Objective
Equal representation is at the core of representative democracy, but are citizens actually in favour of it? There are good reasons to think that citizens may take a variety of stances toward unequal representation (i.e. differential group influence over policy) particularly when it comes to groups that elicit strong emotional reactions (e.g. racialised minorities). Citizens may think that policy-affected groups deserve extra input (due to affectedness), less input (due to bias), or the same amount of input as everyone else. However, it is impossible to say anything meaningful about these attitudes since we know almost nothing about them. This lack of knowledge is a serious shortcoming with real-world implications: these preferences shape politics and, by extension, the functioning of representative democracies. My proposed study is thus relevant not only for recent debates in political science over both the extent and origins of unequal representation, but also for contemporary politics – with its surging populist claims that certain groups have excessive influence over policy.
This project looks beyond an abstract commitment to equal democratic representation, investigating how citizens feel about the influence of specific groups on concrete issues. It does so by employing large-scale, representative panel surveys and innovative survey experiments in the US and the Netherlands, whose key similarities and differences allow us to maximise the insights derived from a two-country comparison. Through methodological triangulation, this project will lead to novel insights, revealing the nature and determinants of preferences around unequal representation. The findings from this research will produce important results both for those seeking to better understand the connections between inequality and democracy and for anyone interested in the representation of marginalised groups and the growing appeal of populism.
Fields of science (EuroSciVoc)
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: https://op.europa.eu/en/web/eu-vocabularies/euroscivoc.
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: https://op.europa.eu/en/web/eu-vocabularies/euroscivoc.
- social sciences political sciences political policies civil society civil society organisations nongovernmental organizations
- social sciences sociology social issues social inequalities gender inequality
- social sciences political sciences government systems democracy
- social sciences sociology governance taxation
You need to log in or register to use this function
We are sorry... an unexpected error occurred during execution.
You need to be authenticated. Your session might have expired.
Thank you for your feedback. You will soon receive an email to confirm the submission. If you have selected to be notified about the reporting status, you will also be contacted when the reporting status will change.
Programme(s)
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
-
H2020-EU.1.3. - EXCELLENT SCIENCE - Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions
MAIN PROGRAMME
See all projects funded under this programme -
H2020-EU.1.3.2. - Nurturing excellence by means of cross-border and cross-sector mobility
See all projects funded under this programme
Topic(s)
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Funding Scheme
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
MSCA-IF-EF-ST - Standard EF
See all projects funded under this funding scheme
Call for proposal
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
(opens in new window) H2020-MSCA-IF-2016
See all projects funded under this callCoordinator
Net EU financial contribution. The sum of money that the participant receives, deducted by the EU contribution to its linked third party. It considers the distribution of the EU financial contribution between direct beneficiaries of the project and other types of participants, like third-party participants.
3584 CS Utrecht
Netherlands
The total costs incurred by this organisation to participate in the project, including direct and indirect costs. This amount is a subset of the overall project budget.