Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T20:47:02.409Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What Is Political Science For?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2014

Jane Mansbridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This address advances three ideas. First, political science as a discipline has a mandate to help human beings govern themselves. Second, within this mandate we should be focusing, more than we do now, on creating legitimate coercion. In a world of increasing interdependence we now face an almost infinite number of collective action problems created when something we need or want involves a “free-access good.” We need coercion to solve these collective action problems. The best coercion is normatively legitimate coercion. Democratic theory, however, has focused more on preventing tyranny than on how to legitimate coercion. Finally, our discipline has neglected an important source of legitimate coercion: negotiation to agreement. Recognizing the central role of negotiation in politics would shed a different light on our relatively unexamined democratic commitments to transparency in process and contested elections. This analysis is overall both descriptive and aspirational, arguing that helping human beings to govern themselves has been in the DNA of our profession since its inception.

Type
Presidential Address
Information
Perspectives on Politics , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , March 2014 , pp. 8 - 17
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Achen, Christopher H. 2005. The EU Decides. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Agricultural Marketing Resource Center. 2013. “Blueberries Profile.” http://www.agmrc.org/commodities__products/fruits/blueberries-profile/ (accessed October 25, 2013).Google Scholar
Arendt, Hannah. 1970. On Violence. New York: Harvest.Google Scholar
Aristotle, . 1944. [c. 347–325 B.C.] Politics. Trans. Rackham, Harris. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press/Loeb Classical Library.Google Scholar
Ayres, Ian, and Braithwaite, John. 1992. Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barber, Benjamin. 1984. Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Baron, David P., and Ferejohn, John A.. 1989. “Bargaining in Legislatures.” American Political Science Review 83(4): 1181–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barry, Brian. 1991. “Is Democracy Special?” In Democracy and Power, ed. Barry, Brian. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Barry, Brian, and Hardin, Russell. 1982. “Individual Actions and Collective Consequences.” In Rational Man and Irrational Society?, eds. Barry, Brian and Hardin, Russell. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Baumol, William J. 1952. Welfare Economics and the Theory of the State. New York: Longmans, Green.Google Scholar
Bentham, Jeremy. 1996 [1789]. Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Berlin, Isaiah. 1955-56. “Equality.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 56: 301–26.Google Scholar
Berlin, Isaiah. 1969 [1958]. “Two Concepts of Liberty.” In Four Essays on Liberty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Besley, Timothy. 2006. Principled Agents? The Political Economy of Good Government. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Birnbaum, Jeffrey H., and Murray, Alan A.. 1987. Showdown at Gucci Gulch: Lawmakers, Lobbyists, and the Unlikely Triumph of Tax Reform. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Brain, Robert. 1979. Friends and Lovers. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Buchanan, James M., and Tullock, Gordon. 1962. The Calculus of Consent: Logical Foundations of Constitutional Democracy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, Joshua. 1989. “Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy.” In The Good Polity, eds. Hamlin, Alan and Pettit, Philip. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1989. Democracy and its Critics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Deci, Edward L., Koestner, Richard, and Ryan, Richard M.. 1999. “A Meta-Analytic Review of Experiments Examining the Effects of Extrinsic Rewards on Intrinsic Motivation.” Psychological Bulletin 125(6): 627–68.Google Scholar
Fearon, James. 1999. “Electoral Accountability and the Control of Politicians: Selecting Good Types versus Sanctioning Poor Performance.” In Democracy, Accountability, and Representation, eds. Przeworski, Adam, Stokes, Susan C., and Manin, Bernard Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fishkin, James S. 2009. When the People Speak: Deliberative Democracy and Public Consultation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Foster, Chase, Mansbridge, Jane, and Martin, Cathie Jo. 2013. “Negotiation Myopia.” In Negotiating Agreement in Politics, eds. Mansbridge, Jane and Martin, Cathie Jo. Washington DC: American Political Science Association.Google Scholar
Frey, Bruno S. 1997. “A Constitution for Knaves Crowds out Civic Virtues.” Economic Journal 107(443): 1043–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, Margaret. 2006. A Theory of Political Obligation: Membership, Commitment, and the Bonds of Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodin, Robert E. 2007. “Enfranchising All Affected Interests and Its Alternatives.” Philosophy & Public Affairs 35(1): 40–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodnow, Frank J. 1904. “The Work of the American Political Science Association: Presidential Address.” Proceedings of the American Political Science Association 1: 35–46.Google Scholar
Goodnow, Frank J. 1905. “The Growth of Executive Discretion: Presidential Address.” Proceedings of the American Political Science Association 2: 29–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, H. Scott. 1954. “The Economic Theory of a Common-Property Resource: The Fishery.” Journal of Political Economy 62(2): 124–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gneezy, Uri and Rustichini, Aldo, 2000.” A Fine is a Price.” The Journal of Legal Studies 29(1): 1–17.Google Scholar
Guttman, Amy; and Thompson, Dennis,. 1996. Democracy and Disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1989. Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society Trans, Berger, Thomas. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hardin, Garrett. 1968. “The Tragedy of the Commons.” Science 162(3859): 1243–48.Google Scholar
Hardin, Russell. 1982. Collective Action. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Honig, Bonnie. 1993. Political Theory and the Displacement of Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Honig, Bonnie. 2013. Antigone, Interrupted. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, David. 1960 [1739–40]. A Treatise of Human Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel, and Tversky, Amos. 1979. “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk.”Econometrica 47(2): 263–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel. 1984. “Choices, Values, and Frames.” American Psychologist 39(4): 341–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1998 [1781]. Critique of Pure Reason, eds. Guyer, Paul and Wood, Allen W.. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 2012 [1785]. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Trans. Gregor, Mary and Timmermann, Jens. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kateb, George. 2011. Human Dignity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Klosko, George. 1991. The Principle of Fairness and Political Obligation. Savage, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Knight, Jack, and Johnson, James. 2011. The Priority of Democracy: Political Consequences of Pragmatism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Laski, Harold J. 1977 [1926]. “On the Study of Politics.” In The Study of Politics: A Collection of Inaugural Lectures, ed. King, Preston. London: Frank Cass.Google Scholar
