I’ve sent it. Nervous.
So before I get any feedback on it here’s what I think are the strengths and weaknesses of my first attempt at a theoretical chapter on participatory democracy.
- Its a bona fide piece of writing, written down into paragraphs with a structure!
- I think it ends up connecting to my research question, in other words it has the beginnings of an ‘NGO test’ which might be applicable – a lot of work to do on it though.
- I think I have a basic handle on the literature – it covers quite a broad range.
- I think it develops a case for participatory democracy which is on its way to standing up (I might be wrong about that!).
- It has references, and Zotero is pretty much functioning now (thanks to Charles and his style sheet).
- Perhaps too broad and definetly too long. Twice as long as it should be in fact. What am I going to send to the PhD roundtable in the next couple of weeks, the whole thing is much too long?
- Do I read too fast and not spend enough time digesting particular arguments.
- Not sure about the four fold structure – does the section on ‘difference democrcy’ really belong? Or is it the same thing as participatory democracy?
- Is the first section on the democratic debates too basic and a bit waffly?
- I am nervous that I do not actually say very much about what participatory democracy would practically look like? Is this actually what I should be doing?
- I still think there are big gaps in my review of the literature – there is plenty more I could do ( perhaps revisit after I have looked at other areas?).
Next on the agenda: This, then civil society, advocacy and government funding. Then Irish government policy on NGOs.