Public Deliberation Consortium
Not a member yet
    327 research outputs found

    Disagreement and Consensus: The Need for Dynamic Updating in Public Deliberation

    No full text
    This analysis compares a consensus-oriented procedure, Princeton Future, with a more adversarial procedure, the public meetings of the Princeton, N.J. borough council, organized as public hearings. It finds that the consensus-oriented procedure failed to pick up significant conflicting interests among the citizens and as a consequence failed to provide venues for discussing and possibly negotiating those interests. It advises that deliberative democratic procedures provide for dynamic updating on the underlying and changing interest structure before and during deliberation, with particular attention to the important lines of conflict. Thus facilitators should help participants in deliberation not only forge common interests but also clarify their conflicting interests

    Portrait of A Pioneer (English Version)

    No full text

    e-Rulemaking: a New Avenue for Public Engagement

    No full text
    A new online system is being created to support rulemaking, the process agencies use to implement federal legislation. The new system will allow members of the public to participate in rulemaking far more easily than ever before, realizing the potential of legislation that has been in place since 1946. Online rulemaking may lead to a process that is more inclusive in scope and more open to public discussion

    A Case Study in Deliberative Democracy: Dialogue with the City

    No full text

    0

    full texts

    327

    metadata records
    Updated in last 30 days.
    Public Deliberation Consortium
    Access Repository Dashboard
    Do you manage Open Research Online? Become a CORE Member to access insider analytics, issue reports and manage access to outputs from your repository in the CORE Repository Dashboard! 👇