Syllabus
EN
IT
Learning Objectives
This course is an introduction to the study of politics. It aims at familiarizing students with the main concepts of political science with a focus on the concepts of public state, democracy, authoritarianism, representation. With special emphasis on the origins, evolution and the diversity of political institutions and attention to not only national but also local and global scales, we will compare and contrast the political systems of various countries of the world, the roles of key political and social actors, political institutions, political processes and patterns of political competition. We will be particularly interested in the genealogy of political systems and in comparing European and non European countries. The main objective for this course is to provide students with the broad context needed for analyzing the political phenomena of any country.
ROCCO LUDOVICO WALTER TERESIO RONZA
Prerequisites
No formal pre-requisites
Program
The course programme is divided into four inter-related parts as follows:
1) States and democratic political systems
2) The compatrative analysis of bureaucracies, media and interest groups
3) The EU and the transaztionalisation of democracy
4) Democratization and authoritarianism
During each lecture, the lecturer presents the planned content with the aid of power point presentations and invites students to critical reflection and dialogue.
1) States and democratic political systems
2) The compatrative analysis of bureaucracies, media and interest groups
3) The EU and the transaztionalisation of democracy
4) Democratization and authoritarianism
During each lecture, the lecturer presents the planned content with the aid of power point presentations and invites students to critical reflection and dialogue.
Books
Attending students:
1. Slides of the course.
2. Reading material distributed by the lecturers
Non attending students (below 80% attendance) will study the following textbooks:
Hanna F. Pitkin, The Concept of Representation, University of California Press, 1967 (chapter 10: “Political Representation”).
A. Lijphart, Democracy in Plural Societies: A Comparative Exploration. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977 (chapters 1, 2 and 5).
S.P. Huntington. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. University of Oklahoma Press, 1991 (chapters 1 and 2).
S.P. Huntington, "The Clash of Civilizations?", Foreign Affairs, 72, 1992: 22-49.
J. T. Dickovick and J. Eastwood, Comparative Politics: Integrating Theories, Methods, and Cases. Oxford University Press, 2016 (chapter 1).
C. Dahlström and V. Lapuente, ‘Comparative Bureaucratic Politics’, Annual Review of Political Science, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 43–63, 2022.
Y. Steinebach, ‘Environmental Policy Outputs, Outcomes, and Impacts’, in Routledge Handbook of Environmental Policy, Routledge, 2023.
E.O. Eriksen and J.E. Fossum, ‘Reconstituting Democracy in Europe’, in E. O. Eriksen, J. E. Fossum. Europe in transformation: How to reconstitute democracy?. ARENA Report No 8/07 (chapters 1, pp. 7-46, and 4, pp. 65-90).
1. Slides of the course.
2. Reading material distributed by the lecturers
Non attending students (below 80% attendance) will study the following textbooks:
Hanna F. Pitkin, The Concept of Representation, University of California Press, 1967 (chapter 10: “Political Representation”).
A. Lijphart, Democracy in Plural Societies: A Comparative Exploration. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977 (chapters 1, 2 and 5).
S.P. Huntington. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. University of Oklahoma Press, 1991 (chapters 1 and 2).
S.P. Huntington, "The Clash of Civilizations?", Foreign Affairs, 72, 1992: 22-49.
J. T. Dickovick and J. Eastwood, Comparative Politics: Integrating Theories, Methods, and Cases. Oxford University Press, 2016 (chapter 1).
C. Dahlström and V. Lapuente, ‘Comparative Bureaucratic Politics’, Annual Review of Political Science, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 43–63, 2022.
Y. Steinebach, ‘Environmental Policy Outputs, Outcomes, and Impacts’, in Routledge Handbook of Environmental Policy, Routledge, 2023.
E.O. Eriksen and J.E. Fossum, ‘Reconstituting Democracy in Europe’, in E. O. Eriksen, J. E. Fossum. Europe in transformation: How to reconstitute democracy?. ARENA Report No 8/07 (chapters 1, pp. 7-46, and 4, pp. 65-90).
Bibliography
J. Møller, “The Medieval Roots of Democracy”, Journal of Democracy, 26(3), 2015: 110-123.
K. Benoit, “Duverger’s Law and the Study of Electoral Systems”, French Politics, 4, 2006: 69–83.
J. J. Linz, “The Perils of Presidentialism”, Journal of Democracy, 1 (1), 1990: 51-69.
A. Lijphart, Democracy in Plural Societies: A Comparative Exploration. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977.
S.P. Huntington. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. University of Oklahoma Press, 1991.
S.P. Huntington, "The Clash of Civilizations?", Foreign Affairs, 72, 1992: 22-49.
J. T. Dickovick and J. Eastwood, Comparative Politics: Integrating Theories, Methods, and Cases. Oxford University Press, 2016 (chapter 1).
C. Dahlström and V. Lapuente, ‘Comparative Bureaucratic Politics’, Annual Review of Political Science, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 43–63, 2022.
Y. Steinebach, ‘Environmental Policy Outputs, Outcomes, and Impacts’, in Routledge Handbook of Environmental Policy, Routledge, 2023.
For Media and Interest groups see the slides uploaded on the course page.
K. Nicolaïdis, R. Youngs. “Europe's democracy trilemma”, International Affairs, 90(6), 2014: 1403-1419.
J. Bohman, “Democratizing the Transnational Polity: The European Union and the Presuppositions of Democracy”, in E. O. Eriksen, J. E. Fossum. Europe in transformation: How to reconstitute democracy? ARENA Report No 8/07, pp. 65-90.
