bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025 huggingface dataset:
Towards the Recognition and Integration of Action Research and Deliberative Democracy
Authors: Cunningham Kiran , McKinney Hannah
Published: May 2020

Because of the shared underlying value systems of action research (AR) and deliberative democracy (DD), the former can be a powerful means for engaging the academy in the latter. AR and DD are both grounded in principles of inclusion, equity, the co-generation of knowledge, and action. In making the case for the integration of AR and DD, we describe their commonalities and place AR in the context of other forms of engaged scholarship. We review outreach scholarship, community-based research and other forms of participatory research, examining each in terms of their alignment with deliberative democratic principles and their potential for furthering deliberative democracy generally. Engaging the academy in research on and for deliberative democracy requires the full recognition of AR and other forms of engaged scholarship. However, Ernest Boyer’s call for the academy to recognize the scholarship of engagement as scholarship worthy of tenure and promotion has been heeded unevenly across and within higher education institutions. Yet, embedding action research firmly in the academy is critical to engaging faculty in research that not only furthers our understanding of deliberative democracy, but engages higher education in the work of pushing democracy forward.
Deliberative Democracy in Teacher Education
Authors: Stitzlein Sarah Marie
Published: May 2020

This paper aims to contribute to the valuable conversation about the role of deliberative democracy in teacher education. I consider both using pedagogy that engages deliberative democracy in process, thereby enhancing teaching, and advancing deliberative democracy as a worthy goal in teacher education. I begin by looking at recent changes in society that have reshaped student goals, educational accountability, and the priority of democracy within higher education. I highlight these changes to issue a call for a thoroughgoing commitment to deliberative democracy both in theory and in practice, as a means and an end. I expand on the definition of deliberative democracy and the skills necessary to fulfilling it as they relate to the goals of teacher education. I close by turning to exemplary programs in teacher education and showcasing some smaller steps toward incorporating democratic practices and assignments.
The Troubled History of Philosophy and Deliberative Democracy
Authors: Meagher Sharon M. , Feder Ellen K.
Published: May 2020

Philosophy has not enjoyed a prominent place in current education movements aimed at strengthening civic engagement and promoting deliberative democracy. This paper provides a brief overview of the history of democracy and philosophy that demonstrates their long but troubled relationship. We argue that the history of Western philosophy provides a much overlooked foundational role in deliberative democracy that must be understood if we are to educate citizens. Furthermore, we argue that philosophy’s central contribution to the contemporary understanding and practice of deliberative democracy is its fostering of the critique of assumptions. We conclude the article with specific pedagogic recommendations that can bring philosophy and deliberative democracy to life for our students both in and beyond the classroom.
Types of Deliberation
Authors: Bobbio Luigi
Published: May 2020

As research has increasingly addressed deliberative processes through theoretical analyses, empirical studies, and practical experiments, it has become apparent that deliberation is a phenomenon with many faces. Argument-based interaction may come about in different ways and have different functions. Many of these differences can be explained by the nature of the entry positions, i.e. the type of judgment participants express at the start of the deliberation process. Positions may be strong or weak, conscious or unconscious, free or constrained. I discuss the relationship between type of position and type of deliberation, hypothesizing what difference there may be in the development of the deliberative process and in its outcome, and look at the most frequent deviations from the ideal deliberative model. I discuss both cases of symmetrical deliberation, in which all participants express positions of the same type, and cases of asymmetrical deliberation, more frequent in the real world, in which interaction is among actors whose positions are of different types. The analysis suggests that specific settings should be adopted and specific strategies employed depending on the type of deliberation involved.
Is Deliberation Neutral? Patterns of Attitude Change During “The Deliberative Polls™”
Authors: Gastil John , Bacci Chiara , Dollinger Michael
Published: May 2020

Though deliberative theory has a bias toward rigorous argument and democratic social relations, it presumes that an ideal discursive process otherwise has a neutral stance with respect to particular ideologies and cultural values. This essay provides a preliminary test of that assumption by examining attitude change across a wide range of Deliberation Polls held across the globe. We analyzed 65 questionnaire statements on which Poll participants significantly changed their views on a wide variety of issues. By coding each of these survey items on various value dimensions, we were able to look for any obvious patterns of attitude change. Despite its small size and the exclusion of items showing no attitude change, this sample showed that Poll respondents tend to move toward more cosmopolitan, egalitarian, and collectivist value orientations. Further analysis showed the strongest value-laden shifts were on empirical statements, with public opinion on such questions shifting moderately toward cosmopolitan and collectivist beliefs. The conclusion considers the implications of these findings for deliberative theory, research, and practice.
Deliberative Democracy and Citizenship: In Search of the Efficacy Effect
Authors: Nabatchi Tina
Published: May 2020

