Conference Program

At its most basic level, democracy signifies “power of the people,” grounded not only in majority rule but also in individual responsibility for the collective good. Beyond its institutional dimension, democracy is understood as a dynamic and evolving social process that continuously negotiates individual freedom, equality, solidarity, and the rule of law (Dahl, 1989; Rohmann, 1999). It functions simultaneously at individual and societal levels, requiring a delicate balance between personal autonomy and belonging to a community (Perotti, 1994). When equality and solidarity compete with individual liberty, the central liberal-democratic question arises: is a sustainable balance between these values possible (Sorensen, 2008)?

Education is crucial in mediating this balance. Democracy depends on the political knowledge, civic awareness, and participatory capacities developed throughout life (Dewey, 1916). Schools and universities therefore represent key arenas where democracy is either enacted as a lived practice or reduced to formal procedures. Inclusion, understood as the meaningful participation of all those affected by decisions (Young, 2002), becomes a defining criterion of democratic quality. Democratic development unfolds across interconnected dimensions—policies, cultures, and practices (Booth & Ainscow, 2002)—which together shape the everyday experience of democracy within institutions.

To reconstruct how these dimensions have been conceptualized across disciplines, we conducted a narrative systematic meta-analysis of more than 200 scientific and professional publications from pedagogy, political science, sociology, anthropology, and history. Through theoretical triangulation and qualitative content analysis, recurring themes, categories, and conceptual patterns were identified. The analysis revealed three dominant conceptual strands of democracy in relation to education: (1) democracy as institutional-legal governance focused on rights, representation, and formal structures; (2) democracy as participatory culture emphasizing voice, dialogue, shared responsibility, and relational power; and (3) democracy as transformative practice linked to moral responsibility, social justice, and active citizenship. These strands, often treated separately within disciplinary boundaries, were integrated into an analytically unified triangulated model conceptualized as “democracy-as-education.” This model understands democracy as simultaneously structural, cultural, and pedagogical.

Applying this triangulated model to the Croatian post-socialist context reveals a significant tension. While democratic institutions and legal frameworks have been formally established since the 1990s, centralized governance structures and hierarchical administrative traditions persist. Findings of previous research indicate that democracy is predominantly interpreted as a legal-institutional arrangement rather than as a participatory culture (Pažur, 2019). Student voice, shared governance, and local community influence remain limited, suggesting that democratic culture and practice lag behind formal policy commitments. The imbalance between structural democratization and cultural-pedagogical transformation reflects historically rooted asymmetries of power typical of post-socialist societies.

This paper presents first-year findings from the Croatian research project “Gordian Hub of Croatian Democracy: How to Untangle It?” (DEMOhub). By situating empirical observations within a theoretically triangulated and historically grounded framework, the study demonstrates how democracy–education relations unfold across four interconnected levels: national policy, local governance, educational institutions, and individual actors.

By bridging theory and empirical analysis, the study contributes to a deeper understanding of how democracy can move from formal adoption toward lived practice in centralized, post-socialist contexts.