Deliberative Polling Research Articles

Knowledge and support for AI in the public sector: a deliberative poll experiment

AbstractWe are on the verge of a revolution in public sector decision-making processes, where computers will take over many of the governance tasks previously assigned to human bureaucrats. Governance decisions based on algorithmic information processing are increasing in numbers and scope, contributing to decisions that impact the lives of individual citizens. While significant attention in the recent few years has been devoted to normative discussions on fairness, accountability, and transparency related to algorithmic decision-making based on artificial intelligence, less is known about citizens’ considered views on this issue. To put society in-the-loop, a Deliberative Poll was thus carried out on the topic of using artificial intelligence in the public sector, as a form of in-depth public consultation. The three use cases that were selected for deliberation were refugee reallocation, a welfare-to-work program, and parole. A key finding was that after having acquired more knowledge about the concrete use cases, participants were overall more supportive of using artificial intelligence in the decision processes. The event was set up with a pretest/post-test control group experimental design, and as such, the results offer experimental evidence to extant observational studies showing positive associations between knowledge and support for using artificial intelligence.

Political polarization and the energy policy paradox: assessing the impact of South Korea’s nuclear power phase-out policy

ABSTRACT Polarization surrounding nuclear power has intensified in Korea following the 2011 Fukushima disaster. In 2017, President Moon Jae-in implemented an energy policy that shifted the focus from nuclear to renewable energy, a departure from previous governments’ approaches. Additionally, Moon administration supported various participatory governance initiatives to minimize social conflicts, including participatory deliberative polls concerning the construction of the Shin-Kori nuclear power plants. However, the Moon administration’s policy was followed by polarization between nuclear and renewable energy factions escalating toward the end of the term. We employed mixed-method approaches combining media and survey analyses to investigate this issue. The results demonstrate that, despite initially appearing to be policy neutral, renewable energy alternatives underwent polarization under the Moon administration. We emphasize the need to investigate effective strategies for utilizing participatory projects as tools to break, rather than reinforce, the political gridlock impeding energy transition.

An Effect of Storytelling on Attitude Changes in Deliberative Mini-Publics

This study aims to explore the relationship between opinion changes and the quality of deliberation in deliberative polls, focusing on the impact of storytelling. Deliberative mini-publics have gained considerable attention as a form of deliberative democracy. While deliberative democracy emphasises the importance of changing participants’ preferences through rational discourse, the existence of a link between opinion changes and deliberation quality has not been thoroughly examined. Furthermore, the influence of alternative forms of communication, such as storytelling, on attitude changes has not yet been investigated. Using data from a deliberation event modelled after a deliberative poll, we conducted a multiple regression analysis to examine the factors that contribute to individual attitude changes, using ‘Opinions,’ ‘Reasons,’ and ‘Personal experience’ as explanatory variables, coded and scored by an index according to the Discourse Quality Index. Our findings revealed that personal experience significantly affected individual opinion changes, although the effect and its direction were inconsistent and contradictory, depending on specific aspects of attitudes. While prior studies have focused on the exchange of reasoned opinions to examine the relationship between opinion changes and deliberation quality, our research suggests that personal storytelling may have an impact on preference changes.

Criminal offenses in the field of Cybernetics related to computer - Computer forgery and computer fraud

Abstract Deliberative polling has emerged as a promising method for promoting democratic reform and citizen engagement in various contexts, however, its potential and limitations in hybrid regimes, where democratic governance is challenged by a mix of democratic and authoritarian features, remain relatively unexplored. This paper focuses on the case of North Macedonia, as a country that has undergone significant political and societal transformation especially in the recent years. Despite efforts to promote democratic reforms, the country continues to face challenges in terms of ensuring democratic governance and citizen participation. In a hybrid regime, like North Macedonia’s, political leaders might not be inclined to value citizens’ input, and the media environment might not be free from influence, which limits access to varied and reliable sources of information. Civil society organizations may also encounter limitations on their operations, and institutional assistance may be insufficient. Additionally, the population’s diversity could make it difficult to reach and build trust with citizens. In this context, deliberative polling represents an opportunity to engage citizens in meaningful political dialogue and institutional reform. This paper examines the potential of deliberative polling as a tool for promoting governance in North Macedonia and highlights the challenges and limitations faced in this process.

Knowledge and Support for AI in the Public Sector: A Deliberative Poll Experiment

Knowledge and Support for AI in the Public Sector: A Deliberative Poll Experiment

How College Students Can Depolarize: Evidence for Political Moderation Within Homogeneous Groups

This paper demonstrates that, after deliberation, college students showed immense moderation potential and affective depolarization, especially even given their homogeneity as a bloc within American politics and within the overwhelmingly liberal sample for this paper. These findings offer optimism for future research in homogeneous groups through understanding that group polarization, while a very worrisome phenomenon, can be avoided with the right precautionary measures. It is clear that college students are capable of engaging constructively across differences and that deliberation, through Deliberative Polling in particular, can serve to build the capacity to do so.

Deliberative Procedures as Social Technology

Abstract Research on deliberative procedures uses normative concepts not only to justify the democratic legitimacy of these procedures but also as analytical tools to understand their empirical effects. This leads to a normativist bias in deliberation research. I argue that deliberative procedures should instead be regarded as a type of opinion-shaping social technology. I introduce a theoretical scheme that helps researchers analyze the interplay between formal and informal aspects of deliberative procedures. The usefulness of the scheme is shown in a case study of the EuroPolis Deliberative Poll.

