Do Open Meetings Affect Deliberation? A Comparative Study of Political Meetings In Two Institutional Settings

Espen Leirset

doi:10.16997/jdd.966

Abstract

Transparency in politics is a core value of democracy, but has to be balanced with politicians' need for deliberation arenas. Norway and Denmark have relatively similar political systems at the municipal level, but the balance between openness and deliberation is approached in different ways: Denmark emphasizes closed political meetings and deliberation, Norway emphasizes open meetings and democratic control. This comparative study of two Danish and two Norwegian municipalities shows that closed meetings makes politicians more able to deliberate, and that mandatory open meetings move deliberation to informal meetings, and thus creates less ability to consensus-based politics.

Highlights

Transparency in politics is a core value of democracy, and has become synonymous with good governance
The aim of this paper is to study the effect open meetings have on deliberation and the quality of policy processes, based on empirical studies of two systems with different approaches to open meetings
In Norwegian municipal law, there is an emphasis on democratic control and open meetings (NOU 1990: 13), while in Danish municipal law, the emphasis is on deliberation and closed meetings (Indenrigsministeriet 1977)

Summary

Introduction

Transparency in politics is a core value of democracy, and has become synonymous with good governance. Many attempts have been made to bolster transparency at different levels of government, with the expectation that the quality of government will improve (Cucciniello, Porumbescu, & Grimmelikhuijsen 2017; Kosack & Fung 2014). One aspect of this ‘transparency wave’ is open meetings, which are studied in this article. In-depth interviews were conducted with 40 informants in Norwegian and Danish municipalities. These countries were selected because their principles of transparency and deliberation differ. In Norwegian municipal law, there is an emphasis on democratic control and open meetings (NOU 1990: 13), while in Danish municipal law, the emphasis is on deliberation and closed meetings (Indenrigsministeriet 1977)

Objectives

Discussion

Conclusion