Bachelor Degree in Global Governance

No formal pre-requisites

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.

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).

J.R. Stayer, On the Medieval Origins of the Modern State, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2005 (or. ed. 1970).
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.
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.
R. Schroeder, ‘Media systems, digital media and politics’, in Social Theory after the Internet, in Media, Technology, and Globalization. UCL Press, 2018, pp. 28–59.
K. Nicolaïdis, R. Youngs. “Europe's democracy trilemma”, International Affairs, 90(6), 2014: 1403-1419.
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, pp. 7-47.

Course assessment
The (default )verification of learning takes place exclusively through a final examination which consists of an individual or group presentation as discussed below. The objective of the final examination is to verify the achievement of the course learning outcome. In particular, the examination 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 are 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:
• In-class presentations (100 %)
• Rules for the presentation: Students can work on their presentations alone or in groups. A group may comprise 2 to 4 students. The students agree on the topic of the presentations with the lecturers, individually or in groups. Each student/group prepares its presentation and emails it to the lecturers at least one day in advance of the day scheduled for class discussion. In the case of group presentations, each group member receives the same final grade.

Course evaluation for non-attending students:
• Final oral exam (100%).
• Rules for the oral exam: the final exam consists of an approximately 20-minute oral test with questions on one of the textbooks indicated above,

-

**Topic 1:** What is Politics?
**Topic 2:** The State and the Formation of the State
**Topic 3:** Democracy and Representation
**Topic 4:** Elections and Party Systems
**Topic 5:** Comparative Methods and Tools for Global Studies (Gaietta)
**Topic 6:** Bureaucracies and Public Policies (Gaietta)
**Topic 7:** Media and Interest Groups (Gaietta)
**Topic 8:** The EU: Transnationalization of Democracy (Zotti)
**Topic 9:** Models of Democracy - The Case of "Divided Societies"
**Focus 1:** South Africa: From Segregation to Dominant Party Democracy - and Beyond?
**Topic 9:** Authoritarianism and Democratization
**Topic 10:** In-Class Presentation of Student Projects

-

Prof. Ronza
J.R. Stayer, On the Medieval Origins of the Modern State, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2005 (or. ed. 1970).
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.
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.

In-class teaching.

Students will be assessed through 1) a written final examination, that will be based on essay questions and a multiple-choice section and will be aimed at determining students’ ability to use the materials and information discussed in class, and (2) a group presentation. Students are demanded to study class material assiduously and actively take part in class discussions, notably as they prepare their presentations throughout the course. Their mark will also be rounded off so as to reflect their homework and participation in the class discussions.
Students who do not participate in the group presentation or who reject their mark will take an additional written exam added to the final written exam.
Students who miss any of the assignments without any valid justification will be asked to read extra reading material. Their mark will be based 100% on another written exam. The same applies to students who plagiarize.

Non-attending students are required to take the final exam test with an additional written part based on additional readings they will be assigned. The mark will be based 100% on the final.