Témata prací (Výběr práce)Témata prací (Výběr práce)(verze: 368)
Detail práce
   Přihlásit přes CAS
The Rise of Direct Democracy in the Czech Republic: Sources, Use and Consequences
Název práce v češtině: Rozvoj přímé demokracie v České republice: Příčiny, využívání a důsledky.
Název v anglickém jazyce: The Rise of Direct Democracy in the Czech Republic: Sources, Use and Consequences
Klíčová slova: Přímá demokracie, volební chování, místní přímá demokracie
Klíčová slova anglicky: Direct democracy, voting behavior, local direct democracy
Akademický rok vypsání: 2012/2013
Typ práce: disertační práce
Jazyk práce: angličtina
Ústav: Katedra sociologie (23-KS)
Vedoucí / školitel: prof. PhDr. Jiří Kabele, Ph.D.
Řešitel: skrytý - zadáno vedoucím/školitelem
Datum přihlášení: 11.03.2013
Datum zadání: 11.03.2013
Datum a čas obhajoby: 19.09.2016 00:00
Místo konání obhajoby: FSV
Datum odevzdání elektronické podoby:14.07.2016
Datum proběhlé obhajoby: 19.09.2016
Oponenti: doc. Mgr. Pavel Šaradín, Ph.D.
  Mgr. Kateřina Vráblíková, Ph.D.
Seznam odborné literatury
Ajzen, I. (2001). Nature and operation of attitudes. Annual review of psychology, 52(1), 27-58.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour.
Alaminos, A., & Penalva, C. (2012). The Cognitive Mobilization Index Crises and Political Generations. SAGE Open, 2(1), 2158244012440437.
Altman, D. (2010). Direct democracy worldwide. Cambridge University Press.
Bachrach, P., & Botwinick, A. (1992). Power and empowerment: A radical theory of participatory democracy. Temple University Press.
Banducci, S. A. (1998). Direct legislation: When is it used and when does it pass. Citizens as legislators: Direct democracy in the United States, 109-131.
Barber, B. R. (2003). Strong democracy: Participatory politics for a new age. University of California Press.
Beetham, D. (1999). Democracy and human rights. Polity.
Bell, D., Gray, T., & Haggett, C. (2005). The social gap in wind farm siting decisions: explanations and policy responses. Environmental politics, 14(4), 460-477.
Bengtsson, Å., & Mattila, M. (2009). Direct Democracy and its Critics: Support for direct democracy and ‘stealth’democracy in Finland. West European Politics, 32(5), 1031-1048.
Berinsky, A. J. (2005). The perverse consequences of electoral reform in the United States. American Politics Research, 33(4), 471-491.
Biggers, D. R. (2011). When ballot issues matter: Social issue ballot measures and their impact on turnout. Political Behavior, 33(1), 3-25.
Blais, A., Gidengil, E., & Nevitte, N. (2004). Where does turnout decline come from? European journal of political research, 43(2), 221-236.
Boehmke, F. J. (2002). The effect of direct democracy on the size and diversity of state interest group populations. The Journal of Politics, 64(03), 827-844.
Boehmke, F. J., & Bowen, D. C. (2010). Direct democracy and individual interest group membership. The Journal of Politics, 72(03), 659-671.
Bogdanor, V. (2009). The new British constitution. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Bowler, S., Donovan, T., & Karp, J. A. (2002). When might institutions change? Elite support for direct democracy in three nations. Political Research Quarterly, 55(4), 731-754.
Bowler, S., Donovan, T., & Karp, J. A. (2007). Enraged or engaged? Preferences for direct citizen participation in affluent democracies. Political Research Quarterly, 60(3), 351-362.
Brady, H. E., Verba, S., & Schlozman, K. L. (1995). Beyond SES: A resource model of political participation. American Political Science Review, 89(2), 271-294.
Bûcek, J., & Smith, B. (2000). New approaches to local democracy: direct democracy, participation and thethird sector'. Environment and Planning C, 18(1), 3-16.
Bühlmann, M., & Freitag, M. (2006). Individual and contextual determinants of electoral participation. Swiss Political Science Review, 12(4), 13-47.
Bühlmann, M., Nicolet, S., & Selb, P. (2006). National elections in Switzerland: an introduction. Swiss Political Science Review, 12(4), 1-12.
