-term interests. The article argues for an unadulterated democracy centered on a strong interpretation of the principle of affected interest, requiring institutions to treat children as political contemporaries to whom adults are accountable.

Purpose The increased dependence on information technology for storage, access and analysis of information has increased the vulnerability of states, organisations and individuals in the last decade. Despite cyberattacks being one of the major risks perceived by citizens, little research has addressed how the public sector at local level is managing the challenges that raising society's preparedness in relation to cyber threats entails. The aim of this study is therefore to analyse the extent to which municipalities are taking measures to increase citizens' awareness of information and cybersecurity risks and to discuss why potential challenges might arise. Design/methodology/approach A cross-sectional survey was used by the Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (SALAR) to collect data from 234 of Sweden's 290 municipalities in the period 10/3-25/4 2023. Findings The results show that 81% of the municipalities are not engaged in raising citizens' awareness of information and cybersecurity risks, and that established working procedures for information and cybersecurity are relevant in understanding this lack of engagement. Interpretive insight from previous literature also shows the relevance of the range of professional logics, which does not provide sufficient incentives for the profession engaged in planning and managing the information and cyber risks to cooperate. Originality/value The paper addresses the citizen perspective in relation to work carried out on information and cybersecurity risks at the municipal level. The article's contribution is to show that the citizen's perspective does not have any prominence in the work that municipalities conduct on information and cybersecurity risks.

ABSTRACT This paper describes a fundamental ambivalence in the ‘tools’ deployed in education. These aim to support critical reflection, yet undermine criticality by reproducing the dominant discourse which they aim to critique. This ambivalence is illustrated with materials from high-school economics textbooks. Drawing on theories of hegemony and subjectivation, and qualitative analysis of textbooks, the paper identifies a tension between student tasks that invite students to (i) critically reflect on the figure of the homo economicus, and activities that invite students to (ii) think in models, play strategy games and simulations, and follow rational decision-making strategies. These latter activities uncritically enact the figure of the homo economicus. The concluding sections reflect on utilising ‘tools’ as a concept, and on the urgent need to analyse quotidian aspects of educational technologies like textbooks, alongside the more widely discussed controversies over commercialisation, corporate ownership or democratic deficits surrounding the media used in state education.

Abstract Social media often follow a visual logic found to increase engagement, as images are more likely to attract attention, presenting information on a holistic-associative basis. For a political entity like the EU, social media are a promising route to overcome the remoteness to its citizens, identified as one of the crucial challenges to its public legitimacy. Against this broader background, our study analyses the influence of 10 years of EU visual social media communication on user engagement as an indicator of successfully creating visibility in a crucial communication space. For this purpose, we conducted an image-type analysis, combining quantitative and qualitative features of visual analysis: First, a subsample of posts was inductively analysed to identify recurring image types and subsequently used to implement a manual quantitative visual content analysis. Building on the results, we drew on a machine learning approach, allowing us to analyse over 40,000 posts, including more than 20,000 pictures. Our results emphasise the crucial influence of social media affordances in explaining user engagement with EU visual social media communication. Implications are discussed with reference to the ongoing discussion about the EU’s democratic deficit.

ABSTRACT This article introduces the conceptual framework for the Symposium on Institutional Dysfunctions and Trust Repair. It examines what it means for public institutions in liberal democracies to function well and how dysfunctions challenge institutional legitimacy and corrode citizens' trust. After identifying three recurring forms of dysfunction – inefficiency, democratic deficits, and corruption – and linking them to broader patterns of structural injustice, it surveys philosophical accounts of institutional functioning, contrasting purpose‐oriented and principle‐based approaches. It also highlights officeholders' affective and contestatory reactions as crucial to diagnosing and correcting institutional dysfunctions. Finally, the article situates these themes within debates on institutional trust and trust repair, emphasizing the role of officeholders' conduct in restoring institutional functioning and repairing trust. Together, the symposium's contributions advance a composite understanding of institutional functioning, failure, and recovery, and chart new directions for philosophical inquiry into the moral life of public institutions.

