Deliberative Citizens Research Articles

Are local Climate Assemblies politically representative of the macro-public they represent, and does this matter?

Abstract Using the results of a follow-up survey circulated to the participants of the Herefordshire Citizens Climate Assembly (HCCA), I compare their stated political identity with the political makeup of the county of Herefordshire (the macro public from which they were drawn) using probability testing based on a hypergeometric distribution. I also assess recent recruitment data for three other climate-themed deliberative citizens panels, to determine whether political party allegiance affects volunteer rate. 

I conclude that there were significantly fewer Conservative voters than would have been needed for the HCCA to be politically representative of the wider population from which its members were drawn. This is mirrored in the recruitment data for the three more recent climate-themed deliberative citizens panels, where Conservative voters systematically ‘under-volunteered’ to take part compared to supporters of left-leaning parties. 

I consider the potential reasons for this disparity in representation between participants of differing political identities, and make recommendations relating to recruitment for future assemblies.

The Deliberative Referendum: An Idea Whose Time has Come?

While deliberative citizens’ assemblies and plebiscitary referendums have long been perceived as antithetical, the idea of combining the two democratic instruments for better connecting administration and society has come to the fore in both theory and practice in more recent years. In this article, three ways of linking citizens’ assemblies to the referendum process are distinguished, exemplified, institutionally compared, and reflectively discussed. The three—the referendum-preparing, referendum-scrutinizing, and referendum-elaborating citizens’ assembly—come with their distinctive features, potential merits, scope limits, and related design questions. Fitting the “square peg of deliberative democracy” into the “round hole of direct democracy” and embedding hybrid design in diverging political systems are overarching challenges of institutional design. The article concludes that considering recent developments in theory and practice, the idea of a deliberative referendum linking citizens’ assemblies to direct voting on issues, seems an idea whose time has come, but also comes with challenges and questions that design thinkers and practitioners have only begun to tackle and answer.

Multimethod valuation of peatland ecosystem services: Combining choice experiment, multicriteria decision analysis and deliberative valuation

This paper presents a multi-method valuation study using discrete choice experiment, participatory multi-criteria decision analysis and deliberative citizens’ panels to evaluate the value of peatland ecosystem services in southern Finland. All three valuation studies addressed the same scenarios and drew on the same biophysical assessment data to facilitate a comparison of the valuation processes as well as the results. The results indicate that people place high value on regulating and cultural ecosystem services, especially on biodiversity, and less value on energy peat. The experiences sustain the argument that learning is important as people rarely have ordered set of preferences for unfamiliar objects like regulating services. They also illustrate the scope of citizen and consumer preferences and support the assumptions that preferences may change as a result of well-informed group deliberation. In terms of integration, the lesson learned is that regardless of the preference elicitation method, all valuation studies would benefit from structured and participatory approach when defining the scenarios as well as attributes and their levels. Furthermore, full integration is not possible among different valuation methods, which can be conceptualized as value articulating institutions, operating under different rationalities.

Public support for deliberative citizens' assemblies selected through sortition: Evidence from 15 countries

AbstractAs representative democracy is increasingly criticized, a new institution is becoming popular among academics and practitioners: deliberative citizens’ assemblies. To evaluate whether these assemblies can deliver their promise of re‐engaging the dissatisfied with representative politics, we explore who supports them and why. We build on a unique survey conducted with representative samples of 15 Western European countries and find, first, that the most supportive are those who are less educated and have a low sense of political competence and an anti‐elite sentiment. Thus, support does come from the dissatisfied. Second, we find that this support is for a part ‘outcome contingent’, in the sense that it changes with respondents’ expectations regarding the policy outcome from deliberative citizens’ assemblies. This second finding nuances the first one and suggests that while deliberative citizens’ assemblies convey some hope to re‐engage disengaged citizens, this is conditioned on the expectation of a favourable outcome.

Social Studies for Democracy: Cultivating Communities of Inquiry for Filipino Students as Deliberative Citizens

This paper provides an overview of the problematic state of Philippine democracy that has long been attributed to the nation’s history of colonial rule, widespread poverty and inequality, oligarchic structures, and dysfunctional institutions. It focuses on the role of education and Social Studies Education, specifically, in cultivating in Filipino citizens skills and attitudes necessary for active participation in deliberative democracy. Drawing from Dewey’s philosophy of progressivist and democratic education, Peirce’s notion of community of inquiry, as well as Lipman’s Philosophy for/with Children, it sketches how Social Studies situated in classroom communities of inquiry will help develop communitarian dispositions and inquiry skills that are indispensable in a healthy and vibrant democracy. While it is recognized that there are numerous other pedagogies that aim at similar purposes, it is argued that the community of inquiry enables a unique and robust learning process that allows students to think reflectively, explore various contexts and experiences, question their assumptions, identify their prejudices, and make their own conclusions through deliberative, intersubjective dialogue.