Budge, I. (1996). The new challenge of direct democracy.
Budge, I. (2006). Direct and Representative Democracy: are they necessarily opposed? Representation, 42(1), 1-12.
Butler, D. (1994). Referendums Around The World: The Growing Use Of Direct Democracy Author: David Butler, Austin Ranney, Publisher: Aei Pres.
Carlin, R. E., & Singer, M. M. (2011). Support for Polyarchy in the Americas. Comparative Political Studies, 44(11), 1500-1526.
Castillo, A. (2006). Institutional Performance and Satisfaction with Democracy. A comparative Analysis.
Chamberlain, G. (1982). Multivariate regression models for panel data. Journal of Econometrics, 18(1), 5-46.
Childers, M., & Binder, M. (2012). Engaged by the initiative? How the use of citizen initiatives increases voter turnout. Political Research Quarterly, 65(1), 93-103.
Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). A theory of framing and opinion formation in competitive elite environments. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 99-118.
Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing public opinion in competitive democracies. American Political Science Review, 101(04), 637-655.
Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 10, 103-126.
Christiano, T. (2004). The Authority of Democracy. Journal of Political Philosophy, 12(3), 266-290.
Cunningham, F. (2001). Theories of democracy: a critical introduction. London: Cambridge University Press.
Dahl, R. A. (1973). Polyarchy: participation and opposition. Yale University Press.
Dahl, R. A. (1989). Democracy and its Critics. Yale University Press.
Dahl, R. A. (1998). On Democracy. New Haven and London.
Dalton, R. J. (2000). Citizen attitudes and political behavior. Comparative political studies, 33(6-7), 912-940.
Dalton, R. J., Burklin, W. P., & Drummond, A. (2001). Public opinion and direct democracy. Journal of Democracy, 12(4), 141-153.
Dalton, R. J., Scarrow, S. E., & Cain, B. E. (2003). Democracy transformed? Expanding political opportunities in advanced industrial democracies.
Dalton, R. J. (2006). Citizenship norms and political participation in America: The good news is... the bad news is wrong. The Center for Democracy.
Dalton, R. J. (2008). Citizenship norms and the expansion of political participation. Political studies, 56(1), 76-98.
Dalton, R. J., & Welzel, C. (Eds.). (2014). The civic culture transformed: from allegiant to assertive citizens. Cambridge University Press.
Darcy, R., & Laver, M. (1990). Referendum dynamics and the Irish divorce amendment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 54(1), 1-20.
de Sousa Santos, B. (1998). Participatory Budgeting in Porto Alegre: Toward a Redistributive Democracy. Politics & Society, 26(4), 461-510.
Denters, B., & Klok, P. J. (2013). Citizen democracy and the responsiveness of councillors: The effects of democratic institutionalisation on the role orientations and role behaviour of councillors. Local government studies, 39(5), 661-680.
Devine-Wright, P. (Ed.). (2014). Renewable Energy and the Public: from NIMBY to Participation. Routledge.
Donovan, T., & Karp, J. A. (2006). Popular support for direct democracy. Party politics, 12(5), 671-688.
Donovan, T., Tolbert, C. J., & Smith, D. A. (2009). Political engagement, mobilization, and direct democracy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 73(1), 98-118.
Druckman, J. N. (2001). The implications of framing effects for citizen competence. Political Behavior, 23(3), 225-256.
Druckman, J. N. (2004). Political preference formation: Competition, deliberation, and the (ir) relevance of framing effects. American Political Science Review, 98(04), 671-686.
Dworkin, R. (2002). Sovereign virtue: The theory and practice of equality. Harvard University Press.
Dwyre, D., O'Gorman, M., Stonecash, J. M., & Young, R. (1994). Disorganized politics and the have-nots: Politics and taxes in New York and California. Polity, 25-47.
Dyck, J. J., & Lascher Jr, E. L. (2009). Direct democracy and political efficacy reconsidered. Political Behavior, 31(3), 401-427.
Dyck, J. J., & Seabrook, N. R. (2010). Mobilized by Direct Democracy: Short‐Term Versus Long‐Term Effects and the Geography of Turnout in Ballot Measure Elections. Social Science Quarterly, 91(1), 188-208.
