Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T05:50:48.112Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Improving deliberative participation: connecting mini-publics to deliberative systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 April 2015

Andrea Felicetti ,
Simon Niemeyer  and
Nicole Curato
Andrea Felicetti*
Affiliation:
CeRIES, University of Lille 3, Villeneuve d’Ascq, France
Simon Niemeyer
Affiliation:
Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance, Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australia Department of Government, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
Nicole Curato
Affiliation:
Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance, Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australia
*
*E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article argues for the assessment of deliberative mini-publics as a dynamic part of a wider deliberative system. The approach draws primarily on Dryzek’s (2009) deliberative capacity building framework, which describes the democratic process as ideally involving authentic deliberation, inclusiveness in the deliberative process, and consequentiality or deliberation’s influence on decisions as well as positive impact on the system. This approach is illustrated using the comparative assessment of two mini-public case studies: the Australian Citizens’ Parliament and Italy’s Iniziativa di Revisione Civica (Civic Revision Initiative). The application of deliberative capacity as a standard for evaluating mini-publics in systemic terms reveals differences between the cases. The deliberative capacity of both cases overlap, but they do so for different reasons that stem from the interconnections between their specific designs and other components of the deliberative system.

Keywords

deliberative democracydeliberative capacitydeliberative systemmini-publics
Type
Research Article
Information
European Political Science Review , Volume 8 , Issue 3 , August 2016 , pp. 427 - 448
Copyright
© European Consortium for Political Research 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baccaro, L., Bächtiger, A. and Deville, M. (forthcoming), ‘Small differences that matter: the impact of discussion modalities on deliberative outcomes’, British Journal of Political Science. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123414000167.Google Scholar
Bächtiger, A. and Gerber, M. (2014), ‘“Gentlemanly conversation” or vigorous contestation? An exploratory analysis of communication modes in a transnational deliberative poll (Europolis)’, in K. Grönlund, A. Bächtiger and M. Setälä (eds), Deliberative Minipublics: Practices, Promises, Pitfalls, Colchester: ECPR Press, pp. 115–134.Google Scholar
Berg-Schlosser, D. and De Meur, G. (2009), ‘Comparative research design: case and variable selection’, in L. Carson, J. Gastil, J. Hartz-Karp and R. Lubensky (eds), Configurational Comparative Methods. Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques, pp. 19–32.Google Scholar
Bonito, J.A., Meyers, R.A., Gastil, J. and Ervin, J. (2013), ‘Sit down and speak up: stability and change in group participation’, in L. Carson, J. Gastil, J. Hartz-Karp and R. Lubensky (eds), The Australian Citizens’ Parliament and the Future of Deliberative Democracy, University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, pp. 120–130.Google Scholar
Boswell, J., Niemeyer, S.J. and Hendriks, C.M. (2013), ‘Julia Gillard’s citizens’ assembly proposal for Australia: a deliberative democratic analysis’, Australian Journal of Political Science 48: 164–178.Google Scholar
Carson, L. and Hartz-Karp, J. (2005), ‘Adapting and combining deliberative designs’, in B. Rihoux and C.C. Ragin (eds), The Deliberative Democracy Handbook: Strategies for Effective Civic Engagement in the Twenty-First Century, San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass, pp. 120–138.Google Scholar
Carson, L., Gastil, J., Hartz-Karp, J. and Lubensky, R. (eds) (2013), The Australian Citizens’ Parliament and the Future of Deliberative Democracy, University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Chambers, S. (2012), ‘Deliberation and mass democracy’, in J., Parkinson and J.J., Mansbridge (eds), Deliberative Systems: Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 52–71.Google Scholar