Levi, Margaret. 1988. Of Rule and Revenue. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Manin, Bernard. 1987. “On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation.” Political Theory 15: 338–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 1990. Beyond Self-Interest. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 2009. “A ‘Selection Model’ of Political Representation.” Journal of Political Philosophy 17(4): 369–98.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 2010. “Beyond the Tragedy of the Commons.” Symposium on Elinor Ostrom’s Governing the Commons. Perspectives on Politics 8(3): 590–93.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 2012a. “On the Importance of Getting Things Done.” Political Science and Politics 45(1): 1–8.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 2012b. “Conflict and Commonality in Habermas's Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere .” Political Theory 40(6): 792–804.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane, with Bohman, James, Chambers, Simone, Estlund, David, Follesdal, Andreas, Fung, Archon, Lafont, Cristina, Manin, Bernard, and Martí, José Luis. 2010. “The Place of Self-Interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy.” Journal of Political Philosophy 18(1): 64–100.Google Scholar
Naurin, Daniel. 2007. Deliberation behind Closed Doors: Transparency and Lobbying in the European Union. Colchester, UK: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
Nedelsky, Jennifer. 2001. Law’s Relations: A Relational Theory of Self, Autonomy, and Law. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ober, Josiah. 2008. Democracy and Knowledge: Innovation and Learning in Classical Athens. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Offe, Claus. 2013. “On the Normative Foundations of Public Policy.” Unpublished manuscript, Berlin: Hertie School of Governance.Google Scholar
Oliver, Pamela, Marwell, Gerald, and Teixeira, Ruy. 1985. “A Theory of the Critical Mass. I. Interdependence, Group Heterogeneity, and the Production of Collective Action.” American Journal of Sociology 91(3): 522–56.Google Scholar
Olson, Mancur. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. New York: Schocken Books.Google Scholar
Ostrom, Elinor. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, Elinor. 1998. “A Behavioral Approach to the Rational Choice Theory of Collective Action.” American Political Science Review 92(1): 1–22.Google Scholar
Peter, Fabienne. 2008. Democratic Legitimacy. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pettit, Philip. 2001. A Theory of Freedom: From the Psychology to the Politics of Agency. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Putnam, Robert A. 1988. ”Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games.” International Organization 42(3): 427–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, John. l971. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rae, Douglas W. 1975. “The Limits of Consensual Decision-Making.” American Political Science Review 69(4): 1270–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ricci, David M. 1984. The Tragedy of Political Science: Politics, Scholarship, and Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Risse, Thomas. 2000. “Let's Argue! Communicative Action in World Politics.” International Organization 54(1): 1–39.Google Scholar
Rosen, Michael. 2012. Dignity: Its History and Meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. 1997 [1754]. “Discourse on the Origin of Inequality.” In Rousseau: The Discourses and Other Early Political Writings, ed.. Gourevitch, Victor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. 2009. “The Prize in Economic Sciences 2009: Information for the Public.” http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2009/info.html (accessed October 25, 2013).Google Scholar
Samuelson, Paul A. 1954. “The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure.” Review of Economics and Statistics 3(4): 387–89.Google Scholar
Saward, Michael. 2010. The Representative Claim. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholz, John T., and Lubell, Mark. 1998. “Trust and Taxpaying: Testing the Heuristic Approach to Collective Action.” American Journal of Political Science 42(2): 398–417.Google Scholar
Scholz, John T., and Pinney, Neil. 1995. “Duty, Fear, and Tax Compliance: The Heuristic Basis of Citizenship Behavior.” American Journal of Political Science 39(2): 490–512.Google Scholar
Scott, Anthony. 1955. “The Fishery: The Objectives of Sole Ownership.” Journal of Political Economy 63(2): 116–24.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Ian. 2003. The State of Democratic Theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Simmons, A. John. 1979. Moral Principles and Political Obligations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Snidal, Duncan. 1979. “Public Goods, Property Rights, and Political Organizations.” International Studies Quarterly 23(4): 532–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stinchcombe, Arthur L. 1980. “Is the Prisoners' Dilemma all of Sociology?” Inquiry 23(2):187–92.Google Scholar
Taylor, Michael. 1987. The Possibility of Cooperation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R. 1990. Why People Obey the Law. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Urbinati, Nadia, and Warren, Mark E.. 2008. “The Concept of Representation in Contemporary Democratic Theory.” Annual Review of Political Science 11: 387–412.Google Scholar
Waldron, Jeremy. 2009. Dignity, Rank and Rights. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Walzer, Michael. 1983. Spheres of Justice. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Warren, Mark E., and Mansbridge, Jane, with Bächtiger, André, Cameron, Maxwell A., Chambers, Simone, Ferejohn, John, Jacobs, Alan, Knight, Jack, Naurin, Daniel, Schwartzberg, Melissa, Tamir, Yael, Thompson, Dennis, and Williams, Melissa. 2013. “Deliberative Negotiation.” In Negotiating Agreement in Politics, eds. Mansbridge, Jane and Martin, Cathie Jo. Washington DC: American Political Science Association.Google Scholar
Williams, Bernard A. O. 1965. “Ethical Consistency.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 39: 103–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolin, Sheldon. 1960. Politics and Vision. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
Wu, Jianzhong and Axelrod, Robert. 1995. “How to Cope with Noise in the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma.” The Journal of Conflict Resolution 39(1): 183–189.Google Scholar