Is All Politics Indeed Local? A Comparative Study of Dual Mandate‐Holders’ Role Attitudes and Behaviours in Parliament

The practice of dual mandate‐holding, i.e. the simultaneous occupation of a political mandate at the (sub)national and the local level, is understudied in the comparative literature. Dual mandate‐holders embody the most direct link between local and central government, yet research has disregarded whether these actors actually feel and act as local ambassadors in parliament. In this article, we study whether councillors in parliament feel responsive for local grievances in terms of their respective role attitudes and behaviour, using the PARTIREP Comparative MP Survey. The estimated regression models demonstrate that dual mandate‐holders indeed perceive themselves as local brokers, even when controlling for various systemic‐, party‐ and individual‐level factors. On the other hand, they struggle to translate their localized attitudes into localized parliamentary behaviour, which could call one of the main arguments in favour of dual mandate‐holding into question.     

Rising powers and order contestation: disaggregating the normative from the representational

A central theme of the literature on rising powers is that new aspirants to great power status pose a challenge to the underlying principles and norms that underpin the existing, Western-led order. However, in much of the literature, the nature and significance of rising powers for international order are imprecisely debated, in particular the concept and practice of ‘contestation’. In this article, we aim to establish a distinction between normative contestation and what can be thought of as ‘contestation over representation’: that is, contestation over who is setting and overseeing the rules of the game rather than the content of the rules themselves and the kind of order that they underpin. The paper engages with debates on international order and international society, and its empirical basis is provided by a thorough analysis of the discourse of rising power summitry.     

SARSCOV-19 amidst corruption: Does the civil society matter? – An empirical study

The pandemic outbreak has dealt consequences on global engagements and structures. With the ongoing search for pandemic-mitigating measures and the excesses (notably corruption) erupted in its wake, concerns have been raised about the decline in public trust, transparency and satisfaction – particularly in Ghana. This situation has spurred multilevel governance discussions regarding pandemic management. Ensuingly characterising policy makers' propositions in this regard is the civil society's salience as a control valve to governance deficits like corruption. Therefore, transcending the anecdotal claims on civil society's efficacy, this study takes a state-society perspective to probe its relevance in fostering trust, transparency and satisfaction, relative to corruption-stricken pandemic governance. The current study engages the general systems theory as a conceptual lens. The structural equation modelling technique was used in analysing data (n = 519) gathered through the questionnaire survey approach. Though results of data analysis affirmed the negative effects of corruption on trust, transparency and satisfaction, the civil society received affirmation as an enhancer of trust, transparency and satisfaction. In view of these study findings, implications and future research suggestions are delimited.