Enthusiasm for deliberative democracy has grown in recent years, as many believe that it can create better citizens generally, and particularly increase their perceptions of political efficacy. Although the “efficacy effect” is frequently touted as a rationale for engaging in deliberative processes, there is little empirical research on the subject. This study examines the impact on perceptions of internal and external political efficacy of participation in one manifestation of a deliberative democracy process, the AmericaSpeaks 21st Century Town Meeting. Using quasi-experimental, longitudinal survey data, the study finds partial support for the claim that deliberative democracy produces the efficacy effect. Implications of the findings and directions for future research are discussed.
The Public as Policy Expert: Deliberative Democracy in the Context of Finnish Health Care Reforms and Policies
Authors: Raisio Harri
Published: May 2020

The provision of health care in contemporary developed societies has become a so-called “wicked problem.” Tackling the many important challenges is a daunting task—so much so, in fact, that it may prove to be a “mission impossible.” This reality has significant implications for the crafting of health care reforms and policies. Moreover, and more fundamentally, there exists no widely accepted standard by which to generate, evaluate, and prioritize reform and policy proposals. In view of these difficulties, turning to the public for guidance may be the wisest course of action. Specifically, a democratic mechanism is needed by which the public can consider a range of policy directions and can deliberate the consequences and trade-offs in view of people’s values and priorities. In short, some form of deliberative democratic exercise is called for. The chief aim of the present article is to highlight the possibilities for bringing the principles and methods of deliberative democracy to bear on health care in Finland, and in particular on developing proposals for reform and policy. The essay consists of four parts. First, I offer a theoretical perspective on deliberative democracy and its potential for dealing with “wicked problems.” Second, I situate the theory in the context of the crisis of the Finnish welfare state. In part three, I consider the relative dearth of existing forms of deliberative democracy in Finland, and present an upcoming Finnish experiment on public deliberation. Finally, in part four, I examine the views of two groups: representatives of Finnish patient and disability NGOs, and a group of Finnish citizens. I ask whether they see the need for or value in increased citizen involvement in the planning of health care reforms and policies.
Developing Deliberative Minds- Piaget, Vygotsky and the Deliberative Democratic Citizen
Authors: Griffin Martyn
Published: May 2020

The Piagetian account of development has been extremely influential in the deliberative democracy literature. It has been either explicitly or implicitly assumed by the majority of theorists working in this area. It encourages deliberative democrats to make at least four key assumptions about the development of deliberative citizens and their capacities. Firstly, that development is an organic process. Secondly, that it is a universal process. Thirdly, that it is an evolutionary or stage-centric process. And finally, that it is a process which is best encouraged through facilitative teaching methods. In this paper I will suggest that this Piagetian influence on deliberative democracy is not as positive as it is often assumed to be. It encourages a laissez faire attitude to development and does not properly explain how we can create deliberative citizens with a wide range of deliberative capacities. However, there is an alternative account of development which I believe offers a much stronger basis for the development of deliberative citizens. It was originally proposed by Piaget's great rival, the Soviet developmental psychologist Lev Vygotsky. He provides four corresponding ideas about development that could also be applied to the development of deliberative citizens. Firstly, development is primarily a cultural process. Secondly it is contextual process. Thirdly, it is a revolutionary or crisis ridden process. And finally, it is a process which is best encouraged through direct and mediatory educational techniques. In this paper I will show how this alternative developmental perspective can provide a much stronger foundation for the cultivation of deliberative minds.
Evaluating the Short- and Long-term Effects of a Modified Deliberative Poll on Idahoans’ Attitudes and Civic Engagement Related to Energy Options
Authors: Hall Troy E. , Wilson Patrick , Newman Jennie
Published: May 2020

Deliberative polling engages citizens in a process of dialog, exposure to information, and interaction with experts, with the goal of developing more informed, stable attitudes and promoting civic engagement. There have been relatively few assessments of deliberative polling’s short-term effects and even fewer on its long-term effects. Moreover, most assessments examine aggregate changes in attitudes, although theory would suggest that changes might be idiosyncratic, especially in situations where balanced information is provided. This study examines the effects of a one-day modified deliberative poll regarding energy options for the state of Idaho. Using quantitative data from pre-tests, an immediate post-test (n=61), and a follow-up post-test eight months later (n=44), as well as qualitative data from interviews, this study explored preferences for five energy options and how participation affected civic engagement. We also report on participants’ assessments of the deliberative poll itself. Results show few significant changes in aggregate attitudes, with the exception that preference for nuclear power declined after the deliberative poll event. However, examining within-subjects data revealed that up to approximately 30% of participants exhibited substantive changes in their preferences, both immediately after the event and several months later. The extent of changes between the post-test and delayed post-test reinforces that attitudes are affected by individuals’ life circumstances, and suggests participation did not lead to highly enduring attitude changes. There was little evidence that participation led to increased civic engagement, either through communicating what was learned with others or through becoming more politically active
Participation: The Happiness Connection
Authors: Barker Chris , Martin Brian
Published: May 2020