Curato, N. and Niemeyer, S.J. (2013), ‘Reaching out to overcome political apathy: building participatory capacity through deliberative engagement’, Politics & Policy 41: 355–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curato, N., Niemeyer, S.J. and Dryzek, J.S. (2013), ‘Appreciative and contestatory inquiry in deliberative forums: can group hugs be dangerous?’, Critical Policy Studies 7: 1–17.Google Scholar
Delli Carpini, M.X., Cook, F.L. and Jacobs, L.R. (2004), ‘Public deliberation, discoursive participation, and citizen engagament: a review of the empirical literature’, Annual Review of Political Science 7: 315–344.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J.S. (1994), ‘Australian discourses of democracy’, Australian Journal of Political Science 29: 221–239.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J.S. (2009), ‘Democratization as deliberative capacity building’, Comparative Political Studies 42: 1379–1402.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J.S. and Tucker, A. (2008), ‘Deliberative innovation to different effect: consensus conferences in Denmark, France, and the United States’, Public Administration Review 68: 864–876.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J.S. and Niemeyer, S.J. (2008), ‘Discursive representation’, American Political Science Review 102: 481–494.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J.S. (with Niemeyer, S.J.) (2010), Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Governance, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J.S., Goodin, R.E., Tucker, A. and Reber, B. (2009), ‘Promethean elites encounter precautionary publics: the case of GM foods’, Science, Technology and Human Values 34: 263–288.Google Scholar
Edelman, M.J. (1985), The Symbolic Uses of Politics, Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Felicetti, A., Gastil, J., Hartz-Karp, J. and Carson, L. (2012), ‘Collective identity and voice at the Australian citizens’ parliament’, Journal of Public Deliberation 8: 5.Google Scholar
Gastil, J. (2008), Political Communication and Deliberation, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gastil, J. (2010), The Jury and Democracy: How Jury Deliberation Promotes Civic Engagement and Political Participation, New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gastil, J. (2013), ‘What counts as deliberation? Comparing participant observer ratings’, in L. Carson, J. Gastil, J. Hartz-Karp and R. Lubensky (eds), The Australian Citizens’ Parliament and the Future of Deliberative Democracy, University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, pp. 95–107.Google Scholar
Gastil, J. and Wilkerson, J. (2013), ‘Staying focused: tracing the flow of ideas from the online parliament to canberra’, in L. Carson, J. Gastil, J. Hartz-Karp and R. Lubensky (eds), The Australian Citizens’ Parliament and the Future of Deliberative Democracy, University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, pp. 146–160.Google Scholar
Gastil, J. and Richards, R. (2013), ‘Making direct democracy deliberative through random assemblies’, Politics & Society 41: 253–281.Google Scholar
Gastil, J., Richards, R. and Knobloch, K. (2014), ‘Vicarious deliberation: how the Oregon citizens’ initiative review influenced deliberation in mass elections’, International Journal of Communication 8: 28.Google Scholar
Goodin, R.E. (2005), ‘Sequencing deliberative moments’, Acta Politica 40: 182–196.Google Scholar
Goodin, R.E. and Dryzek, J.S. (2006), ‘Deliberative impacts: the macro-political uptake of mini-publics’, Politics & Society 34: 219–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, J. (1996), Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hartz-Karp, J. (2005), ‘A case study in deliberative democracy: dialogue with the city’, Journal of Public Deliberation 1: Article 6. Retrieved from http://services.bepress.com/jpd/vol1/iss1/art6/.Google Scholar
Hartz-Karp, J., Carson, L., Gastil, J. and Lubensky, R. (2013), ‘Conclusion: theoretical and practical implications of the citizens’ parliament experience’, in L. Carson, J. Gastil, J. Hartz-Karp and R. Lubensky (eds), The Australian Citizens’ Parliament and the Future of Deliberative Democracy, University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, pp. 289–300.Google Scholar
