Listening to the Public: An Inductive Analysis of the Good Citizen in a Deliberative System

Abstract

Significant research has demonstrated that deliberative participation has a number of benefits for participants, leaving them more informed, efficacious, and engaged. Unfortunately, this model of the good citizen may be at odds with both what citizens want out of engagement and what might be most beneficial for self-empowerment. Activism, rather than deliberation, might be a more effective means of influencing public decisions, but traits associated with activism are often considered antithetical to deliberative participation. This paper utilizes a case study to ask what participants want out of engagement and whether their conception of the good citizen aligns with theoretical deliberative norms. Findings suggest that participants in a hybrid model of engagement that blends deliberative discussion with interest group politics want opportunities for public input that center interest formation and recognition, equity, and empowerment. These results suggest a need to better integrate the voices of citizens in normative deliberative theory and research.