Participation in decision-making has the potential to contribute to greater happiness. To explore this connection, we examine three areas: the family, the workplace and politics. In each of these areas, happiness research suggests that greater participation should increase happiness, most directly via the channels of personal relationships and helping others. There is some empirical research suggesting that participation contributes to happiness. It is useful to consider the connections between the three areas. In particular, examination of participation-happiness connections within families and workplaces can provide some insights for promoting a stronger connection at the level of politics.
It Takes More than Good Intentions: Institutional and Attitudinal Impediments to Engaging Young People in Participatory Planning
Authors: Grant-Smith Deanna , Edwards Peter B.
Published: May 2020

While participatory processes have become an important part of planning, young people are a particularly vulnerable group in terms of potential marginalisation and exclusion from effective participation. Including the views of young people in participatory planning is not simply a matter of bringing them into existing processes. Instead, participatory processes must find ways to integrate and accommodate their needs and ways of expressing their views. Without these adjustments young people may simply move from being kept outside the planning process to a situation where, although they are formally included, their claims are not taken seriously and they are not treated with equal respect. In this paper we reflect on the success of a community advisory committee, formed to consider water planning issues, in integrating the views of young people into their deliberations. Using Iris Marion Young’s (1995) ideas of communicative democracy we highlight the challenges and opportunities presented by this participatory approach, as articulated by both the young people involved and the adult participants. We specifically consider how the elements of greeting, rhetoric and narrative were reflected in the committee process. We argue that both planners and adult participants need to ensure that participatory processes allow for the equal engagement of all participants and place equal value on their contributions. Our research shows that this involves both an institutional and attitudinal commitment to include the views of young people. The institutional commitment requires young people to be included in processes and for their involvement to be supported. However, the attitudinal commitment it is equally important and requires that adult participants be prepared not only to accept the views of younger participants but to actively encourage and support their full participation.
Organizing Deliberation: The Perspectives of Professional Participation Practitioners in Britain and Germany
Authors: Cooper Emmeline , Smith Graham
Published: May 2020

Public authorities at different levels of governance are increasing the opportunities for citizens to deliberate on issues of public policy. With this practice comes a plethora of academic evaluations, influenced particularly by theories of deliberative democracy. However, the perspectives of one significant group of actors have generally been overlooked: the professional participation practitioners who are commissioned to organize and facilitate these events. It is these actors who work with public authorities in designing and implementing engagement strategies and who thus structure the democratic experience of those citizens who participate. Drawing on interviews with experienced practitioners in Britain and Germany, this essay explores the degree of diffusion of public participation designs; the extent to which practitioners express deliberative democratic principles; and the constraints they perceive to more effective institutionalization of public participation. While practitioners are committed to democratic ideals, too often the culture and practices of public authorities, as well as the pressures of the market-place, constrain their realization.
Deliberative Democracy and the Neglected Dimension of Leadership
Authors: Kuyper Jonathan W.
Published: May 2020

Although deliberative democracy is flourishing as a political theory, there is a need to properly acknowledge and theorize upon the role of leadership in deliberative processes. Leaders arise in all political situations for traceable reasons and are an essential element of decision-making. Because deliberative democrats emphasize the necessity of deliberation between free and equal citizens for legitimate decision-making, this stands in stark contrast with the emergence and existence of leaders in deliberative settings. The current lack of engagement has numerous implications for deliberative democracy, but most importantly creates a serious gap between theory and practice. This paper takes a pragmatic view of these issues and seeks to analyze the different ways in which leadership occurs during deliberative practice and the potential this holds for recalibrating deliberative democracy. The analysis is limited to deliberative minipublics as a way to highlight and advance my arguments.
Collective Identity and Voice at the Australian Citizens’ Parliament
Authors: Felicetti Andrea , Gastil John , Hartz-Karp Janette , Carson Lyn
Published: May 2020