Hendriks, C.M. (2006), ‘When the forum meets interest politics: strategic uses of public deliberation’, Politics & Society 34: 571–602.Google Scholar
Hendriks, C.M., Ayirtman Ercan, S. and Boswell, J. (2013), ‘Understanding deliberative systems in practice: the crucial role for interpretive research’. APSA 2013 Annual Meeting Paper, August 29–September 1, Chicago.Google Scholar
Hobson, K.P. and Niemeyer, S.J. (2013), ‘What do climate sceptics believe? Discourses of scepticism and their response to deliberation’, Public Understanding of Science 22: 396–412.Google Scholar
Il Resto del Carlino (2012), ‘I “campioni” della Valsamoggia hanno detto ‘sì’ alla fusione dei 5 comuni’. Il Resto del Carlino, October 9, p. 22.Google Scholar
Iniziativa di Revisione Civica (2012), ‘Iniziativa di Revisione Civica sulla proposta di fusione dei cinque Comuni della Valle del Samoggia’, Iniziativa di Revisione Civica, Monteveglio. Retrieved 3 December 2013 from http://www.fusionesamoggia.it/images/adv/irc_documento_finale.pdf.Google Scholar
Jennstål, J. and Niemeyer, S.J. (2014), ‘The deliberative citizen: the role of personality and context in deliberative behaviour’. Working Paper No. 1, Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance, Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis, University of Canberra. Retrieved from http://www.governanceinstitute.edu.au/magma/media/upload/ckeditor/files/The%20Deliberative%20Citizen%20(Uppsala%20Version)(1).pdf.Google Scholar
Kim, J. and Kim, E.J. (2008), ‘Theorizing dialogic deliberation: everyday political talk as communicative action and dialogue’, Communication Theory 18: 51–70.Google Scholar
Knight, J. and Johnson, J. (2011), The Priority of Democracy: Political Consequences of Pragmatism, Princeton, NJ; Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Landemore, H. (2013), ‘Deliberation, cognitive diversity, and democratic inclusiveness: an epistemic argument for the random selection of representatives’, Synthese 190: 1209–1231.Google Scholar
Landemore, H.E. (2012), ‘Why the many are smarter than the few and why it matters’, Journal of Public Deliberation 8: 7.Google Scholar
Lubensky, R. and Carson, L. (2013), ‘Choose me: the challenges of national random selection’, in L. Carson, J. Gastil, J. Hartz-Karp and R. Lubensky (eds), The Australian Citizens’ Parliament and the Future of Deliberative Democracy, University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, pp. 35–48.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, M.K. and O’Doherty, K.C. (2011), ‘Deliberating future issues: minipublics and salmon genomics’, Journal of Public Deliberation 7: 1–27. Article 5.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, M.K. and Warren, M.E. (2012), ‘Two trust-based uses of minipublics in democratic systems’, in J. Parkinson and J.J. Mansbridge (eds), Deliberative Systems: Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 95–124.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, J. (2000), ‘What does a representative do? Descriptive representation in communicative settings of distrust, uncrystallized interests, and historically denigrated status’, in W. Kymlicka and W. Norman (eds), Citizenship in Diverse Societies, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 99–123.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, J.J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S., Christiano, T., Fung, A., Parkinson, J.R., Thompson, D.F. and Warren, M.E. (2012), ‘A systemic approach to deliberative democracy’, in J. Parkinson and J.J. Mansbridge (eds), Deliberative Systems. Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–26.Google Scholar
Marsh, I. and Carson, L. (2013), ‘Supporting the citizen parliamentarians: mobilizing perspectives and informing discussion’, in L. Carson, J. Gastil, J. Hartz-Karp and R. Lubensky (eds), The Australian Citizens’ Parliament and the Future of Deliberative Democracy, University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, pp. 204–217.Google Scholar
