Citizen Participation with Consensus Status and Agonistic in Structural Equation Models
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The research aimed to show the relations, the status of a majority of people, the
opposing groups, and participation according to the concept of the multi-democracy. The
present work was focused on reviews, concepts, theories and related research works to test
the theory and related factors. The samples were 435 individuals.
The study found that a confidence value according to Cronbach’s method was at
0.924. The model was in line with the empirical data at a good level. It can be interpreted
that a resolution positively influenced the public’s participation at 0.57; it influenced the
changes by 75.0%, the opposing groups by 0.34%. A resolution by the opposing groups
positively influenced the participation by 0.70, changes by 75.0% with a statistical significance
of 0.001.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of
planners, 35(4), 216-224.
Berkley, G. E. (1975). The Craft of public Administration. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Dawkins, C. (2015). Agonistic pluralism and stakeholder engagement. Business Ethics
Quarterly, 25(1), 1-28.
Erman, E. (2009). What is wrong with agonistic pluralism? Reflections on conflict in
democratic theory. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 35(9), 1039-1062.
Erwin, W. (1976). Electoral Participation in a low Stimulus Election. Rural Development, 4(1),
-124.
Habermas, J. (1995). Reconciliation through the public use of reason: remarks on John
Rawls's political liberalism. The journal of philosophy, 92(3), 109-131.
Kenaphum, S. (2008). khwamsamret kho̜ng wisahakit chumchon nai si changwat chaidæn
lumnam khong [The success of community enterprises of four provinces in the
Mekong basin]. (Unpublished Doctoral thesis). Valaya Alongkorn Rajabhat University
under the Royal Patronage, Pathum Thani, Thailand.
Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1848). The Communist Manifesto. Retrieved 2 April 2018, from
http://public.wsu.edu/brians/world_civ/worldcivreader/world_civ_reader_2/marx.ht
ml.
Mouffe, C. (1997). Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism. Political Science Series, 72,
-17.
Niyomtrong, D. (2017). næokhit thritsadi læ phatthanakan kanwangphæn phak chak yuk
rœmton kan ruam klum su yuk lang fưnfu phak niyom mai [Concept, theory and
development of sector planning; From the era of the beginning of integration to
the post-revival era of the new popular sector], Urban and Regional Planning
Academic, 2(1), 36-45
Niyomtrong, D. (2019 a). Urban Futures: Critical Transformation in Asian City. VietnameseGerman University, Binh Duong, Vietnam.
Niyomtrong, D. (2019 b). kanwangphæn siang toyæng kho̜ng klum phu mi suan daisia phưa
kanphatthana yang yangyưn ko̜rani sưksa kanchat tham phangmưang ruam
changwat Surin [Controversial Planning of Stakeholders for Sustainable
Development: A Case Study of City Planning of Surin Province]. (Unpublished
Doctoral thesis). Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Putti, J. M. (1987). Work values and organizational commitment: A study in the Asian
context. Human Relation, 42(3), 275-288.
Roskamm, N. (2015). On the other side of “agonism”:“The enemy,” the “outside,” and the
role of antagonism. Planning Theory, 14(4), 384-403.
Ruangwasilp, S. (2007). kanmi suanruam kho̜ng chumchon nai kanchatkan sưksa nai phưnthi
kan bo̜rikan kho̜ng rongrian lo̜m rætwitthaya amphœ thœn changwat lam pang
[Community participation in educational management in the service area of
Lomrad Wittaya School, Thoen District, Lampang Province]. (Unpublished Master's
thesis). Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Sorbon, D. (1996). LISREL 8: User's Reference Guide. Chicago: Scientific Software
International