This paper examines the role of collective identity and collective voice in political life. We argue that persons have an underlying predisposition to use collective dimensions, such as common identities and a public voice, in thinking and expressing themselves politically. This collective orientation, however, can be either fostered or weakened by citizens’ political experiences. Although the collective level is an important dimension in contemporary politics, conventional democratic practices do not foster it. Deliberative democracy is suggested as an environment that might allow more ground for citizens to express themselves not only in individual but also in collective terms. We examine this theoretical perspective through a case study of the Australian Citizens’ Parliament, in which transcripts are analyzed to determine the extent to which collective identities and common voice surfaced in actual discourse. We analyze the dynamics involved in the advent of collective dimensions in the deliberative process and highlight the factors—deliberation, nature of the discussion, and exceptional opportunity—that potentially facilitated the rise of group identities and common voice. In spite of the strong individualistic character of the Australian cultural identity, we nonetheless found evidence of both collective identity and voice at the Citizens’ Parliament, expressed in terms of national, state, and community levels. In the conclusion, we discuss the implications of those findings for future research and practice of public deliberation.
Why the Many Are Smarter than the Few and Why It Matters
Authors: Landemore Helene E.
Published: May 2020

This paper presents the foundations of a systematic epistemic case for democracy as a collective decision-rule and explores the implications of this epistemic claim for normative justifications of democracy, scientific explanations of its empirical success, and policy reforms. As far as the epistemic case is concerned, the paper proposes an account based on the concept of “democratic reason,” or the collective intelligence of the people in politics. The paper argues that, counter-intuitively, democratic reason is more a function of the cognitive diversity of the individuals taking part in the decision than of their individual ability. As an account of democracy’s epistemic benefits, the argument from democratic reason supplements procedural accounts based on fairness and equality to provide a complete functionalist explanation of democracy. Finally, the argument supports policy reforms increasing citizens’ participation in the collective decision-process.
Just-in-Time Exploratory Public Discussion
Authors: Gundersen Adolf G. , Boyer Dennis
Published: May 2020

This essay describes a case study that successfully dealt two of the biggest challenges facing exploratory public discussion. By design, this category of discussion is typically separated from actual decisions and collaborative action and therefore lacks an element of urgency. The exploratory public discussions that prompted this report, which coincided with climate change conferences held in Cancún, Mexico, and Durban, South Africa, in 2010-2011, largely overcame this problem by preserving the exploratory nature of public discussion while trading on citizens’ interest in unfolding real-world events. We call the result “just-in-time” exploratory discussion, shorthand for the notion that public discussion can remain exploratory despite drawing on the motivational power of temporal urgency. By getting the timing of exploratory discussion right, we suggest, citizens will be ready, even eager, to participate. Proper timing also tends to reinforce the value of exploratory discussion. In short, a just-in-time approach is useful at both the front and back end of exploratory discussion. It helps get citizens interested and keeps them interested in using what they’ve discussed.
Deliberate Design or Unintended Consequences: The Argumentative Uses of Facebook During the Arab Spring
Authors: Lewiński Marcin , Mohammed Dima
Published: May 2020

By looking at the argumentative uses of ‘status updates’, we discuss how Facebook design and context of use influenced opportunities for deliberation during the Egyptian phase of the Arab Spring in early 2011. Our basic point is that, somewhat against the grain of much debate on designing precise tools for supporting online argumentation, many benefits for open and critical argumentation result, in this case, from unintended, indeed parasitic, uses of online technologies. This is evident in the ways that (seemingly) politically trivial, “commercially colonized” and entertainment-oriented technologies such as Facebook or YouTube become major arenas for deliberative mobilization and serious argumentation.
A New Purpose for International Broadcasting: Subsidizing Deliberative Technologies in Nontransitioning States
Authors: Powers Shawn M. , Youmans William
Published: May 2020

In failed or failing states, deliberation as it is operationalized in much of the political communication literature is inapplicable. These states lack advanced communication infrastructures, press systems and public spheres, which require high literacy rates, education, the rule of law and other elements of an enabling regulatory environment. Rather than imagining deliberation as a series of exchanges over focused issues, a scaled down standard of deliberation is appropriate. Such a model could simply involve enhanced communication and information sharing among the citizenry, spreading political norms that aid some level of quasi-governance or simply improving the quality of life in challenging circumstances. Even in both starkly repressive countries and states where governments barely exist, some new communication technologies are increasingly available and they facilitate deliberative exchange. At the same time, foreign international broadcasters are complementing their traditional broadcasting with the development and promotion of deliberation technologies. This paper suggests international broadcasting agencies can find new purpose by utilizing emerging ICTs for the purpose of deliberative development in failed and failing states where public deliberation is under-developed.
Transnational Models of Citizen Participation: The Case of Participatory Budgeting
Authors: Sintomer Yves , Herzberg Carsten , Röcke Anja , Allegretti Giovanni
Published: May 2020

