Abstract
The concluding chapter presents innovative findings and new horizons for research exploration. The chapter stresses how representation circuits interweave in different combinations, as a result of the analyses offered throughout the book’s chapters. It also exposes the analytical gains of the three-dimensional analysis of political intermediation. It stresses different forms of proximity (geographical and political) as a key component shaping the recognition of political intermediation by those who are intermediated. Accountability of such intermediation is limited by different kinds of constraints, notably reputation, the size of the communities represented and the existence of evaluative mechanisms. Finally, agonistic conflict is instrumental to the representativeness of political intermediation. However, a content to be represented can be agreed in an agonist way at a specific level, but become completely antagonist at a higher level. Based on these findings, new research challenges are posed. Specially, the relationship between state weakness and political intermediation is posited as a crucial phenomenon to be explored in the future.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Bibliography
Alcoff, L. 1992. The Problem of Speaking for Others. Cultural Critique 20(Winter): 5–32.
Aronson, P., and E. Weisz, comps. 2007. La vigencia del pensamiento de Max Weber a cien años de “La ética protestante y el espíritu del capitalismo”. Buenos Aires: Gorla.
Axelrod, R. 1984. The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books.
Bevir, M., and R.A.W. Rhodes. 2010. The State as Cultural Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brito Viera, M., and D. Rucinman. 2008. Political Representation. Cambridge: Polity Press, Key Concepts.
Coleman, J. 2000[1988]. Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. In Social Capital. A Multifaced Perspective, ed. P. Dasgupta and I. Serageldin. Washington, DC: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development.
Fischer, F., and H. Gottweis, ed. 2012. The Argumentative Turn Revisited: Public Policy as Communicative Practice. Durham: Duke University Press.
Fung, A., and E.O. Wright. 2003. Thinking About Empowered Participatory Governance. In Deepening Democracy: Institutional Innovation in Empowered Participatory Governance, ed. A. Fung and E.O. Wright. London: Verso.
Gurza Lavalle, A., and G. Zaremberg. 2014. Más allá de la representación y del clientelismo: hacia un lenguaje de la intermediación política. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales 59: 19–49.
Hart, H.L.A. 1961. The Concept of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Helmke, G., and S. Levitsky 2002. Informal Institutions and Comparative Politics: A Preliminary Research Agenda. In Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August, Boston, 28–31.
Hobbes, T. 1996[1651]. Leviathan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Manin, B. 1997. The Principles of Representative Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mansbridge, J. 1999. Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent ‘Yes’. Journal of Politics 61(3, Spring): 628–657.
O’Donnell, G. 2004. Why the Rule of Law Matters. Journal of Democracy 15(4): 32–46.
Olson, M. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Phillips, A. 2009. Democracy and Representation: Or, Why Should It Matter Who our Representatives Are? In Feminism and Politics, ed. A. Phillips, 224–240. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Oxford Readings in Feminism.
Pitkin, F.H. 1967. The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Saward, M. 2010. The Representative Claim. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Smith, G. 2009. Democratic Innovations: Designing Institutions for Citizen Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Urbinati, N. 2006. Representative Democracy: Principles and Genealogy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Wagenaar, H. 2011. Meaning in Action. Interpretation and Dialogue in Policy Analysis. New York: M. E. Sharpe.
Weber, M. 1964. Economía y sociedad. Esbozo de sociología comprensiva, trad. J. Medina Echavarría, ed. J. Winckelmann. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Williams, M.S. 1998. Voice, Trust, and Memory: Marginalized Groups and the Failings of Liberal Representation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Yanow, D. 1996. How Does A Policy Mean? Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Young, I.M. 2002. Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zittel, T., and Fuchs D. Dieter. 2007. “1. Participatory Democracy and Political Participation” and “Conclusion: Can Participatory Engineering Bring Citizens Back in?”. In Participatory Democracy and Political Participation, ed. Thomas Zittel and Dieter Fuchs. Abingdon: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zaremberg, G., Gurza Lavalle, A., Guarneros-Meza, V. (2017). Conclusions and Future Research Agenda. In: Zaremberg, G., Guarneros-Meza, V., Gurza Lavalle, A. (eds) Intermediation and Representation in Latin America. Studies of the Americas. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51538-0_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51538-0_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-51537-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-51538-0
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)