IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpsaxx/v38y2022i6p479-496.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understandings of democracy and “good citizenship” in Ukraine: utopia for the people, participation in politics not required

Author

Listed:
  • Joanna Szostek
  • Dariya Orlova

Abstract

This article investigates and compares how people in diverse peripheral regions of Ukraine understood democracy, their role as citizens in a democracy, and the meaning of “good citizenship” in 2021, the year before Russia’s full-scale invasion. We conduct thematic analysis of focus group discussions to demonstrate gaps and inconsistencies in the understandings of democracy articulated by our participants. We find that a utopian understanding of democracy is common, in which authorities are expected to “listen to the people” and keep them satisfied, but the need for government to manage conflicting interests is not recognized. Understandings of good citizenship are inclusive and pro-social, but mostly detached from institutional politics. We observe similarity across regions in how democracy is understood in the abstract. However, the meaning ascribed to democracy often varied when discussion moved from the abstract to particular country examples – a finding relevant beyond the Ukrainian case, for survey-based research on public understandings of democracy more generally.

Suggested Citation

  • Joanna Szostek & Dariya Orlova, 2022. "Understandings of democracy and “good citizenship” in Ukraine: utopia for the people, participation in politics not required," Post-Soviet Affairs, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(6), pages 479-496, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpsaxx:v:38:y:2022:i:6:p:479-496
    DOI: 10.1080/1060586X.2022.2084280
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/1060586X.2022.2084280
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/1060586X.2022.2084280?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:taf:rpsaxx:v:38:y:2022:i:6:p:479-496. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rpsa .

    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.