This article pursues two main objectives. First, it provides a transnational overview and analysis of participatory budgeting, which has been central to the literature on democratic innovations in citizen participation. Second, it combines this broad empirical project with a theoretical approach based on the construction of ideal-types in the Weberian tradition. Namely, it presents six models of citizen participation: participatory democracy, proximity democracy, participative modernization, multi-stakeholder participation, neo-corporatism, and community development. Although these models have evolved from participatory budgeting and the European context, it is our contention that they can help us to understand the socio-political and ideological dynamics, contexts and impacts of civic engagement and democracy today at the transnational scale.
Laying the Groundwork for Participatory Budgeting – Developing a Deliberative Community and Collaborative Governance: Greater Geraldton, Western Australia
Authors: Hartz-Karp Janette
Published: May 2020

Participatory Budgeting (PB), an institutional innovation to promote democratic change, is a form of collaborative governance in which citizens are involved in decision-making processes about how to spend part or all of available government funds. Like the broader concept of democracy, for PB to be effective, there needs to be an ongoing participatory process that involves the building of civic capacity and infrastructure. This paper focuses on a particular attribute of civic efficacy, that of deliberative public engagement, defined as collaborative problem solving through informed, inclusive, egalitarian processes with the outcomes influencing policy, decisions and/or collaborative action. It is argued that to be a deep democratic reform, PB needs to be more intentionally deliberative than usually practiced, within an environment that nurtures civic collaboration and empowerment. In the current situation of disaffected, often angry and/or cynical citizenry, without resorting to revolution, overcoming the pervasive sense of impotence to effect real change is not easy. It requires ongoing effort to create the civic capacity, policies and the institutions that will enable everyday people to work together with decision-makers to achieve collaborative public wisdom, decisions and action. For PB to avoid being merely a superficial band-aid to the perceived malaise of our democratic systems, we contend that the culture in which it is situated needs to be nurtured and stewarded to be more collaborative, considered and egalitarian. The deliberative democracy process instituted over a number of years in Greater Geraldton, Western Australia, shows how some of the preconditions for an effective participatory budgeting initiative could be achieved. The lessons learned are widely applicable to other western democracies, and potentially, other forms of governance.
Participatory budgeting - the Australian way
Authors: Thompson Nivek K.
Published: May 2020

For the first time in Australia a local council has used a deliberative democracy approach to obtain citizen advice on key decisions regarding the full range of Council services, service levels and funding. Typically a participatory budget (PB) gives citizens authority in relation to a component of the local government budget. The City of Canada Bay Council, in metropolitan Sydney, went well beyond this. In this paper the Canada Bay Citizens’ Panel (CP), the name given to the PB, is compared to the traditional PB process highlighting three distinctive features of this process: (1) the use of a randomly selected group of citizens; (2) the role of the newDemocracy Foundation as a ‘nonpartisan intermediary organisation’ (Kadlec and Friedman, 2007); and (3) the engagement of council staff through a parallel process convened by the Council, using a randomly selected staff panel. Whilst it is too early yet to make any final judgments, there is promising evidence that the recommendations of this CP will be seriously considered and that this engagement model will be used again by the City of Canada Bay, for the next four-year delivery plan and other contentious issues. Even though the Canada Bay Citizens’ Panel process is not yet complete, it is already clear that its impact will be felt, not only on the budget of the City of Canada Bay, but more broadly as an exemplar for local governments in Australia thinking about engaging their citizens.
An Unlikely Success: Peru’s Top-Down Participatory Budgeting Experience
Authors: McNulty Stephanie
Published: May 2020

This article focuses on the unlikely success of Peru’s top-down participatory budget experience. As part of democratization and decentralization efforts in the early 2000s, Peruvians mandated participatory budgeting in all subnational governments. The article suggests that, while success is constrained in many ways, Peruvians can point to two important accomplishments: 1) engaging a significant number of civil society organizations in debating public resources; and 2) an increased focus on “pro-poor” projects. The article concludes that the current challenge in Peru is to improve the process and engage an even more diverse array of participants. Only then will the process have real potential to improve local governance.
(In) stability, a key element to understand participatory budgeting: Discussing Portuguese cases
Authors: Alves Mariana Lopes , Allegretti Giovanni
Published: May 2020