Faas, T. (2015). Bring the state (information) in: Campaign dynamics in the run-up to a German referendum. Electoral Studies, 38, 226-237.
Fatke, M., & Freitag, M. (2013). Direct democracy: Protest catalyst or protest alternative? Political Behavior, 35(2), 237-260.
Feld, L. P., & Kirchgässner, G. (2000). Direct democracy, political culture, and the outcome of economic policy: a report on the Swiss experience. European Journal of Political Economy, 16(2), 287-306.
Fieldhouse, E., Tranmer, M., & Russell, A. (2007). Something about young people or something about elections? Electoral participation of young people in Europe: Evidence from a multilevel analysis of the European Social Survey. European Journal of Political Research, 46(6), 797-822.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fox, R. L., & Lawless, J. L. (2005). To run or not to run for office: explaining nascent political ambition. American Journal of Political Science, 49(3), 642-659.
Franklin, M., Marsh, M., & Wlezien, C. (1994). Attitudes toward Europe and referendum votes: A response to Siune and Svensson. Electoral Studies,13(2), 117-121.
Franklin, M. N. (2002). Learning from the Danish case: A comment on Palle Svensson's critique of the Franklin thesis. European Journal of Political Research, 41(6), 751-757.
Franklin, M. N. (2004). Voter turnout and the dynamics of electoral competition in established democracies since 1945. Cambridge University Press.
Fraser, N. (2007). Identity, Exclusion, and Critique A Response to Four Critics. European Journal of Political Theory, 6(3), 305-338.
Freitag, M., & Stadelmann-Steffen, I. (2010). Stumbling block or stepping stone? The influence of direct democracy on individual participation in parliamentary elections. Electoral Studies, 29(3), 472-483.
Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2002). What can economists learn from happiness research? Journal of Economic literature, 402-435.
Fung, A. (2003). Survey article: recipes for public spheres: eight institutional design choices and their consequences. Journal of political philosophy, 11(3), 338-367.
Gerber, E. R. (1999). The populist paradox: Interest group influence and the promise of direct legislation. Princeton University Press.
Geurtz, C., & Van de Wijdeven, T. (2010). Making citizen participation work: the challenging search for new forms of local democracy in the Netherlands. Local Government Studies, 36(4), 531-549.
Góra, M., & Mach, Z. (2010). Identity formation, democracy and European integration. Collective Identity and Democracy, 7.
Goerres, A. (2007). Why are older people more likely to vote? The impact of ageing on electoral turnout in Europe. The British journal of politics & international relations, 9(1), 90-121.
Gross, C. (2007). Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance. Energy policy, 35(5), 2727-2736.
Grummel, J. A. (2008). Morality politics, direct democracy, and turnout. State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 8(3), 282-292.
Hanley, S., & Sikk, A. (2014). Economy, corruption or floating voters? Explaining the breakthroughs of anti-establishment reform parties in Eastern Europe. Party Politics.
Haider-Markel, D. P., Querze, A., & Lindaman, K. (2007). Lose, win, or draw? A re-examination of direct democracy and minority rights. Political Research Quarterly, 60(2), 304-314.
Hibbing, J. R., & Theiss-Morse, E. (2002). Stealth democracy: Americans' beliefs about how government should work. Cambridge University Press.
Higley, J., & McAllister, I. (2002). Elite division and voter confusion: Australia's republic referendum in 1999. European Journal of Political Research, 41(6), 845-861.
Hill, L. (2003). Democratic deficit in the ACT: Is the citizen initiated referendum a solution? Australian Journal of Social Issues, 38(4): 495-511.
Hobolt, S. B. (2005). When Europe matters: The impact of political information on voting behaviour in EU referendums. Journal of elections, public opinion & parties, 15(1), 85-109.
Hobolt, S. B. (2006). How parties affect vote choice in European integration referendums. Party Politics, 12(5), 623-647.
Hobolt, S. B. (2007). Taking cues on Europe? Voter competence and party endorsements in referendums on European integration. European Journal of Political Research, 46(2), 151-182.
Hobolt, S. B. (2009). Europe in question: Referendums on European integration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hug, S. (2004). Occurrence and Policy Consequences of Referendums A Theoretical Model and Empirical Evidence. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 16(3), 321-356.
Inglehart, R. (1990). Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton University Press.
