IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/igg/jsesd0/v4y2013i1p66-85.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Quality of Democracy-Concept vs. the Quintuple Helix: On the Virtues of Minimalist vs. Maximalist Approaches in Assessing the Quality of Democracy and the Quality of Society

Author

Listed:
  • Gerhard Schlattl

    (Advantage Austria country office, Austrian Federal Economic Chamber, Skopje, Macedonia)

Abstract

This article focuses on the virtues of minimalist vs. maximalist democracy conceptions, based on the central research: Should the Quality of Democracy be equated with the Quality of Society? The article addresses the Quintuple Helix, recently introduced by Carayannis & Campbell (2010), followed by a conceptual discussion of one practical operationalization, notably the “Democracy Ranking” developed by Campbell (2008). By contrast, a more concise model on political democracy, notably the Quality-of-Democracy Concept (QD-Concept), is subsequently elaborated and finally incorporated into the Quintuple Helix for further discussion. The primary aim of the article is highlighting the need to avoid the fallacy of conceptual overstretch in the framework of assessing the quality of democracy. Democracy conceptualizations should more clearly be differentiated from broader conceptualizations on quality of society.

Suggested Citation

  • Gerhard Schlattl, 2013. "The Quality of Democracy-Concept vs. the Quintuple Helix: On the Virtues of Minimalist vs. Maximalist Approaches in Assessing the Quality of Democracy and the Quality of Society," International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development (IJSESD), IGI Global, vol. 4(1), pages 66-85, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:igg:jsesd0:v:4:y:2013:i:1:p:66-85
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://services.igi-global.com/resolvedoi/resolve.aspx?doi=10.4018/jsesd.2013010104
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:igg:jsesd0:v:4:y:2013:i:1:p:66-85. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journal Editor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.igi-global.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.