Public Deliberation Consortium
Not a member yet
327 research outputs found
Sort by
How Deliberative Democracy May Keep Pseudo-Democracy, The New Rule by the Few, From Bungling Into Global Catastrophes
No full textAction planning to improve issues of effectiveness, representation and scale in public participation: A conference report
No full textThis conference report examines issues of effectiveness, representation and scale in deliberative processes by reporting on outcomes of the Participatory Approaches in Science and Technology (PATH) conference. The H-form and action planning (HAP) approach was used to guide 120 participating experts in a plenary workshop as they assessed the current state of practice and developed action plans for improving public participation in decision-making related to science and technology. The workshop outcomes highlighted the need for greater institutionalisation of participatory processes within decision-making structures and wider society, coupled with improved transparency in decision-making and increased emphasis on participatory democracy in the formal education system. Higher levels of funding and logistical support for participatory processes were also recommended, along with improvements to practice through continued innovation and testing of methods, as well as enhanced opportunities for collaborative learning from past experiences. Challenges in representing the values and views of diverse publics were identified as a central concern. The HAP approach provided a systematic way of exploring individual and collective thoughts on a complex topic as well as a means of developing ideas into practical action plans. Reflections on the benefits and shortcomings of this method are offered
Activists’ Views of Deliberation
No full textThis article, based on more than 60 interviews, explores the tensions between deliberation and various forms of political activism and advocacy. It identifies more than 20 objections to deliberation that are proposed by political activists in various countries and contexts. It concludes with suggestions for combining deliberation and advocacy
It\u27s a Long Way from Helsingborg to Porto Alegre: A Case Study in Deliberative Democracy in Late Modernity
No full textSince the 1990’s representative democracy has been challenged by a deliberative turn in political philosophy, reaching even into the practices of established political institutions. In Sweden, the Municipality of Helsingborg, inspired by deliberative ideals, established civic committees as a way to deal with changing patterns of civic political behavior in late modernity. One reason for this is that deliberation is assumed to revitalize representative democracy by avoiding the instrumental rational focus on self-interest. However, there are some difficulties in implementing deliberative democracy within this municipal representative democratic setting. This article will point to some problems in the Helsingborg experiment
Creating Democratic Surplus through Citizens\u27 Assemblies
No full textThis paper, originally a presentation to the Sydney Democracy Forum, discusses how the current democratic deficit could be converted to a democratic surplus. In particular, attention is focused on an ambitious project which has recently commenced in Australia which will culminate in a grassroots citizens’ assembly. One hundred and fifty Australians will be randomly selected from each electorate and will participate in a range of deliberative environments (online and face-to-face), culminating in a four-day citizens’ parliament in Sydney. The project is jointly funded by an Australian Research Council-Linkage grant and a not-for-profit organisation, newDemocracy. During the entire process, typical Australians will consider ways in which Australia’s political system could be strengthened to better represent the will of the people
Applications of Public Deliberation: Themes Emerging fromTwelve Personal Experiences Emanating from National Issues Forums Training
No full textIn order to learn about post-training efforts in public deliberation in Oklahoma, a study was conducted with individuals who had completed a two-day course to become conveners, moderators, and recorders of deliberative forums. In Phase Two of the study (the qualitative portion), twelve individuals participated in in-depth personal interviews to describe a personal experience of significance related to public deliberation. The audio-recorded interviews were transcribed and analyzed. Five themes emerged from the data analysis: variety of settings; examination of benefits and consequences; use of guidelines and forum rules; common ground for the public good; and deliberative leadership. Study findings reinforced the use of some methodologies used in the two-day course and led to recommendations for post-course training and mentoring
Just Talk: Public Deliberation After 9/11
No full textCritics of public deliberation as conventionally practiced have charged that it is “just talk” in the sense both that it substitutes sociable conversation for practical deliberation and that it substitutes political talk for political action. I argue that both criticisms rest on unnecessarily restrictive models of talk and politics. Drawing on participant observation and interviews with eighty participants in two forums convened to deliberate about the future of the former World Trade Center, I tease out the variety of models on which people styled their discussions, models that included education, negotiation, and advocacy. In ways not often recognized by deliberative theorists, these models helped participants to hone their own opinions and reach agreement across difference. Participants also perceived less of a conflict between deliberation and advocacy than deliberative theorists have tended to do. Insofar as participants’ understandings of what made for good deliberation and appropriate modes of political influence differed from those of forum organizers, they point both to practical challenges in organizing deliberation and to possibilities for organizing it more effectively
Deliberative Democracy and the Problem of Power
No full textAmong the most interesting contributions to contemporary deliberative democratic theory are a number of arguments against deliberation leveled by radical democratic theorists such as Iris Marion Young and Lynn Sanders. These theorists question the meaning and efficacy of deliberation based on deep and vital insights about the impact of structural inequalities and entrenched relations of power. We consider these insights to be critical cautions that deliberative democrats must confront, and offer a response that draws on both theory and practical experience. In particular, we suggest that careful attention to three fundamental challenges of deliberative practice, those of control, design, and democratic change, can go a long way towards ensuring that meaningful and effective deliberation is possible in the face of deep structural inequalities and complex power relations