Much has been said about Participatory Budgeting. Still, how to make it a successful and long-lasting experience remains open for debate. Studies have advanced in analyzing many PB “features”, discussing its capacity to promote transparency, empowerment and accountability. However, little was said about its capacity to maintain continuity over time. With the increasing number of experiences all over the world we can observe that not always the numeric growth represent the emergency of strong and stable experiences. Many Participatory Budgeting experiences are implemented but after a short time disappear from the local political agenda. In this paper we analyze the Portuguese Participatory Budgeting panorama discussing the phenomenon of fragility and volatility that many PB have faced in this country. We argue that the explanatory power of some apparently important variables, such as ruling party change, is very limited. Finally, based on the empirical discussion we propose an analytical model that may help to understand the dynamics of this phenomenon in Portugal and other countries. We think that identifying “fragility” points is an important step for enhancing Participatory Budgeting experiences.
By the People, For the People: Participatory Budgeting from the Bottom Up in North America
Authors: Lerner Josh , Secondo Donata
Published: May 2020

In the pilot year of Participatory Budgeting in New York City, around 8,000 people decided how to spend almost $6 million across four city districts. After years advocating for participatory budgeting (PB) in the US, our organization - The Participatory Budgeting Project (PBP) - served as lead technical assistance partner. In this article, we share some of the lessons learned from our work in New York and other North American cities. Two main concerns have haunted PB in the US (and elsewhere) - that it will only attract the “usual suspects” and that it will merely be a token effort. We argue for tackling these challenges by crafting PB around four key principles - strategic funds, grassroots leaders, accessible design, and targeted outreach. Through this bottom-up approach, PB can better achieve its potential to transform democracy and build social justice - in North America and beyond.
Whose Budget? Our Budget? Broadening Political Stakeholdership via Participatory Budgeting
Authors: Su Celina
Published: May 2020

In this thought piece, I attempt to contextualize New York City’s inaugural participatory budgeting (PB) process in the larger landscape of American political participation. I discuss how the bottom-up way in which stakeholders wrote the process’s rules in the first place, alongside the core role played by the two lead organizations, helped to broaden notions of stakeholdership among constituents. Ultimately, the first year’s primary achievement regarding political participation was not a specific set of outcomes, but a debut as an unfinished form of governance—one that began to engage traditionally marginalized constituents, to trigger their political imagination, and to prompt them to demand more.
Framing Democracy and Conflict Through Storytelling in Deliberative Groups
Authors: Black Laura W.
Published: May 2020

Disagreement is a fundamental part of deliberative discussion, but how group members understand their disagreement can profoundly influence their actions. These conflict frames have implications for members’ perception of both the issue and as their relationships. Drawing on Putnam’s (1990, Brummans et al., 2008) work on conflict frames, this study examines how members of an online deliberative group framed and reframed their conflicts through personal storytelling. Members drew on different models of democracy in their stories. Some managed their disagreements through reframing their conflicts and relationships as collaborative, even in response to adversarially-framed stories. This study advances research in conflict, group discussion, and deliberative discussion and offers practical suggestions for facilitators on how to recognize, interrogate, and help groups develop productive conflict frames.
Deliberate Silences
Authors: Jungkunz Vincent
Published: May 2020

This article offers silences to make deliberative democracy more inclusive and diverse. Considering deliberation broadly as conversation, I advance the argument that silence may be the missing link in our democratic theories: that some silences are packed full of meaning, others can be used as temporary tactics for bringing more meaningful voices to the table, and that silent yielding is the most crucial practice for a robust democratic world. Inclusion involves at least two important dimensions. First, excluded subjects must be brought, allowed, welcomed, and embraced to democratic conversations. Excluded voices must become present. Second, and this is the more difficult dimension, exclusionary identities must be transformed in the process. Simply including more voices and meanings does little if there are structural forces that preclude the rearrangement of democratic possibilities. One such structural force is privileged identities that, by their character, are unlikely to hear and be transformed. In this regard, I put forth silent yielding as an enduring democratic habit that, if practiced sincerely, is likely to transform such identities, and transition thin democracies (ones in which citizens participate in order to simply fight for their own self-interests) into strong democracies (ones in which all citizens are welcomed to the table, and all leave the table transformed in the direction of the common). Deliberate silences combine intentionality, meaningfulness, thoughtful engagement, and robust commitment to inclusion, in order to make deliberative democracy more democratic and transformative.
Democracy Through Multi-Body Sortition: Athenian Lessons for the Modern Day
Authors: Bouricius Terrill G.
Published: May 2020

