Public Deliberation Consortium
Not a member yet
327 research outputs found
Sort by
Strengthening Democracy by Design: Challenges and Opportunities
No full textIn 2014, the Journal of Public Deliberation published an essay, “Democracy by Design,” a framework for a more aspirational, stronger democracy and approach to civic learning. Here, the authors update and reissue Democracy by Design along with a report on the status of the four foundational attributes of a strong democracy, one that is participatory, free and equal, educated and informed, and accountable and justly governed. The authors argue that American democracy faces multiple challenges reflecting declines in democratic norms and practices, for example, growing inequality, weak and unequal civic education, widening polarization, and the rise of undemocratic forces in some segments of American society that are seemingly unchecked by political leaders. Stopping democracy’s decline calls for efforts - some deliberative and some more activist - by both public officials and everyday citizens. Citizen-driven efforts will prevail only if contextualized in broader knowledge and understanding of democracy’s design and health
The Instrumental Value of Deliberative Democracy – Or, do we have Good Reasons to be Deliberative Democrats?
No full textThough commanding a prominent role in political theory, deliberative democracy has also become a mainstay of myriad other research traditions in recent years. This diffusion has been propelled along by the notion that deliberation, properly conceived and enacted, generates many beneficial outcomes. This article has three goals geared toward understanding whether these instrumental benefits provide us with good reasons – beyond intrinsic ones – to be deliberative democrats. First, the proclaimed instrumental benefits are systematized in terms of micro, meso, and macro outcomes. Second, relevant literatures are canvassed to critically assess what we know – and what we do not know – about deliberation’s effects. Finally, the instrumental benefits of deliberation are recast in light of the ongoing systemic turn in deliberative theory. This article adds to our theoretical understanding of deliberation’s promises and pitfalls, and helps practitioners identify gaps in our knowledge concerning how deliberation works and what its wider societal implications might be
Authoritarians don\u27t deliberate: Cultivating deliberation and resisting authoritarian tools in an age of global nationalism
No full textWhile research has demonstrated the effectiveness of deliberative practices applied to mini-publics, the extent to which these smaller, specialized communities of deliberation can be scaled-up or reflect national level practices of governance is in doubt. This gap in research is critical in today’s age with the rise of global authoritarian politics coming at the hand of populist national parties. In this essay, we call on deliberative democracy scholars to examine the larger societal forces inhibiting deliberative practices by focusing on the changes in society which lead to the adoption and success of authoritarian policies and messaging strategies globally. In doing so, we take a macro view to explain how and why authoritarian practices are spreading transnationally by first, briefly explaining the differences between authoritarian and deliberative practices before developing a model of authoritarian communication technique based on Ellul’s (1973) work on propaganda. We then apply this model to three case studies showing the modern evolution and spread of authoritarianism from nations such as China and Russia and the subsequent adoption of these techniques within the US. Finally, we suggest interventions designed to stem the tide of global authoritarianism
Political Deliberation, Interest Conflict, and the Common Knowledge Effect
No full textDeliberation depends on the ability of deliberators to learn from each other through the exchange of information. However, the Common Knowledge Effect (CKE) finding, a well-established phenomenon affecting small-group discussion, shows that when people talk in groups they tend to ignore novel information and instead discuss commonly known information; things that everyone knew before discussion started. Some theorists have worried that the CKE makes small group discussion - one of the most common features of recent democratic innovations - a poor tool for making deliberative democracy a reality. However, most research on the CKE is limited to situations where group members share a common goal or interest, while political deliberation generally happens in situations where citizens have at least some conflicting interests. This paper looks for evidence of the CKE in two group-discussion experiments where subjects had partially conflicting interests, ultimately finding find no evidence of this effect. Scholars of deliberation frequently view conflicting interests as an obstacle to the success of deliberation; this result suggests that conflicting interests may, in fact, enhance deliberation by reducing the overreliance on commonly-known information
Me on the Map: A Case Study of Interactive Theatre and Public Participation