Deliberative Quality and Expertise: Uses of Evidence in Citizens’ Juries on Wind Farms

When addressing socio-scientific wicked problems, there is a need to negotiate across and through multiple modes of evidence, particularly technical expertise and local knowledge. Democratic innovations, such as deliberative citizens’ juries, have been proposed as a means of managing these tensions and as a way of creating representative, fairer decision making. But there are questions around participatory processes, the utilization of expertise, and deliberative quality. This paper considers forms of argumentation in the 2013-2014 “Citizens’ juries on wind farm development in Scotland.” Through a critical-interpretative research methodology drawing on rhetoric and argumentation, we demonstrate that arguments relating to the topoi of the environment and health functioned as de facto reasoning, whereas arguments using social scientific evidence around economics more prominently interacted with local knowledge. The findings offer implications for process design to improve and promote deliberative quality in mini-publics and other forms of participatory engagement on socio-scientific issues.

The Dutch Citizen Forum on Public Reimbursement of Healthcare: A Qualitative Analysis of Opinion Change

Background: A deliberative Citizen Forum ‘Choices in healthcare’ was held in the Netherlands to obtain insight into the criteria informed citizens would propose for the public reimbursement of healthcare. During 3 weekends, 24 citizens participated in evidence-informed deliberation on the basis of 8 case studies. The aim of this study was to assess how the opinions of 8 participants in the deliberative Citizens Forum changed and if so, why participants themselves believe their opinions have changed, whether participation influenced their perceived reasonableness of other participants in the forum and whether it influenced their opinions about involvement of citizens in decision-making. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were held with 8 participants before and after their participation in the Citizen Forum. Using the method of reconstructing interpretive frames opinions about the public reimbursement of healthcare were reconstructed. Results: Participants’ opinions changed over time; they became more aware of the complexity of decision-making and came to accept that there are limits to the available resources and accept cost as a criterion for reimbursement decisionmaking. Participants report that exchanging arguments and personal experiences with other participants made them change their initial opinions. Participants ascribed increases in the perceived reasonableness of other participants’ opinions to feelings of group-bonding and becoming more familiar with each other’s personal circumstances. Participants further believe that citizens represent an additional opinion to that of other stakeholders and believe their opinions should be considered in relation to those of other stakeholders, given they are provided with opportunities for critical discussion. Conclusion: Organized deliberation should allow for the exchange of arguments and the sharing of personal experiences which is linked to learning. On the one hand this is reflected in the uptake of new arguments and on the other hand in the revision, specification or expansion of personal argumentation. Providing opportunities for critical deliberation is key to prevent citizens from adhering to initial emotional reactions that remain unchallenged and which may no longer be supported after deliberation.

How does participating in a deliberative citizens panel on healthcare priority setting influence the views of participants?

A deliberative citizens panel was held to obtain insight into criteria considered relevant for healthcare priority setting in the Netherlands. Our aim was to examine whether and how panel participation influenced participants’ views on this topic. Participants (n = 24) deliberated on eight reimbursement cases in September and October, 2017. Using Q methodology, we identified three distinct viewpoints before (T0) and after (T1) panel participation. At T0, viewpoint 1 emphasised that access to healthcare is a right and that prioritisation should be based solely on patients’ needs. Viewpoint 2 acknowledged scarcity of resources and emphasised the importance of treatment-related health gains. Viewpoint 3 focused on helping those in need, favouring younger patients, patients with a family, and treating diseases that heavily burden the families of patients. At T1, viewpoint 1 had become less opposed to prioritisation and more considerate of costs. Viewpoint 2 supported out-of-pocket payments more strongly. A new viewpoint 3 emerged that emphasised the importance of cost-effectiveness and that prioritisation should consider patient characteristics, such as their age. Participants’ views partly remained stable, specifically regarding equal access and prioritisation based on need and health gains. Notable changes concerned increased support for prioritisation, consideration of costs, and cost-effectiveness. Further research into the effects of deliberative methods is required to better understand how they may contribute to the legitimacy of and public support for allocation decisions in healthcare.

