Hostname: page-component-669899f699-qzcqf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-29T00:29:21.106Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Failure to Examine Failures in Democratic Innovation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Paolo Spada  and
Matt Ryan
Paolo Spada
Affiliation:
University of Coimbra (Portugal)
Matt Ryan
Affiliation:
University of Southampton (United Kingdom)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Symposium: Civic Engagement and Civic Technology
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 50 , Issue 3 , July 2017 , pp. 772 - 778
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2017 

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Alves, Mariana Lopes and Allegretti, Giovanni. 2012. “(In) stability, a key element to understand participatory budgeting: Discussing Portuguese cases.” Journal of Public Deliberation 8 (2): Article 3.Google Scholar
Barber, B. 1984. Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Baiocchi, Gianpaolo and Ganuza, Ernesto. 2014. “Participatory Budgeting as if Emancipation Mattered.” Politics & Society 42 (1): 29–50.Google Scholar
Bherer, Luarence, Gauthier, Mario, and Simmard, Simon, eds. 2016. The Professionalization of Public Participation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bohman, James. 1998. “The Coming of Age of Deliberative Democracy.” The Journal of Political Philosophy 6 (4): 400–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dienel, Peter C. and Renn, Ortwin. 1995. “Planning Cells: A Gate to ‘Fractal’ Mediation.” In Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation, eds. Renn, Ortwin, Webler, Thomoas and Wiedemann, Peter, 117–40. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Publishers.Google Scholar
Estlund, David. 1997. “Beyond Fairness and Deliberation: The Epistemic Dimension of Democratic Authority.” In Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics, ed. Bohman, James and Rehg, Willaim, 173–204. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Findley, Michael G., Jensen, Nathan M., Malesky, Edmunt J., and Thomas, B.. 2016. “Can Results-Free Review Reduce Publication Bias? The Results and Implications of a Pilot Study.” Comparative Political Studies 49 (13): 1667–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fishkin, James S. 1991. Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform. New York: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Fishkin, James S. 2009. When the People Speak: Deliberative Democracy & Public Consultation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fuji-Johnson, G. 2015. Democratic Illusion: Deliberative Democracy in Canadian Public Policy (Vol. 49). University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Fung, Archon. 2006. Empowered Participation: Reinventing Urban Democracy. Princeton. NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Galton, Francis. 1886. “Regression Towards Mediocrity in Hereditary Stature.” The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 15: 246–63.Google Scholar
Gastil, John E., Dees, Pierre, and Weiser, Philip J.. 2002. “Civic Awakening in the Jury Room: A Test of the Connection between Jury Deliberation and Political Participation.” Journal of Politics 64 (2): 585–95.Google Scholar
Gaynor, Niamh. 2011. “Associations, Deliberation and Democracy: The Case of Ireland’s Social Partnership.” Politics & Society 39 (4): 497–520.Google Scholar
Gerber, Alan S., Green, Donald P., and Nickerson, David W.. 2001. “Testing for Publication Bias in Political Science.” Political Analysis 9 (4): 385–92.Google Scholar
Goodin, Robert E. and Dryzek, John. 2006. “Deliberative Impacts: The Macro-political Uptake of Mini-publics.” Politics & Society 34 (2): 219–244.Google Scholar
Gutmann, Amy and Thompson, Dennis. 1996. Democracy and Disagreement. London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University.Google Scholar
Hendriks, Carolyn M. 2012. The Politics of Public Deliberation: Citizen Engagement and Interest Advocacy. Springer.Google Scholar
Hibbing, Theiss-Morse E JR. 2002. Stealth Democracy: Americans’ Beliefs About How Government Should Work. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Hughes, Jessica M. F. 2016. “Constructing a United Disability Community: The National Council on Disability’s Discourse of Unity in the Deliberative System around Disability Rights.” Journal of Public Deliberation 12 (1): Article 8.Google Scholar
