Abstract
Broadly defined, deliberative democracy aspires the decision-making legitimacy by deliberation of equal citizens. As a response to the growing discontent with the representational governance, the normative and empirical development of the deliberative democracy theory addresses the increasing desiderata of public engagement beyond party politics and constituencies. Generating knowledge for the use of policy-making, foresight shares a common ground of participative and policy-impacting challenges with the deliberative democracy theory. In this article the prospects and mutual advantages of deliberative democracy (DD) alliance with the field of futures studies are discussed. The exploration strives to accentuate the societal policy-making advantages of the cross-disciplinary development. The article begins with introducing the deliberative democracy theory and the theoretical development, following with an account of some encouraging deliberative practices. A brief sketch of two recent projects enhancing participation detail the discrepancies in defining the concept. After examining the common epistemic ground of futures studies and social studies, the cross-disciplinary interface and shared key elements in policy-making impact are described. The article proposes a multi-voiced and future-oriented dialogue as a prerequisite for ameliorating societal preparedness and resilience in a world marked by proliferating uncertainty.
Highlights
Defined, deliberative democracy aspires the decision-making legitimacy by deliberation of equal citizens
The overarching desideratum of civic engagement has enhanced the public governance since the millennium, creating assemblages of diverse actors pursuing participation beyond representative politics
He suggests rethinking the very core of legitimacy – comprising representation, publicity, and rationality – in order to see the legitimacy following from several deliberative forums in a wider deliberative system
Summary
Eur J Futures Res (2017) 5: 13 management reform, motivated by advancing the accountability and transparency of public policy making [6,7,8]. The third, systemic turn in DD development has broadened the extent of deliberation, not as a one-off process but as a larger complex entity of the democratic system This approach emphasises the interaction between different institutions and their opportunity to increase deliberative capacity in its entirety. Parkinson [18] draws attention to the challenges inherent in the classical deliberative account of legitimacy (Bthe classical deliberative account of legitimacy is incomplete, because it cannot account for why non-participants should grant legitimacy to the outcome of any deliberative moment^) and highlights the inability of a single event in fulfilling the requirements of legitimacy, democracy, and deliberation He suggests rethinking the very core of legitimacy – comprising representation, publicity, and rationality – in order to see the legitimacy following from several deliberative forums in a wider deliberative system. Twenty-First Century Town Meetings (created originally for the purposes of the America Speaks organisation) is a
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