Assessing the Impact of Deliberative Democratic Initiatives at the Local Level: A Framework for Analysis

Although deliberative reforms have been proposed to strengthen democracy, little is known about their impact on politics, public policies, and society. This article develops a framework to systematically assess this impact, differentiating between direct and indirect forms of impact. We apply this framework to two cases of deliberative citizens’ summits in the Netherlands. Our analysis reveals that these summits have a limited direct impact on local politics and policy making, but a relatively strong indirect impact on the local community. The article also discusses some conditions that mediate the impact of the forum.

Deliberative Citizens, (Non)Deliberative Politicians: A Rejoinder

Are citizens or politicians (more) capable of deliberation, and when should they be willing to do so? In this essay, we first show that both politicians and citizens have the capacity to deliberate when institutions are appropriate. Yet high-quality deliberation sometimes collides with democratic principles and ideals. Therefore, we employ a “need-oriented” perspective, asking when and where citizens and the political workings of democracy need high-quality deliberation and when and where this is less the case. On this account, we propose a number of institutional interventions and reforms that may help boost deliberation in ways that both exploit its unique epistemic and ethical potential while simultaneously making it compatible with democratic principles and ideals.

Geothermal energy and the public: A case study on deliberative citizens’ engagement in central Italy

This paper reports on a case study on the citizens’ engagement with developments towards the harnessing of geothermal energy in central Italy. The research has been conducted within the framework of a larger project on the feasibility of further geothermal developments in Italy, funded by the Italian government. The aims of the case study research were first to explore the role of public and stakeholder engagement in the processes of innovation in the geothermal energy sector. Second, to design, implement and consolidate a methodological framework for comparative analysis of case studies on citizens’ engagement, thus bringing a social scientific perspective into geothermal energy research. The results show general support for renewable energy but knowledge and understanding of the potential of geothermal is remarkably low. Lack of trust in politics and unsure public communication emerged as prominent themes where the common good and community developments are sharply contrasted with corporate and private interests. As geothermal energy is included and encouraged under the European Strategic Energy Plan and in the Paris agreement on halting climate change, the results can make significant input into future policy making, by providing concrete guidelines on citizens’ engagement in processes of culturally sustainable innovation.

Cultivating Political Morality for Deliberative Citizens — Rawls and Callan Revisited

In this article, I will argue that the implementation of deliberative democracy needs to be supplemented by a specific political morality in order to cultivate free and equal citizens in exercising public reason for achieving a cooperative and inclusive liberal society. This cultivation of personality is literally an educational project with a robust ethical ambition, and hence, it reminds us the orthodox liberal problem concerning the relation between the state and its citizenship education. Following Callan’s reformulation of the political conception of the person, I will argue that Rawls’s political liberalism can accommodate the ethical demand of deliberative citizenship education. Liberal civic education should legitimately specify its own ethical endowments for active citizenship and need not shy away from making proposals on the cultivation of liberal character that might result in influencing individual’s conception of the good. Rawls’s theory thus redefines the state neutrality problem on education and paves the way for a framework of deliberative citizenship education.

When do deliberative citizens change their opinions? Evidence from the Irish Citizens’ Assembly

Many claims have been made for the impact of deliberative democracy in generating change in people’s opinions, and often in predictable ways. It is claimed that people involved in deliberation change their minds on important issues. We also know that political participation and attitudes towards certain issues depend on political knowledge and civic education. To what extent are these linked? Do certain types of people react differently to their involvement in deliberation and is opinion change contingent on the varying capacities and knowledge of participants? Using data from a nationwide exercise in deliberative democracy carried out in Ireland we find some evidence that the ‘deliberative’ citizen, or at least the citizen most likely to shift opinion following deliberation, is under 65, with median levels of knowledge. We also find that heterogeneous groups are important for deliberation to be effective.

Engaging the public in healthcare decision-making: quantifying preferences for healthcare through citizens’ juries

IntroductionThe optimal approach to engage the public in healthcare decision-making is unclear. Approaches range from deliberative citizens’ juries to large population surveys using discrete choice experiments. This study promotes public...

Understanding Deliberative Citizens: The Application of Q Methodology to Deliberation on Policy Issues

Understanding Deliberative Citizens: The Application of Q Methodology to Deliberation on Policy Issues

Understanding Deliberative Citizens: The Application of Q Methodology to Deliberation on Policy Issues