Mcallister, I. (2014), ‘ANU-SRC poll: changing views of governance: results from the ANUpoll, 2008 and 2014’. ANU College of Arts and Social Sciences.Google Scholar
Michels, A. (2011), ‘Innovations in democratic governance: how does citizen participation contribute to a better democracy?’, International Review of Administrative Sciences 77: 275–293.Google Scholar
Niemeyer, S.J. (2004), ‘Deliberation in the wilderness: displacing symbolic politics’, Environmental Politics 13: 347–372.Google Scholar
Niemeyer, S.J. (2010), ‘The Q-block method and an alternative: benchmarking the Australian discourse of democracy’, Operant Subjectivity 34: 59–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niemeyer, S.J. (2011), ‘The emancipatory effect of deliberation: empirical lessons from mini-publics’, Politics & Society 39: 103–140.Google Scholar
Niemeyer, S.J. (2014), ‘Scaling up deliberation to mass publics: harnessing minipublics in a deliberative system’, in K. Grönlund, A. Bächtiger and M. Setälä (eds), Deliberative Mini-Publics: Practices, Promises, Pitfalls, Essex: ECPR Press, pp. 177–202.Google Scholar
Niemeyer, S.J., Felicetti, A. and Ruggero, O.D. (2012), Prelimary Report: Valsamoggia Citizens Initiative Review, Canberra: Centre for Deliberative Demcracy and Global Governance, Research School of Social Sciences, The Australian National University.Google Scholar
Niemeyer, S.J., Batalha, L. and Dryzek, J.S. (2013), ‘Changing dispositions to Australian democracy in the course of the citizens’ parliament’, in L. Carson and J. Gastil (eds), The Australian Citizens’ Parliament and the Future of Deliberative Democracy, University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, pp. 133–145.Google Scholar
Owen, D. and Smith, G. (2014), ‘Deliberative systems and the ideal of deliberative democracy’. Politics and International Studies Departmental Seminar Series, University of Warwick.Google Scholar
Parkinson, J. (2006), Deliberating in the Real World: Problems of Legitimacy in Democracy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pateman, C. (2012), ‘Participatory democracy revisited’, Perspectives on Politics 10: 7–19.Google Scholar
Regione Emilia-Romagna (2014), ‘Bando 2014 Fusione di comuni’. Retrieved 21 August 2014 from https://partecipazione.regione.emilia-romagna.it/tecnico-di-garanzia/bandi/bando-2014-fusione-di-comuni.Google Scholar
Renn, O. and Webler, T. (1992), ‘Anticipating conflicts: public participation in managing the solid waste crisis’, Gaia 2: 84–94.Google Scholar
Rinke, E.M., Knoblock, K.R., Gastil, J. and Carson, L. (2013), ‘Mediated meta-deliberation: making sense of the Australian citizens’ parliament’, in L. Carson, J. Gastil, J. Hartz-Karp and R. Lubensky (eds), The Australian Citizens’ Parliament and the Future of Deliberative Democracy, University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, pp. 260–283.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, S.W. (2007), ‘Rethinking democratic deliberation: the limits and potential of citizen participation’, Polity 39: 335–360.Google Scholar
Sabatini, F. (2005), ‘Measuring social capital in Italy: an exploratory analysis’, University of Bologna, Faculty of Economics, Third Sector and Civil EconomyWorking Paper Series 12. http://econpapers.repec.org/paper/risaiccon/2005_5f012.htm.Google Scholar
Sass, J. and Dryzek, J.S. (2014), ‘Deliberative cultures’, Political Theory 42: 3–25.Google Scholar
Steenbergen, M.R., Bächtiger, A., Spörndli, M. and Steiner, J. (2003), ‘Measuring political deliberation: a discourse quality index’, Comparative European Studies 1: 21–48.Google Scholar
Stevenson, H. and Dryzek, J.S. (2012), ‘The discursive democratisation of global climate governance’, Environmental Politics 21: 189–210.Google Scholar
Stirling, A., Leach, M., Mehta, L., Scoones, I., Smith, A., Stagl, S. and Thompson, J. (2007), ‘Empowering Designs: towards more progressive social appraisal of sustainability’, STEPS Working Paper 3: 1–80.Google Scholar
Thompson, D.F. (2008), ‘Deliberative democratic theory and empirical political science’, Annual Review of Political Science 11: 497–520.Google Scholar
Young, I.M. (1999), ‘Justice, inclusion, and deliberative democracy’, in S. Macedo (ed.), Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 151–158.Google Scholar