Inglehart, R., & Welzel, C. (2005). Modernization, cultural change, and democracy: The human development sequence. Cambridge University Press.
Inglehart, R., & Welzel, C. (2010). Changing mass priorities: The link between modernization and democracy. Perspectives on Politics, 8(02), 551-567.
Jobert, A., Laborgne, P., & Mimler, S. (2007). Local acceptance of wind energy: Factors of success identified in French and German case studies. Energy policy, 35(5), 2751-2760.
Johanningmeier, C. A. (2007). Law & Politics: The Case Against Judicial Review of Direct Democracy. Ind. LJ, 82, 1125.
Johnson, R. J., & Scicchitano, M. J. (2012). Don't Call Me NIMBY: Public Attitudes Toward Solid Waste Facilities. Environment and Behavior, 0013916511435354.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 263-291.
Karp, J. A., & Milazzo, C. (2015). Democratic scepticism and political participation in Europe. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion & Parties, 25(1), 97-110.
Keele, L. (2009). An observational study of ballot initiatives and state outcomes. Working paper.
Kennedy, R. (2013). The role of supranational identity in promoting democratic values. European Union Politics, 14(2), 228-249.
Klingemann, H. D. (2014). Dissatisfied democrats: evidence from old and new democracies. The Civic Culture Transformed: From Allegiant to Assertive Citizens, eds R. Dalton & C. Welzel, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Krouse, R. W. (1982). Polyarchy & participation: the changing democratic theory of Robert Dahl. Polity, 441-463.
Kunz, R., Moeller, J., Esser, F., & de Vreese, C. (2013). Mobilizing Referenda: The Effects of Direct Democracy on Youth Political Participation.
Ladner, A., & Fiechter, J. (2012). The Influence of Direct Democracy on Political Interest, Electoral Turnout and Other Forms of Citizens’ Participation in Swiss Municipalities. Local Government Studies, 38(4), 437-459.
Laisney, M. (2012). The Initiation of Local Authority Referendums: Participatory Momentum or Political Tactics? The UK Case. Local Government Studies,38(5), 639-659.
Lau, R. R., & Pomper, G. M. (2001). Effects of negative campaigning on turnout in US Senate elections, 1988–1998. Journal of Politics, 63(3), 804-819.
Lauth, H. J. (2011). Quality Criteria for Democracy. Why Responsiveness is not the Key. In Regression of Democracy? (pp. 59-80). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Leduc, L. (2002). Opinion change and voting behaviour in referendums. European Journal of Political Research, 41(6), 711-732.
LeDuc, L. (2003). The politics of direct democracy: Referendums in global perspective. Broadview Press.
LeDuc, L. (2007). Opinion formation and change in referendum campaigns. The Dynamics of Referendum Campaigns: An International Perspective, 21-44.
Leininger, A. (2015). Popular Support for Direct Democracy in Europe.
Linek, L. (2011). Proč se měnila úroveň účasti ve volbách do Poslanecké sněmovny v letech 1996–2010? Sociologický časopis/Czech Sociological Review, 1, 9-32.
Loewen, P. J., & Blais, A. (2011). The Quarterly Allowance and Turnout: Old and New Evidence. Money, Politics, and Democracy: Canada's Party Finance Reforms, 130.
Lupia, A. (1992). Busy Voters, Agenda Control, and the Power of Information.American Political Science Review, 86(02), 390-403.
Lupia, A. (1994). Shortcuts versus encyclopedias: information and voting behavior in California insurance reform elections. American Political Science Review, 88(1), 63-76.
Lutz, W., Kritzinger, S., & Skirbekk, V. (2006). The demography of growing European identity. Science-New York, 314(5798), 425.
Mansbridge, J. J. (1983). Beyond adversary democracy. University of Chicago Press.
Mansbridge, J. (1999). On the idea that participation makes better citizens. Citizen competence and democratic institutions, 291-325.
March, J. G. (1978). Bounded rationality, ambiguity, and the engineering of choice. The Bell Journal of Economics, 587-608.
Marsh, M. (2007). Referendum Campaigns: Changing What People Think or Changing What They Think About? (pp. 63-83). Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Macedo, S., Alex-Assensoh, Y., Berry, J. M., Brintnall, M., Campbell, D. E., Fraga, L. R., & GALSTON, W. A. (2005). Democracy at risk. How Political Choices Undermine Citizen Participation and What.