K. Benoit, “Duverger’s Law and the Study of Electoral Systems”, French Politics, 4, 2006: 69–83.
J. J. Linz, “The Perils of Presidentialism”, Journal of Democracy, 1 (1), 1990: 51-69.
A. Lijphart, Democracy in Plural Societies: A Comparative Exploration. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977.
S.P. Huntington. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. University of Oklahoma Press, 1991.
S.P. Huntington, "The Clash of Civilizations?", Foreign Affairs, 72, 1992: 22-49.
J. T. Dickovick and J. Eastwood, Comparative Politics: Integrating Theories, Methods, and Cases. Oxford University Press, 2016 (chapter 1).
C. Dahlström and V. Lapuente, ‘Comparative Bureaucratic Politics’, Annual Review of Political Science, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 43–63, 2022.
Y. Steinebach, ‘Environmental Policy Outputs, Outcomes, and Impacts’, in Routledge Handbook of Environmental Policy, Routledge, 2023.
For Media and Interest groups see the slides uploaded on the course page.
K. Nicolaïdis, R. Youngs. “Europe's democracy trilemma”, International Affairs, 90(6), 2014: 1403-1419.
J. Bohman, “Democratizing the Transnational Polity: The European Union and the Presuppositions of Democracy”, in E. O. Eriksen, J. E. Fossum. Europe in transformation: How to reconstitute democracy? ARENA Report No 8/07, pp. 65-90.
Teaching methods
The course combines different teaching methods: lectures and student presentations. The lectures will provide the students with the necessary information and reading guidelines on the phenomena under study, while in-class presentations will see students critically engage with this knowledge. Students are expected to attend each class, to come to class prepared and to participate in discussions.
Exam Rules
Course assessment
The verification of learning takes place through a final written examination and an individual or group presentation. The objective of the final exams is to verify the achievement of the course learning outcome. In particular, the exams assesses the student's overall preparation, ability to integrate knowledge of the different parts of the programme, consequentiality of reasoning, analytical ability and autonomy of judgement. In addition, ownership of language and clarity of exposition will be assessed, in adherence with the Dublin descriptors.
Minimum score for passing the written test 18 out of 30.
After listening to the presentations, the lecturers communicate the results to the students registered for the examination via the Delphi system.
Students may take the examination on all available dates. there is no roll-call jump.
The examination will be assessed according to the following criteria:
• FAIL: important deficiencies and/or inaccuracies in the knowledge and understanding of the topics; limited ability to analyse and synthesise, frequent generalisations and limited critical and judgemental skills, the topics are set out inconsistently and with inappropriate language;
• 18-20: Barely sufficient knowledge and understanding of the topics with possible generalisations and imperfections; sufficient capacity for analysis, synthesis and autonomy of judgement, the topics are frequently exposed in an incoherent manner and with inappropriate/technical language;
• 21-23: Routine knowledge and understanding of topics; ability to analyse and synthesise correctly with sufficiently coherent logical argumentation and appropriate/technical language
• 24-26: Fair knowledge and understanding of the topics; Good analytical and synthetic skills with arguments expressed in a rigorous manner but with language that is not always appropriate/technical.
• 27-29: Comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the topics; considerable capacity for analysis and synthesis. Good autonomy of judgement. Arguments presented in a rigorous manner and with appropriate/technical language
• 30-30L: Excellent level of knowledge and thorough understanding of topics. Excellent analytical and synthetic skills and independent judgement. Arguments expressed in an original manner and with appropriate technical language.
Course evaluation for attending students:
• Final written exam (70%), in-class presentations (30 %)
Course evaluation for non-attending students:
• Final written exam (100%).
The verification of learning takes place through a final written examination and an individual or group presentation. The objective of the final exams is to verify the achievement of the course learning outcome. In particular, the exams assesses the student's overall preparation, ability to integrate knowledge of the different parts of the programme, consequentiality of reasoning, analytical ability and autonomy of judgement. In addition, ownership of language and clarity of exposition will be assessed, in adherence with the Dublin descriptors.
Minimum score for passing the written test 18 out of 30.
After listening to the presentations, the lecturers communicate the results to the students registered for the examination via the Delphi system.
Students may take the examination on all available dates. there is no roll-call jump.
The examination will be assessed according to the following criteria:
• FAIL: important deficiencies and/or inaccuracies in the knowledge and understanding of the topics; limited ability to analyse and synthesise, frequent generalisations and limited critical and judgemental skills, the topics are set out inconsistently and with inappropriate language;
• 18-20: Barely sufficient knowledge and understanding of the topics with possible generalisations and imperfections; sufficient capacity for analysis, synthesis and autonomy of judgement, the topics are frequently exposed in an incoherent manner and with inappropriate/technical language;
• 21-23: Routine knowledge and understanding of topics; ability to analyse and synthesise correctly with sufficiently coherent logical argumentation and appropriate/technical language
• 24-26: Fair knowledge and understanding of the topics; Good analytical and synthetic skills with arguments expressed in a rigorous manner but with language that is not always appropriate/technical.
• 27-29: Comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the topics; considerable capacity for analysis and synthesis. Good autonomy of judgement. Arguments presented in a rigorous manner and with appropriate/technical language
• 30-30L: Excellent level of knowledge and thorough understanding of topics. Excellent analytical and synthetic skills and independent judgement. Arguments expressed in an original manner and with appropriate technical language.
Course evaluation for attending students:
• Final written exam (70%), in-class presentations (30 %)
Course evaluation for non-attending students:
• Final written exam (100%).
Attendance Rules
Attendance is required from the very first lesson and it is necessary to attend at least 80% of the course to be considered an attending student.