Mature Classical Athenian democracy is presented as a representative system, rather than the commonly described form of “direct democracy.” When viewed in this way, the commonly assumed problem of scale in applying Athenian democracy to modern nation states is solved, and principles and practices of the Athenian model of democracy continue to have relevance today. The key role of sortition (selection by lot) to form multiple deliberative bodies is explained. Five dilemmas faced by modern proposals for the use of sortition are examined. Finally, a new model of lawmaking using multiple allotted bodies is presented, which resolves these dilemmas and which can be implemented in many ways, from a small addition to an existing system to a more fundamental reform such as replacing one or both elected chambers of a legislature.
Participatory and Deliberative Practices in Health: Meanings, Distinctions, and Implications for Health Equity
Authors: Blacksher Erika
Published: May 2020

This paper examines the meanings of and distinctions between public deliberation and a tradition of participation in health committed to community empowerment, collective action, and social justice and their implications for health equity. Although participation (as empowerment) and public deliberation share fundamental democratic ideals, these democratic practices differ in basic respects. Whereas participation in health typically seeks to engage marginalized and minority groups in planning, research, and action on the social determinants of health and wellbeing, deliberative processes seek to create the conditions for reasoned and respectful public dialogue that can lead to well considered collective judgments about important social issues. Whereas the ultimate aim of participation in health is a redistribution of resources and power that will advance health equity and social justice, the ultimate aim of deliberation is a fair process that yields public decisions all will view as legitimate. Proponents of public deliberation often contend that decision-making subject to democratic deliberation will result in (more) just outcomes; yet, public deliberation has been criticized precisely for its inability to include marginalized perspectives and to challenge status quo institutional arrangements and power relations. This analysis concludes that the use of public deliberation to advance health equity and social justice in the U.S. context holds promise despite serious challenges.
Synthesising the outputs of deliberation: Extracting meaningful results from a public forum
Authors: O’Doherty Kieran C.
Published: May 2020

Recent years have seen an increase in empirical studies of public deliberation. This has led to important advances in thinking through issues such as who to include, how best to inform lay audiences about a particular topic, and how to maximise the perceived legitimacy of deliberation. An important issue that has not received much attention is how to define, identify, and report the results of deliberation. The conversations among individuals that occur over the course of a deliberation can be understood as a large and complex set of qualitative data. The deliberative discourse that is produced over the course of a public deliberation contains a large number of statements by participating individuals, and it is not immediately obvious how certain statements might be extracted to characterise the official results of the deliberation. In particular, public deliberation aims to guide deliberants towards collective decisions – therefore, social scientific methods of analysis that do not orient to changes in individual deliberants’ positions at best only capture a part of what is going on. Further, qualitative analyses such as thematic or content analyses may give equal importance to considered and informed positions produced nearer to the end of a deliberative event and relatively uninformed and preliminary positions expressed at the beginning. While such analyses can provide important insights, they are therefore not sufficient on their own for identifying the results of deliberation. In this paper, I argue that the results of a deliberative forum are best conceptualised as constituted by at least three distinct factors: 1) the initial framing and structuring of the deliberation; 2) the facilitation process; and 3) the final (post-hoc) collation and analysis of materials by an analyst or host of the deliberation. I conclude that any meaningful and legitimate representation or synthesis of the results of deliberation should take into account the complexity of the discourse that is produced in such settings. The recent case of the BC BioLibrary Deliberation is used to illustrate and ground the discussion.
Contemporary Trends Of Deliberative Research: Synthesizing A New Study Agenda
Authors: Beste Simon
Published: May 2020

Deliberation is among the most widely acknowledged figures of thought in social theory. Taking the growing interest in the research conducted around deliberative democracy as an initial position, this paper seeks to provide an overview of recent predispositions and paradigm shifts of approaches taken towards the analysis of real-world discourses. Therefore, as a first step three different – nevertheless correlating – trends of deliberative research are identified: (1) an “empirical turn” and an effort to test and “falsify” assumptions of deliberative theories, (2) the consideration of certain epistemic dimensions of deliberative democracy and (3) the conceptual opening towards not fully rationalizable modes of communication. Based on those trends, the task is to make suggestions of how to incorporate those predispositions and paradigm shifts fruitfully into future research designs.
Who Moderates the Moderators? The Effect of Non-neutral Moderators in Deliberative Decision Making
Authors: Spada Paolo , Vreeland James Raymond
Published: May 2020

Ideal deliberative democracy seeks to employ unbiased moderators. Yet, a large literature in the field of mediation suggests the elusiveness of perfect neutrality. Our study thus addresses the following question: when moderators of deliberations express their own views – even in a limited manner – can they change the preferences of participants? Using a novel experimental design in a real deliberative decision-making process, we find that moderators can significantly influence the attitudes and behaviors of participants by expressing views in a constrained manner. The results of our study have implications for refining epistemic conceptions of deliberative democracy and for designing more precise empirical investigations of the effects of deliberative processes on attitudes and behavior. The results also warn of a simple mechanism by which interest groups might hijack the deliberative decision-making processes used in community driven development projects all over the world.
Boundary Objects and Public Deliberation: Analyzing the Management of Boundary Tensions in the Consensus Conference
Authors: Yeh Hsin-Yi
Published: May 2020