Marquis, L., & Sciarini, P. (1999). Opinion formation in foreign policy: the Swiss experience. Electoral Studies, 18(4), 453-471.
Matsusaka, J. G. (1995). Fiscal effects of the voter initiative: Evidence from the last 30 years. Journal of Political Economy, 587-623.
Matsusaka, J. G. (2005). Direct democracy works. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 185-206.
McClurg, S. D. (2003). Social networks and political participation: The role of social interaction in explaining political participation. Political research quarterly, 56(4), 449-464.
McLaren, L. M. (2004). Opposition to European integration and fear of loss of national identity: Debunking a basic assumption regarding hostility to the integration project. European Journal of Political Research, 43(6), 895-912.
Michels, A., & De Graaf, L. (2010). Examining citizen participation: Local participatory policy making and democracy. Local Government Studies, 36(4), 477-491.
Michels, A. (2011). Innovations in democratic governance: how does citizen participation contribute to a better democracy? International Review of Administrative Sciences, 77(2), 275-293.
Michels, A. (2012). Citizen participation in local policy making: Design and democracy. International Journal of Public Administration, 35(4), 285-292.
Morel, L. (2007). The Rise of ‘Politically Obligatory Referendums: The 2005 French Referendum in Comparative Perspective. West European Politics, 30(5), 1041-1067.
Mundlak, Y. (1978). On the pooling of time series and cross section data. Econometrica: journal of the Econometric Society, 69-85.
Mutz, D. C. (2006). Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. Cambridge University Press.
Morel, L. (2001). The rise of government-initiated referendums in consolidated democracies. Referendum democracy: Citizens, elites and deliberation in referendum campaigns, 123-152.
Morel, L. (2007). The Rise of ‘Politically Obligatory Referendums: The 2005 French Referendum in Comparative Perspective. West European Politics, 30(5), 1041-1067.
Mouffe, C. (2000). Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism. Wien.
Muthen, B. (2001). Latent variable mixture modeling. New developments and techniques in structural equation modeling, 1-33.
Muthén, B., & Muthén, B. O. (2009). Statistical analysis with latent variables. Wiley.
Nelson, T. E., & Oxley, Z. M. (1999). Issue framing effects on belief importance and opinion. The Journal of Politics, 61(4), 1040-1067.
Nevitte, N., Blais, A., Gidengil, E., & Nadeau, R. (2009). Socio-economic status and non-voting. The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Noël, A., & Thérien, J. P. (2008). Left and right in global politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Norris, P. (1999). Introduction: the growth of critical citizens? Critical citizens: Global support for democratic government, 1-27.
Papke, L. E., & Wooldridge, J. M. (2008). Panel data methods for fractional response variables with an application to test pass rates. Journal of Econometrics, 145(1), 121-133.
Pateman, C. (1970). Participation and democratic theory. Cambridge University Press.
Pattie, C., Seyd, P., & Whiteley, P. (2004). Citizenship in Britain: Values, participation and democracy. Cambridge University Press.
Plotke, D. (1997). Representation is democracy. Constellations, 4(1), 19-34.
Price, V., & Tewksbury, D. (1997). News values and public opinion: A theoretical account of media priming and framing. Progress in communication sciences, 173-212.
Putnam, R. D. (2001). Bowling alone. Simon and Schuster.
Rhodes, C., & Mazey, S. (Eds.). (1995). Building a European polity? (Vol. 3). Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Richman, B. D. (2001). Mandating negotiations to solve the NIMBY problem: a creative regulatory response. UCLA J. Envtl. L. & Pol'y, 20, 223.
Richman, B. D., & Boerner, C. (2006). Transaction Cost Economizing Approach to Regulation: Understanding the NIMBY Problem and Improving Regulatory Responses, A. Yale J. on Reg., 23, 29.
Rose, R., & Borz, G. (2013). What determines demand for European Union referendums? Journal of European Integration, 35(5), 619-633.
Saward, M. (1998). The terms of democracy. Polity Press.
Saward, M. (2000). Direct and deliberative democracy. In Paper for presentation at the ECPR Joint Sessions, Copenhagen April 2000, Workshop on Democracy from Below.