Ingham, Sean. 2013. “Disagreement and Epistemic Arguments for Democracy.” Politics, Philosophy & Economics 12 (2): 136–55.Google Scholar
Kamenova, Kalina and Goodman, Nicole. 2015. “Public Engagement with Internet Voting in Edmonton: Design, Outcomes, and Challenges to Deliberative Models.” Journal of Public Deliberation 11 (2): Article 4.Google Scholar
Karpowitz, Christopher F., Mendelberg, Tali, and Shaker, Lee. 2012. “Gender Inequality in Deliberative Participation.” American Political Science Review 106 (3): 533–47.Google Scholar
Kosack, Stephen and Fung, Archon. 2014. “Does Transparency Improve Governance?” Annual Review of Political Science 17: 65–87.Google Scholar
Landemore, H. 2013. Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lee, Caroline W. 2015. Do-it-Yourself Democracy: The Rise of the Public Engagement Industry. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lupia, Arthur. 2004. “The Wrong Tack: Who’s to Say that People Make Better Decisions in Groups than They Do on Their Own?” Legal Affairs 3: 43–45.Google Scholar
Morozov, Evgeny. 2013. To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism. New York: PublicAffairs.Google Scholar
Mutz, Diana C. 2008. “Is Deliberative Democracy a Falsifiable Theory?” Annual Review of Political Science 11: 521–38.Google Scholar
Nabatchi, Tina, Gastil, John, Weiksner, Matthew, and Leighninger, G. Michael. 2012. Democracy in Motion: Evaluating the Practice and Impact of Deliberative Civic Engagement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nylen, William R. 2003. “An Enduring Legacy: Popular Participation in the Aftermath of the Participatory Budgets of Joao Monlevade and Betim.” In Radicals in Power: The Worker’s Party (PT) and Experiments in Urban Democracy in Brazil, ed. Baiocchi, Gianpaolo. London: Zed Books Ltd.Google Scholar
Owen, David and Smith, Graham. 2015. “Survey Article: Deliberation, Democracy and the Systemic Turn.” Journal of Political Philosophy 23 (2): 213–234.Google Scholar
Ravazzi, Stefania and Pomatto, Gianfranco. 2014. “Flexibility, Argumentation and Confrontation. How Deliberative Minipublics Can Affect Policies on Controversial Issues.” Journal of Public Deliberation 10 (2): Article 10.Google Scholar
Rogers, Everett. 1983. Diffusion of Innovations, 3rd edition., The Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
Ryfe, David M. 2005. “Does Deliberative Democracy Work?” Annual Review of Political Science 8: 49–71.Google Scholar
Sabl, Andrew. 2015. “The Two Cultures of Democratic Theory: Responsiveness, Democratic Quality, and the Empirical-Normative Divide.” Perspectives on Politics 13 (2): 345–65.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Ian. 2003. The State of Democratic Theory. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Graham. 2009. Democratic Innovations: Designing Institutions for Citizen Participation , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, William. 2013. “Anticipating Transnational Publics: On the Use of Mini-Publics in Transnational Governance.” Politics & Society 41 (3): 461–484.Google Scholar
Spada, Paolo. 2012. “Participatory Budgeting Census: 1989–2012.” Available at. http://participedia.net/en/content/brazilian-participatory-budgeting-census Google Scholar
Spada, Paolo and Vreeland, James R.. 2013. “Who Moderates the Moderators? The Effect of Non-neutral Moderators in Deliberative Decision Making.” Journal of Public Deliberation 9 (2): Article 3.Google Scholar
Sveiby, Karl-Erik, Gripenberg, Pernilla, Segercrantz, Beata, Eriksson, Andreas, and Aminoff, Alexander. 2009. “Unintended and undesirable consequences of innovation.” XX ISPIM Conference, The Future of Innovation. Vienna. http://www.sveiby.com/articles/UnintendedconsequencesISPIMfinal.pdf (accessed July 2016).Google Scholar
Thompson, Dennis. 2008. “Deliberative Democratic Theory and Empirical Political Science.” Annual Review of Political Science 11: 497–520.Google Scholar
Wampler, Brian. 2007. Participatory Budgeting in Brazil: Contestation, Cooperation and Accountability. Pennsylvania: Penn State University Press.Google Scholar
Wang, Zhengxu and Dai, Weina. 2013. “Women’s Participation in Rural China’s Self-Governance: Institutional, Socioeconomic, and Cultural Factors in a Jiangsu County.” Governance 26 (1): 91–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Spada and Ryan supplementary material

Spada and Ryan supplementary material

Download Spada and Ryan supplementary material(File)
File 73 KB