No full textMe on the Map (MOTM) is a unique participatory show for classroom-sized groups of young people aged 6-15. Initially developed and produced by Neworld Theatre in Vancouver, through a commission from the Vancouver International Children’s Festival, MOTM challenges participants to collectively solve the problem of how to best develop an actual lot of land that sits empty in their city. The MOTM experience guides participants through co-design activities that start in the classroom. The choice students make provide data that forms the foundation for the decisions made during the performance. This paper details the theoretical background of the show including participatory theatre, inclusive design, urban happiness studies and ethical decision making. We present lessons learned and make recommendations for public deliberation practitioners on using this technique in future projects
Review of Deliberative Pedagogy: Teaching and Learning for Democratic Engagement. Edited by Timothy J. Shaffer, Nicholas V. Longo, Idit Manosevitch, and Maxine S. Thomas. (Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 2017)
No full textReview of Deliberative Pedagogy: Teaching and Learning for Democratic Engagement. Edited by Timothy J. Shaffer, Nicholas V. Longo, Idit Manosevitch, and Maxine S. Thomas. (Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 2017
The Role of the Local Community in Promoting Discursive Participation: A Reflection on Elderly People’s Meetings in a Small Rural Community in Finland
No full textThis paper explores how elderly residents’ discursive participation is promoted through the local community in one Finnish municipality. It introduces the case of the Elderly People’s Forum as an interesting example of a self-initiated, informal participatory forum that has established a role in local governance and continuously inspires the wide discursive participation of elderly residents in public discussions. Drawing on the concept of discursive participation, which includes talk in informal settings about matters of common interest as a measure of civic engagement, I argue that by acknowledging the deliberative potential of self-initiated civil society forums, local governance can enhance residents’ ongoing participation and possibilities to exert influence
Dramatizing Deliberation: A Method for Encouraging Young People to Think About Their Rights
No full textNine ‘youth juries’ were established across three major British cities – London, Leeds and Nottingham -, each comprising twelve 12-to-17 year-olds who were invited to act as ‘jurors’ with a view to ‘putting the Internet on trial’. This article outlines the method that was designed for conducting these juries, focusing upon two innovative features: the organisation of deliberative juries, based upon a four-step process for arriving at policy recommendations; and the use of dramatic scenarios, intended to make relatable to personal experience what might otherwise have been regarded as abstract policy principles
Authoritarianism and Deliberative Democracy: Responding to Our Current Political Times and Contexts
No full textThis article introduces the special issue on Deliberative Democracy in an Era of Authoritarianism. The essay highlights the relationship between authoritarianism and democracy, and discusses concerns about the current rise in authoritarianism in political systems. It poses questions about how deliberative scholars and practitioners should respond to authoritarian political contexts and how deliberation should relate to more activist forms of civic engagement. Finally, it previews the articles in the special issue and urges future work in the field to take up ideas, questions, and challenges posed by these essays
Outsourcing Participatory Democracy: Critical Reflections on the Participatory Budgeting Experiences in Taiwan
No full textThis article attempts to critically examine the experiences of participatory budgeting (PB) that have proliferated across Taiwan’s cities over the past three years. It is argued that PB in Taiwan remains an isolated initiative instead of an integral part of a comprehensive administrative reform. What makes Taiwan’s PB experiences theoretically interesting is that, in most cases outside the Taipei City, the tasks of promoting PB, designing the procedure of participation, and organizing and mobilizing lay citizens have been contracted out to NGOs or teams led by scholars.
In light of the analytical framework of state power - political society - civil society, this article argues that (1) PB in Taiwan takes place in the absence of active support from civil society and confronts a political society that is hostile to or skeptical of PB; (2) the “outsourced” model of PB generates incentives for the commissioner to evade administrative and political responsibilities, and imposes structural constraints on the performance of the contractor regarding mobilization, organizing and deliberative quality; and (3) the future of PB in Taiwan depends on whether the current modus operandi of PB will give way to a more comprehensive institutional reform and whether a growing number of active citizens and civil society organizations can fill the new political space created by PB that may otherwise be occupied by vested interests and political elites