Saward, M. (2003). Enacting democracy. Political Studies, 51(1), 161-179.
Scarrow, S. E. (1999). Parties and the Expansion of Direct Democracy Who Benefits? Party Politics, 5(3), 341-362.
Scarrow, S. E. (2001). Direct Democracy and Institutional Change A Comparative Investigation. Comparative Political Studies, 34(6), 651-665.
Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of communication, 49(1), 103-122.
Schiller, T. (Ed.). (2011). Local direct democracy in Europe. Springer Science & Business Media.
Siune, K., Svensson, P., & Tonsgaard, O. (1994). The European union: The Danes said ‘no’in 1992 but ‘yes’ in 1995: How and why?. Electoral Studies, 13(2), 107-116.
Smets, K. (2010). A Widening Generational Divide? Assessing the Age Gap in Voter Turnout Between Younger and Older Citizens (Doctoral dissertation, European University Institute Florence).
Smith, G. (2009). Democratic innovations: designing institutions for citizen participation. Cambridge University Press.
Smith, M. L. (2011). The uneasy balance between participation and representation: local direct democracy in the Czech Republic. In Local Direct Democracy in Europe (pp. 33-53). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Schimmelfennig, F., & Sedelmeier, U. (Eds.). (2005). The Europeanization of central and eastern Europe. Cornell University Press.
Schlozman, D., & Yohai, I. (2008). How initiatives don’t always make citizens: Ballot initiatives in the American states, 1978–2004. Political Behavior, 30(4), 469-489.
Schuck, A. R., & De Vreese, C. H. (2011). Public support for referendums: The role of the media. West European Politics, 34(2), 181-207.
Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values? Journal of social issues, 50(4), 19-45.
Smith, M. A. (2002). Ballot initiatives and the democratic citizen. The Journal of Politics, 64(3), 892-903.
Smith, D. A., & Fridkin, D. (2008). Delegating direct democracy: Interparty legislative competition and the adoption of the initiative in the American states.American Political Science Review, 102(03), 333-350.
Špok, R. (2006). Místní referenda v České republice a ve vybraných zemích Evropské unie. EUROPEUM.
Stadelmann-Steffen, I., & Vatter, A. (2012). Does satisfaction with democracy really increase happiness? Direct democracy and individual satisfaction in Switzerland. Political Behavior, 34(3), 535-559.
Svensson, P. (2002). Five Danish referendums on the European Community and European Union: A critical assessment of the Franklin thesis. European Journal of Political Research, 41(6), 733-750.
Szczerbiak, A., & Taggart, P. (2004). The politics of European referendum outcomes and turnout: Two models. West European Politics, 27(4), 557-583.
Tolbert, C. J., McNeal, R. S., & Smith, D. A. (2003). Enhancing civic engagement: The effect of direct democracy on political participation and knowledge. State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 3(1), 23-41.
Tolbert, C. J., & Smith, D. A. (2005). The educative effects of ballot initiatives on voter turnout. American Politics Research, 33(2), 283-309.
Torgler, B. (2005). Tax morale and direct democracy. European Journal of Political Economy, 21(2), 525-531.
Vargas, S. R. L. (1999). Judicial Review of Initiatives and Referendums in Which Majorities Vote on Minorities' Democratic Citizenship. Ohio St. LJ, 60, 399.
Vetter, A. (2009). Citizens versus parties: explaining institutional change in German local government, 1989–2008. Local Government Studies, 35(1), 125-142.
Vreese, C. H., & Semetko, H. A. (2004). News matters: Influences on the vote in the Danish 2000 euro referendum campaign. European Journal of Political Research, 43(5), 699-722.
Warhurst, J. (1999). From Constitutional Convention to Republic Referendum: A Guide to the Processes, the Issues and the Participants. Department of the Parliamentary Library.
Warren, M. (1992). Democratic Theory and Self-Transformation. American Political Science Review, 86(01), 8-23.
Webb, P. (2013). Who is willing to participate? Dissatisfied democrats, stealth democrats and populists in the United Kingdom. European Journal of Political Research, 52(6), 747-772.
Weitz-Shapiro, R., & Winters, M. S. (2008). Political participation and quality of life (No. 638). Working paper//Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. MIT press.
Zaller, J. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge university press.