This article argues that deliberation provides a suitable ll1ethod for understanding what the public ideally wants when it C0111es to decision 1naking. Qlnethodology provides the basis for an ideal approach for understanding what is happening during deliberation andfor developing a deeper understanding of the choices being 1nade. The approach reported in this article involves using Q sorting in conjunction with a survey of policy preferences, both ad111inistered before and after deliberation. The focus is a deliberative process conductedto decide thefllture ofthe ageing Frelnantle Bridge, 'here the issue involved conflicting vaIlles. The Q analysis revealed three 111ain positions (factors) in relation to the issue, each tending to correspond to different kinds ofoptions for replacing the bridge. Overalt deliberation resliited in a l110ve awayfro 111 concern about the heritage value ofthe old bridge and toward a safety-orientedposition. There was also a corresponding change in preference in favollr ofoptions that participants believed would itnprove safety. The approach provides inforrnation that is lIseful for policy 111aking because it identifies the 1nain reasons driving the for111ation ofpublic opinion and the CirCll111stances in which opinions change when the pllblic is given the chance to fully reflect on the outcorne.

Ambiguity, complexity and uncertainty surrounding the hazards of hydrogen and public views of emergent risks

New technologies and emergent risks pose special problems for risk governance and regulation. This paper outlines some of the uncertainties about the hazards of hydrogen energy and examines qualitative evidence from recent deliberative Citizens’ Panels in England and Wales about hydrogen energy technologies. It is shown that laypeople express ambivalent and contradictory views about, and critical trust in, experts’ views about hydrogen. The findings are discussed in relation to the International Risk Governance Council framework for emergent risks characterised by ambiguity, complexity and uncertainty.

Deliberative Democracy and Emotional Intelligence: An Internal Mechanism to Regulate the Emotions

Deliberative democracy, it is claimed, is essential for the legitimisation of public policy and law. It is built upon an assumption that citizens will be capable of constructing and defending reasons for their moral and political beliefs. However, critics of deliberative democracy suggest that citizens’ emotions are not properly considered in this process and, if left unconsidered, present a serious problem for this political framework. In response to this, deliberative theorists have increasingly begun to incorporate the emotions into their accounts. However, these accounts have tended to focus only upon the inclusion of emotions in the external-collective exchange of reason between citizens. Little work has been done on how the individual will actually cope with emotions internally within their own minds. There has been no consideration of the capacities that citizens will need to perceive, understand and regulate emotions as they formulate reasons both by themselves and with others. Moreover, there has been little consideration of how these capacities might be educated in children so that emotionally competent deliberative citizens can be created. In this paper, emotional intelligence is presented as an essential capacity that can fulfil this role for the deliberative citizen and deliberative democracy more generally. The ‘deliberative school’ is suggested as a potential site for this transformation that can progress from generation to generation, cultivating citizens that are increasingly better equipped to handle emotionally-laden deliberative engagement.

Developing Deliberative Minds- Piaget, Vygotsky and the Deliberative Democratic Citizen

The Piagetian account of development has been extremely influential in the deliberative democracy literature. It has been either explicitly or implicitly assumed by the majority of theorists working in this area. It encourages deliberative democrats to make at least four key assumptions about the development of deliberative citizens and their capacities. Firstly, that development is an organic process. Secondly, that it is a universal process. Thirdly, that it is an evolutionary or stage-centric process. And finally, that it is a process which is best encouraged through facilitative teaching methods. In this paper I will suggest that this Piagetian influence on deliberative democracy is not as positive as it is often assumed to be. It encourages a laissez faire attitude to development and does not properly explain how we can create deliberative citizens with a wide range of deliberative capacities. However, there is an alternative account of development which I believe offers a much stronger basis for the development of deliberative citizens. It was originally proposed by Piaget's great rival, the Soviet developmental psychologist Lev Vygotsky. He provides four corresponding ideas about development that could also be applied to the development of deliberative citizens. Firstly, development is primarily a cultural process. Secondly it is contextual process. Thirdly, it is a revolutionary or crisis ridden process. And finally, it is a process which is best encouraged through direct and mediatory educational techniques. In this paper I will show how this alternative developmental perspective can provide a much stronger foundation for the cultivation of deliberative minds.

Adolescents as Deliberative Citizens: Building Health Competence in Local Communities

Given the host of tragic events that children experience, it is often compelling for well-intended adults to respond in a protective and charitable fashion. The child rights approach asks for more. Building on their collective experiences in the developmental and social sciences, the authors present in roughly chronological fashion a synopsis of the theoretical explorations and scientific evaluation that completes a framework to advance the status of children as citizens. The recognition of the agency and capability of a child and the dynamic and enduring source of socialization from and social integration within the community are fundamental to this project. The participatory rights enshrined in the Convention on the Rights of the Child serve as an impetus and inspiration to this project, the Young Citizens Program. What began with small-scale deliberative groups in Chicago matured into a cluster randomized controlled trial in northern Tanzania.