This article offers a critical perspective on the current state of Scottish higher education. It is informed not only by conventional forms of evidence (e.g., legislation, official reports and academic analysis) but also by the writer’s personal experience of working in different types of Scottish universities over a period of nearly fifty years. It argues that the vital democratic function of higher education has been weakened by a combination of factors: the steady incursion of corporate thinking into institutions that have traditionally been committed to a different value system; a growing divide between senior managers and front-line academic staff; performance management practices that tend to demoralise rather than incentivise; governance arrangements that fail to ensure adequate accountability for financial and strategic decisions. In developing these points, reference is made to the rapid expansion of the sector, the economic challenges this has presented, public criticism of the leaders of some institutions, and debates over academic freedom. Questions about where responsibility lies for the present situation, including whether academics themselves have shown insufficient resistance, are raised. It is acknowledged that, on the metrics that are currently employed, the leading Scottish universities show up well on UK and international comparisons. Much good work continues to be produced by dedicated individuals and teams of researchers. But will this continue if corporate culture remains unchecked?

Abstract This article examines the regulation of environmental advertising claims—commonly termed ‘greenwash’—through the lens of private governance and legitimacy theory. While climate law scholarship often foregrounds public regulation or litigation, the UK’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) offers a distinctive case of an autonomous private legal regime exercising public-facing authority. Against entrenched scepticism about self-regulation and its democratic deficit, the article argues that the ASA demonstrates notable epistemic competence and procedural robustness in adjudicating complex environmental claims. Analysis of recent rulings against major corporations, including banks and oil majors, suggests that the ASA’s enforcement model, though reliant on reputational sanctions and soft law, achieves high compliance and enjoys judicial deference. At the same time, limitations persist: opacity in case selection, informal resolution practices, and the unexamined deployment of AI monitoring tools raise concerns about transparency and accountability. Situating the ASA within debates on private environmental governance, output legitimacy, and the hard/soft law continuum, the article contends that while the ASA cannot overcome structural drivers of climate-harmful consumption, it offers a rare example of sustained success in climate-related dispute resolution.

Abstract Background The clean energy transition required for the decarbonisation of societies to meet climate, energy and sustainability goals make policymakers targets for broad business and non-business advocacy, ensuring that their often-conflicting interests are protected or considered in public policies. The concept of policy entrepreneurs foregrounds the role of agency in understanding such advocacy acts. This paper aims to further the understanding of policy entrepreneurship by comparing strategies used by policy entrepreneurs from various social spheres, who advocate policy change or the status quo, in four longitudinal cases related to EU energy and climate policy from 2011 to 2023. Results Policy entrepreneurship was mainly of a cultural-institutional nature, aiming at altering or diffusing people’s perceptions, beliefs, norms and cognitive frameworks, worldviews, or institutional logics. However, the European Commission’s (EC) actions also included structural entrepreneurship, aiming at overcoming structural barriers to enhance governance influence by altering the distribution of formal authority and factual and scientific information. The motives of policy entrepreneurs in the four cases differ, but strategies do not differ significantly between actors from the public, private and civic spheres of society. However, the results indicate that civil society policy entrepreneurs focus on building broader coalitions, than do public and private sector entrepreneurs. There is no indication that policy entrepreneurs from a certain sector are more successful than others in setting the agenda, changing the perceptions of policy actors, or influencing actual policy change. Conclusions It is concluded that policy entrepreneurs advocating policy change are more active and use more elaborate strategies than policy entrepreneurs advocating the status quo. They are also more successful in influencing policy outcomes. The EC was the only policy entrepreneur using structural entrepreneurship, but other policy entrepreneurs were also found to act in non-transparent ways, hiding who takes decisions. The EC acts to expand its reach into areas where the EU holds no or limited legal competence according to the Treaty of the EU. In all, this comes with democratic deficits related to accountability and legitimacy and raises concerns about technocratisation of EU policy processes. These tendencies should be combated to reinstate and reinforce the position and powers of both national and European legislators in formally making important decisions that impact the lives of European citizens and sustainability in the EU.