Předběžná náplň práce
V posledních několika desetiletích dochází ve většině vyspělých zemí k rozvoji institutů přímé demokracie na národní i lokální úrovni. Česká republika nepředstavuje výjimku a v posledních 25 letech došlo k postupnému, ačkoliv neúplnému, rozvoji, který směřuje k přímým formám vládnutí.

Cílem disertační práce je analýza uplatňování institutů přímé demokracie v České republice. Ačkoli je práce založena především na českých datech, jejím smyslem je také reagovat na zahraniční vědecké analýzy, které se týkají zkoumaného tématu. Práce se zaměřuje na následující otázky: Kdo podporuje a kdo se účastní přímé demokracie v ČR? Jak si voliči tvoří volební postoje a jaké jsou charakteristiky volebního chování v přímé demokracii? Jaký je vliv přímé demokracie na další formy politické participace a politickou angažovanost?

Přímou demokracii vnímám jako demokratickou inovaci a zhodnocuji ji na základě tří kritérií: inkluzivity, kompetence a efektivity (Smith 2009). Nejdříve se zaměřuji na otázku, kdo podporuje využívání přímé demokracie a zkoumám zastoupení různých sociálních skupin v hlasování v přímé demokracii (inkluzivita). Poté analyzuji rozhodování voličů a zjišťuji, zda je založeno na racionálních postojích a informovanosti o tématu hlasování (kompetence). Nakonec analyzuji, zda praxe přímé demokracie nadměrně nezatěžuje občany a nevede ke sníženému zájmu o politickou participaci (efektivita).

Výsledky analýz ukazují, že v českém kontextu naplňuje přímá demokracie tyto kritéria pouze částečně. (1) Ačkoliv je veřejná podpora přímé demokracie všeobecná a velmi vysoká, hlasování v přímé demokracii se účastní zejména ti lidé, kteří jsou již politicky aktivní. (2) Hlasování voličů v přímé demokracii podléhá různým diskurzivním strategiím a rámcům, podle kterých voliči upravují své hlasování bez ohledu na míru informovanosti o daném tématu. Nelze tedy mluvit o tom, že lidé hlasují v přímé demokracii kompetentně, protože samotná otázka co je kompetentní hlasování ztrácí smysl. (3) Lokální přímá demokracie sice zvyšuje politickou participaci, její efekt je ale spíše malý a není efektem pouze institucí přímé demokracie, ale také souběžně probíhajících lokálních konfliktů, které využívají institut místního referenda v politickém boji.  
Předběžná náplň práce v anglickém jazyce
In the last few decades there has been an expansion of institutions of direct democracy in most developed countries. The Czech Republic has been no exception and over the past 25 years, there has been a rise of direct democracy in the Czech Republic.

The aim of the dissertation is an analysis of the use of direct democracy in the Czech Republic.
Although the analyses are based mainly on data from the Czech Republic, the aim is also to contribute to scholarly debates in the field of direct democracy research. I focus on the following questions:

Who supports the use of direct democracy and who participates in it in the Czech Republic? How do voters form opinions and what are the characteristics of direct democracy campaigns? What is the effect of direct democracy on other forms of political participation?

I view direct democracy as an institutional innovation and evaluate it based on three criterions: inclusiveness, competence and efficiency. First, I focus on who supports the expansion of direct democracy. I also study the patterns of turnout of various social groups in direct democracy (inclusiveness). Second, I analyse the processes of opinion formation in direct democracy campaigns to find out, whether it can be regarded as competent or not. Last, I analyse whether direct democracy leads to increased or decreased political engagement (efficiency).

The results of the analyses show that direct democracy in the Czech Republic does not fully satisfy these criteria. (1) Great popular support for direct democracy does not seem to translate into real voting behaviour and direct democracy seems rather to replicate the existing biases in political participation. (2) When voting in direct democracy, citizens are subject to framing discursive strategies that work no matter how well-informed they are about the issue at stake. This questions the ability of citizens to vote competently as the issue of what is a competent vote ceases to make sense. (3) Finally, direct democracy enacted on local level does bring about increased political engagement in subsequent elections, but this seems to be an effect of politicized local community conflict – not a pure direct effect of experience with direct forms of decision making.
Univerzita Karlova | Informační systém UK