A Chapter on Institutionalization: The Use and Misuse of Institutions of Citizen Participation in Hungary

Paper by Eszter Kovács Szitkay, Dániel Oross, and Alexandra Kiss: “The institutionalization of democratic innovations has been the focus of considerable debate in academic literature, particularly regarding whether it is necessary and, if so, what form it should optimally take. However, the present research—which uses the concept of institutions of citizen participation (ICPs) instead of democratic innovation due to its enhanced applicability in the present research context—goes one step further. Beyond the scrutiny of institutionalization, it also examines the democratic quality of ICPs. It argues that institutionalization alone does not guarantee the effective functioning of the related institutions. Hence, the article examines the institutionalization of ICPs in Hungary, evaluating its degree, impact, and potential in an illiberal and centralized environment by posing the following research question: How does the degree of institutionalization affect the quality of ICPs in a hybrid regime? The methodology is built on document analysis and applies a three-step assessment framework consisting of an institutionalization assessment of Hungarian ICPs, the use of an evaluation framework developed for a quality analysis, and, lastly, an analysis of the correlation between the degree of fulfillment of the institutionalization criteria and the impact on policy-making. Being embedded in the context of Hungary, the article defines the contours of how ICPs operate and have effects in a backsliding democracy. The article assesses five Hungarian ICPs, including open primaries, referenda, national consultations, public hearings, and citizens’ assemblies. The findings demonstrate that institutionalization in itself is not sufficient to ensure the quality of these institutions, and provide insight into the functioning of Hungary’s hybrid regime, which is based on the logic of “ruling by cheating.”..(More)”.