ABSTRACT When inflation returned to the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic after decades of price stability, it created a critical test for the accountability mechanisms underpinning the system of delegated monetary policy governance. Using a mixed-methods analysis of congressional testimony, press conferences, and political communications on X during the 2021–2022 mid-term cycle, this paper examines whether Congress subjected the Federal Reserve to genuine accountability through reciprocal oversight, or whether the crisis prompted genuine repoliticisation by restoring inflation management to democratic control. The analysis reveals neither occurred. Instead, systematic strategic repoliticisation operated across formal and public arenas. Political actors engaged largely in procedural scrutiny of the Federal Reserve's institutional performance whilst robustly contesting the partisan drivers of inflation. Republicans attributed inflation to the Democrats’ fiscal policies and the Fed's progressive ‘mission creep’; Democrats blamed corporate behaviour, global energy shocks and supply chain disruptions; the Federal Reserve blamed external shocks and the Democrats’ fiscal stimulus whilst framing monetary tightening's distributional consequences as technical necessities. Strategic repoliticisation thus represents political contestation that reinforces rather than dismantles technocratic autonomy through mechanisms of agenda-setting power, revealing how the democratic deficit in delegated inflation management is actively maintained rather than passively inherited.

This article examines state sovereignty from the philosophical perspective, the theory of the State, and public international law, with an emphasis on popular ownership of sovereignty even in the context of authoritarian regimes. A systematic analysis is developed that articulates the contributions of Rousseau, Sieyès, Kelsen, and Bodin with contemporary international normativity, demonstrating that popular sovereignty is not extinguished by the form of the political regime, but remains as the ontological foundation of the State. The central thesis argues that imperialist interventions under the pretext of a democratic deficit lack legal foundation in positive international law and violate structuring principles such as self-determination of peoples, non-intervention, and sovereign equality. Thru a legal-dogmatic and philosophical-analytical methodology, the purported legitimacy of unilateral interventions is critically examined, demonstrating their incompatibility with the normative architecture of the United Nations Charter and the theoretical foundations of sovereignty as a legal-political institution. Although Sovereignty, in classical International Law, continues to be conceived as the supreme legal power of the State to self-determine and govern itself freely, both internally and externally, on equal footing with other States, without submission to any higher authority, in contemporary International Law the classical concept has been relativized. Indeed, the notion of sovereignty, conceived in International Law as the independence of States, has gained new substantive uses at the domestic level of countries, especially from the second half of the 20th century onward, when it began to be associated with the self-determination of peoples, active citizenship, and the effectiveness of fundamental rights and human rights. In light of the emergencies of modern times, the study concludes with the necessity of distinguishing between the ownership of sovereignty (always popular) and the exercise of governmental power (contingent), arguing that internal political transformations constitute an exclusive prerogative of the peoples thru their own mechanisms of self-determination.

Abstract While the radical left has strong connections to the tradition of liberal democracy, it also has associations with authoritarian forms of rule and a tolerance of illiberal transgressions when perpetrated by sister parties. Through an exploration of 53 European Parliamentary debates from 2011 to 2022, this paper illuminates a hitherto neglected part of the Rule of Law Crisis, namely the extent to which radical left parties defend liberal democracy in the EU. We find that these parties, through the GUE/NGL group in the Parliament, tread a fine line between defending EU intervention in cases of democratic backsliding internal to member states, while retaining a critical outlook on the EU’s own democratic deficits. Our paper shows that the radical left develops a set of arguments that are sharply distinct not only from those of social-democratic parties, but also from radical right MEPs, suggesting that on this issue area at least, the latter two party families do not converge, contrary to what the “horseshoe” model of political ideology would suggest.

