Public Deliberation Consortium
Not a member yet
    327 research outputs found

    Explaining Political Efficacy in Deliberative Procedures - A Novel Methodological Approach

    No full text
    So far, not much research has been done explaining the change of political efficacy in deliberative procedures, and case studies or experiments prevail in the field. Quantitative, systematic studies of real-life cases are missing. This article contributes to filling this gap. It identifies factors which lead to increased group-related political efficacy in deliberative procedures applying an almost novel method, i.e. a quantitative meta-synthesis combining and aggregating data from case studies. The study focuses exemplarily on Germany. The findings indicate that an improvement of political efficacy is more likely when deliberative procedures take place in a municipality, which has institutionalized citizens’ involvement in a local ‘participatory plan’ (‘local constitution’) and provides respective staff

    The Role of Experts across Two Different Arenas in a Deliberative System

    No full text
    The notion of a “deliberative system” has become central to debates on deliberation. The plea to regard deliberative processes from a system-wide perspective is genuinely innovative and attractive, but little has been done to understand how deliberation in one arena or a separate institution relates to other arenas. This study investigates the role that experts play in public communication in two arenas that have distinct systemic functions. It compares how experts express and justify their opinions on a controversial public policy in legislative public hearings and when they are quoted in the news media. Our findings, based on an empirical case study, revealed that experts played a similar role in different contexts in micro- and macro arenas; and most debate participants appealed to technical knowledge to compel a particular decision. Our analysis concludes by reflecting upon the interconnectivities of the aforementioned arenas; and the systemic approach implications on empirical research

    Authority and Deliberative Moments: Assessing Equality and Inequality in Deeply Divided Groups

    No full text
    The notion of equality is central to public deliberation, but few researches have examined how participants construct interactions in face-to-face group discussion involving unequal conditions of authority. This study analyses discussion between slum residents and police officers in Brazil, focusing on both reciprocal and hierarchical relationships in the flow of deliberation. It contributes to explain that the expression of authority is far from straightforward. Looking at a range of authority sources (expertise, functional position, tradition, life experience) that serve to situate and re-situate participants in relation to each other in discussion dynamics helps clarifying what goes on in deliberative moments. Findings reveal that personal experiences prevail in deliberative moments whereas functional credentials predominate in non-deliberative ones. Yet, the case demonstrates that functional authority is not necessarily dominative but can be combined with certain behaviors (such as empathetic imagination, search for commonalities and self-criticism) that lead to reciprocal interactions. This study provides important insights for organizing deliberation more effectively in contexts of fear, mistrust and resentment

    Review of Democracy , Deliberation and Education by Robert Asen (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2015)

    No full text
    Review of Democracy , Deliberation and Education by Robert Asen (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2015

    For more Transparency in Deliberative Research. Implications for Deliberative Praxis

    No full text
    Coding decisions in deliberative research are almost never justified. We show with our own research how transparency in the coding decisions helps deliberate practitioners better to relate to deliberate research and in this way to acquire deliberative skills

    A Randomly Selected Chamber: Promises and Challenges

    No full text
    This paper explores the idea of a randomly selected chamber of representatives (RSC) through an appreciation of the promises it offers and the challenges it would face. We identify two main promises: a RSC could offset the aristocratic character of elections, thereby increasing the legitimacy of the political system; and it could increase democracy’s epistemic potential, thanks to gains in terms of diversity, deliberations, humility, and long-term perspective. We then discuss four key challenges. First, participation: how can the chamber have diversity without mandatory participation or heavy sanctions? Second, how can we conceive or build legitimacy for this non-elected and somehow unaccountable chamber’s views? Third, independence: how to safeguard randomly selected people from corruption? Finally, there may be a linguistic challenge: if the RSC has a deliberative role, how should it cope with the possible linguistic diversity of its members? We conclude that these challenges are not insurmountable, but reveal some trade-offs that cannot be entirely dissolved

    Deliberators, not Future Citizens: Children in Democracy

    No full text
    This paper is a manifesto for incorporating children into deliberative democracy. Although the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) emphasizes children’s right to participation in the process of democracy, their activities and voices still do not receive the attention they merit. There exists a widespread skepticism reinforced by notions of socialization and remediation about children’s capacities, knowledge, experiences, and interests in democracy, and this leads to a conceptualization of children as “future citizens.” Drawing on the recent scholarship on deliberative democracy, particularly the deliberative system framework, this article reconsiders the capacities and actual contributions of children in democracy, and suggests reconceptualizing children as “deliberators.” The perspective of deliberative system in particular helps us to notice the agency and deliberative capacity of children not only in “empowered” decision-making spaces but also in the context of previously unnoticed various democratic activities

    Discourse Quality in Deliberative Citizen Forums – A Comparison of Four Deliberative Mini-publics

    No full text
    In recent years, there has been a rapid growth in studies reporting findings from a variety of deliberative citizen forums. Such studies help to develop our understanding of deliberative democracy by exploring changes in opinion and knowledge as well as - more recently - the quality of the deliberative process itself. However, most deliberative forums are organized on an ad hoc basis, making it hard to judge how generalizable the findings from such forums actually are. This article attempts to address this problem by comparing the findings on the quality of deliberation from four different citizen forums. Based on the findings citizen deliberation is generally very respectful, while argumentation is less refined than among elected representatives. The cases included in this study also suggest that women and those with lower education have less influence in the deliberative process

    “Nothing about politics”: The political scope in rural participatory governance, a case-study in the Basque Country, Spain.

    No full text
    Participatory mechanisms are understood as settings for citizens’ political engagement. However, participants frequently depict these institutions as nonpolitical. In this paper, the political scope of participatory institutions is examined through a case-study of town meetings (concejos abiertos) in the Basque Country (Spain). Through ethnographic observation and interviews with 53 participants, we analyze how participants deal with public issues, and how they limit or expand the political scope of their participation. In concejos, participants talk about “small deliberation” issues such as sewers or water installations. They reject partisan issues in their everyday engagement. However, they cultivate a culture of self-management, and embark on political campaigns on selective issues. The political scope of this institution is opened and closed by participants according to cultural and organizational conditions. In the end, small deliberation on community issues can be a basis for further engagement on broader political concerns. Small deliberation –if sustained over time- is not as small as it seemed initially

    Prompting Deliberation about Nanotechnology: Information, Instruction, and Discussion Effects on Individual Engagement and Knowledge

    No full text
    Deliberative (and educational) theories typically predict knowledge gains will be enhanced by information structure and discussion. In two studies, we experimentally manipulated key features of deliberative public engagement (information, instructions, and discussion) and measured impacts on cognitive-affective engagement and knowledge about nanotechnology. We also examined the direct and moderating impacts of individual differences in need for cognition and gender. Findings indicated little impact of information (organized by topic or by pro-con relevance). Instructions (prompts to think critically) decreased engagement in Study 1, and increased it in Study 2, but did not impact post-knowledge. Group discussion had strong positive benefits for self-reported cognitive-affective engagement across studies. Also, for some types of engagement, effects were more positive for women than men. When predicting knowledge, there also was some evidence that discussion was more positive for women than men. Finally, need for cognition positively predicted engagement and knowledge gains, but rarely moderated the experimental effects. Given these mixed results, future research should continue to test theoretical assumptions about the effects of specific deliberative design features

    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! 👇