Consistent with studies on inclusive management, this paper adopts the concept of “boundary object” and therefore an emergent approach to explain the collaboration of heterogeneous social actors in public deliberation. My long-term participant observation of the consensus conferences in Taiwan from 2002 through 2005 in general and the transcript of a national consensus conference on prenatal examination in 2005 in particular form the data sources. The identification of a series of boundary objects in the consensus conferences led me to conclude that, on the one hand, the consensus conference is a boundary infrastructure that fosters the establishment of a community of participation and thereby facilitates diverse parties’ deliberation on sensitive issues. On the other hand, whereas a newly formed collective identity is emerging in public deliberation, boundary tensions and the differences between diverse social actors are managed and halted temporarily instead of eliminated permanently by boundary objects. That is, collaboration in public deliberation is always an achievement “in the making” by all parties.
What’s in a name? The search for ‘common ground’ in Kenora, Northwestern Ontario
Authors: Robson James P. , Sinclair Andrew J. , Davidson-Hunt Iain J. , Diduck Alan P.
Published: May 2020

Kenora is a small city in northwestern Ontario, Canada. No longer a forestry centre of note, Kenora plans to develop a more diversified and sustainable economy, driven by local needs and local decision-making. Yet any collective desire to enjoy a prosperous future is set against a backdrop of historical conflict, discrimination and misunderstanding among local First Nation, Métis and Euro-Canadian populations. Using a range of qualitative data, we discuss whether the philosophy and vision behind common ground, a term used to front a collaborative land management initiative close to the city centre, has gained currency among the wider public. Charting the trajectory of its usage over the last decade, we discuss whether the powerful rhetoric invoked by common ground will likely be reflected in the forging of more equitable and productive relations among the multiple cultural groups that define life in this region.
The Varieties of Individual Engagement (VIE) Scales: Confirmatory Factor Analyses across Two Samples and Contexts
Authors: PytlikZillig Lisa M. , Tomkins Alan J.
Published: May 2020

The field of public engagement, participation and deliberation is fraught with conflicting results that are difficult to interpret due to the very different methods and measures used. Theory advancement and consistent operationalization and assessment of key public deliberation and engagement variables will benefit considerably from standardized measures of constructs and the ability to compare across studies. In this article, drawing from social and educational psychology, we describe the theoretical bases for scales assessing eight varieties of participant engagement that may be experienced during participation activities: Active learning, conscientious, uninterested, creative, open-minded, closed-minded, angry, and social engagement. We describe our development of scales to measure these varieties of engagement, and results from three confirmatory factor analyses across two very different populations (college students and city residents) and three different engagement activities (reading background information, deliberating about ethical scenarios, completing an online survey). Finally, we examine evidence of the convergent and divergent validity of the scales by examining their relationships with each other and theoretically-relevant individual and situational characteristics. Findings indicate the scales have good psychometric properties and show evidence of construct validity. We discuss how these scales might be used in reflective practice and research, and identify questions that public engagement researchers and practitioners will find useful in their work.
The Politics of Subnational Decentralization in France, Brazil, and Italy
Authors: Vlahos Nick
Published: May 2020

Decentralized political institutions increasingly play a substantial role in the lives of people, implementing services deriving from influential (elected) bodies of governance, and influencing the relative degree of civil society access to policy-making. The following paper challenges pluralist and social capitalist claims of how decentralized institutions arise and differ in their ability to function. Robert Putnam, Robert Leonardi, and Raffaela Nanetti’s (1993) book Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy will provide the base from which this paper departs, utilizing comparative historical analysis to argue instead that subnational or otherwise regional and local governments entail dialectical relations within and between different levels of state institutions. Overall, this paper argues that the struggles over decentralization ultimately depend on ideological opponents and the balance of power in the struggle for political change, simultaneously affecting both political institutions and civil society participation. This paper briefly unfolds Putnam et al.’s arguments regarding the relationship between democratic institutions and civil society, followed by two case studies – France and Brazil – explaining several macrofactors influencing the processes, outcomes, and implications of decentralization. Thirdly, decentralization and multi-level governance is tied to civil society participation. Lastly, decentralization in relation to partisan objectives is discussed with reference to participatory budgeting.