The relocation of the State Capital (IKN) from Jakarta to Nusantara is one of the largest strategic projects initiated by the government. This policy is based on the excessive burden on Jakarta and the economic disparity between Java Island and other regions in Indonesia. The remarkably swift legislative process for the IKN Law has created a public perception that speed was prioritized over thorough deliberation, which has the potential to erode public trust. This study aims to reveal the political metacommunication behind the IKN relocation project. The analysis was conducted to uncover the hidden meanings, power dynamics, and underlying intentions behind political statements and actions related to IKN. This research uses a political metacommunications analysis approach, which serves to uncover the "message within the message" conveyed through verbal and non-verbal cues. The analysis was performed on the official government narrative, public counter-narratives and criticism, and the role of the media in the IKN metacommunication landscape. The findings indicate that the official government narrative attempts to frame IKN as a symbol of progress, equity, and unity, reinforced by the use of symbols like "Nusantara" and "Pohon Hayat". However, this narrative is confronted by a strong counter-narrative from civil society and academics who highlight the rushed legislative process, environmental impacts, and financial ambiguities. These implicit messages point to a "democratic deficit" and "financial vulnerability". The role of the media and social media dynamics also contributes to reinforcing these competing narratives. In conclusion, the legitimacy of the IKN project does not solely depend on the grand vision and physical development, but also on the complex interaction between explicit and implicit messages. The project's success will be determined by the government's ability to align its rhetoric with its actions, building genuine trust and accountability.

Sexual harassment at the workplace constitutes a serious violation of gender equality, dignity, and the right to safe working conditions. While the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) was enacted to address this issue across diverse employment settings, its applicability to political party offices remains contested and under-enforced. Political parties occupy a unique position in democratic governance, functioning as powerful institutions that employ formal staff, informal workers, volunteers, interns, and grassroots functionaries, yet they frequently evade compliance with workplace protection norms. This paper critically examines whether political party offices qualify as “workplaces” under the POSH Act through a functional and purposive interpretation of statutory provisions, constitutional mandates, and gender justice jurisprudence. It argues that the informality of political labour, hierarchical power structures, and absence of institutional grievance mechanisms significantly heighten women’s vulnerability to sexual harassment within party offices. The study further analyses the failure of political parties to constitute effective Internal Complaints Committees and the resulting accountability gaps, retaliation risks, and democratic deficits. Situating the discussion within constitutional principles of equality, dignity, and substantive political participation, the paper contends that excluding political workspaces from POSH compliance creates impermissible rights-free zones within democratic institutions. It concludes that the application of the POSH Act to political party offices is not merely a statutory interpretation issue but a constitutional imperative essential to gender-just democracy. The paper proposes structural, regulatory, and institutional reforms to ensure effective enforcement of POSH norms within political organisations and to safeguard women’s right to participate in politics free from harassment and coercion.

Memory Warriors, Pluralists and Abnegators in Constituional Interpretation: An Essay on Jack Balkin's Pluralist Originalism in Memory and Authority

Abstract: Weber noted the conflict between egalitarian ideals and the tendency of bureaucrats to become a status group, as well as the generic problem of controlling them. This was in its core a principal-agent problem, with the people as principals and discretionary power beyond law the issue. His discussions of Russia illustrate a case in which bureaucratic power and the outsourcing of decisions and power to advisory bodies produced a kind of pseudo-constitutionalism. The case is analogous to present democratic deficits, and with a similar consequence: populist reaction.

The nexus between corporations and politics in Indonesia is often characterized by the transformation of economic dominance into political influence, which risks undermining democratic principles. This study examines how metacommunication is strategically employed to establish legitimacy, shape public perception, and reinforce power relations between the Perindo Party and the MNC Group, its affiliated media conglomerate. The research aims to analyze the role of metacommunication in Perindo’s political strategy and its broader implications for Indonesian democracy. Using a qualitative case study approach, the study applies critical discourse analysis to the MNC Group’s media content alongside symbolic interpretation of Perindo’s political communication. Findings indicate that metacommunication through implicit messaging, symbolic repetition such as the “Mars Perindo” slogan, and nonverbal leadership imagery functions as an effective tool in projecting a pro-people image. However, the commodification of content, audiences, and media workers illustrates a shift of media from a public sphere to a personal political instrument, reinforcing media oligarchy and generating a democratic deficit. A parallel analysis of the 2025 SOE Law further demonstrates how metacommunicative framing produces divergent interpretations: the government presents it as efficiency-driven reform, while civil society perceives it as a threat to accountability. The study concludes that while metacommunication is a powerful strategy in corporate-political relations, it simultaneously exacerbates democratic vulnerabilities. Strengthening transparency, independent oversight, and regulatory frameworks is essential to safeguard accountability and democratic integrity in Indonesia.