Mediation analysis of deliberation and opinion changes: the case of the deliberative polling on Sin-Gori nuclear reactor 5&6

Mediation analysis of deliberation and opinion changes: the case of the deliberative polling on Sin-Gori nuclear reactor 5&6

Progressive borealism and the diversity deficit in Iceland’s constitutional reform process

ABSTRACT Efforts to rewrite Iceland’s constitution have attracted significant attention, being heralded as the world’s first ‘crowdsourced constitution’ and a pioneering example of deliberative democracy. Such claims fit into a wider pattern of what this paper terms progressive borealism: exoticising Iceland as a progressive utopia at once both part of and removed from Europe, predicated on the systematic exclusion of marginalised groups. The aims of this paper are twofold. Firstly, it describes the phenomenon of progressive borealism, which relies on the reimagination of colonial-era depictions of Iceland’s liminality, purity and wildness. Essential to this notion is the importance ascribed to whiteness and racialisation of ethnic minorities. Secondly, it considers how progressive borealism has impacted Iceland’s constitutional reform process. Data is taken from a deliberative poll which formed the basis of recommendations to the Icelandic Parliament. The data demonstrate a diversity deficit, meaning that the most marginalised residents are unable to participate in debates over Iceland’s future, challenging the claim that social diversity is irrelevant in democratic processes such as deliberative polling. The analytical framework draws insights from theories of intersectionality and superdiversity to reveal that the lack of inclusivity is a product of structural forces generating and perpetuating systematic exclusion of marginalised communities. The paper closes by considering the prospects for meaningful constitutional change in this context.

Deliberating in the Gray Zone: North Macedonia’s Hybrid Regime and Deliberative Democracy Exercise

Abstract Deliberative polling has emerged as a promising method for promoting democratic reform and citizen engagement in various contexts, however, its potential and limitations in hybrid regimes, where democratic governance is challenged by a mix of democratic and authoritarian features, remain relatively unexplored. This paper focuses on the case of North Macedonia, as a country that has undergone significant political and societal transformation especially in the recent years. Despite efforts to promote democratic reforms, the country continues to face challenges in terms of ensuring democratic governance and citizen participation. In a hybrid regime, like North Macedonia’s, political leaders might not be inclined to value citizens’ input, and the media environment might not be free from influence, which limits access to varied and reliable sources of information. Civil society organizations may also encounter limitations on their operations, and institutional assistance may be insufficient. Additionally, the population’s diversity could make it difficult to reach and build trust with citizens. In this context, deliberative polling represents an opportunity to engage citizens in meaningful political dialogue and institutional reform. This paper examines the potential of deliberative polling as a tool for promoting governance in North Macedonia and highlights the challenges and limitations faced in this process.

Deliberative Effect and Opinion Changes: The Cases of Deliberative Polling on South Korea’s Nuclear Energy Policies

Deliberative polling has been widely used globally to enhance democracy and deliberation on key policy issues. This study analyzed deliberative effects and opinion changes for two cases of deliberative polling on nuclear energy policy issues in South Korea: whether to resume/discontinue Shin-Gori No.5·6 nuclear reactors and whether to construct a temporary storage of spent nuclear fuel. By using logistic models, it found out deliberative effect working for opinion changes on Shin-Gori No.5·6 nuclear reactors issue, but not significantly for opinion changes on the issue of spent nuclear fuel. In addition, this study analyzed whether deliberative effect has a direction of opinion changes. Deliberative effect seems to have no directional effect regarding Shin-Gori No.5·6 nuclear reactors issue, whereas having a directional effect towards ‘Yes’ for the spent nuclear fuel issue.

Resolving the Conflict of Interests Issue within the Laws Concerning the Political Matters: Deliberative Democracy or Empowering Dewan Perwakilan Daerah?

This study examines whether the concept of deliberative democracy could offer a viable solution to the issues surrounding laws on political matters, commonly referred to as Paket Undang-Undang Politik in Indonesia. These laws, including general election regulations, have become problematic due to their close association with the drafters. Over the past two decades, presidents and the majority in the House of Representatives have formed coalitions to maintain government stability. However, this success has had a detrimental impact on the system of checks and balances during the drafting of these laws. While the Constitutional Court could potentially intervene by reviewing these laws, it has often not addressed the conflict of interest issues arising from open legal policies, especially in cases related to reviewing election laws. This paper addresses this issue by proposing a solution integrated into the drafting process to mitigate conflicts of interest in political matters legislation. The proposed approach involves incorporating an additional institution in the drafting process not directly influenced by political interests. In other countries, similar issues are tackled through practical implementations of deliberative democracy, which directly involves citizens as the decisive factor, using methods such as citizen assemblies and deliberative polling. We suggest empowering the Regional Representatives Council could offer a more practical solution to this issue.

대항 헤게모니로서 건강의 공공성 : 제주 녹지국제병원 공론조사에 대한 비판적 담론분석을 중심으로

영리병원인 제주 녹지국제병원 개설에 대한 최종 공론조사 결과, 시민들은 영리병원 개설 불허와 공공성 악화 반대를 선택하였다. 본 연구는 공론조사가 진행되는 동안 존재한 담론과 헤게모니 투쟁을 분석하고, 신자유주의와 발전주의 이데올로기의 산물인 영리병원 개설에 대항한 담론과 헤게모니가 무엇인지 확인하였다. 그리고 이를 통해 ‘모두를 위한 자유와 평등’을 원칙으로 하는 민주주의 체제의 급진화를 위한 헤게모니 구성체 수립의 단초를 탐색하였다.BR 공론조사가 진행되는 동안 혼재되어 있는 신자유주의, 발전주의 이데올로기가 영리병원 허가 측의 담론에서 드러났고, 경제권력에 포획된 국가권력과 허가 측 전문가들은 소송 가능성을 이유로 도민들을 협박하였다. 그리고 이러한 허가 측의 담론에 건강의 공공성 보장이라는 공동의 민주적 목적을 중심으로 연대한 사회권력이 대항하였다. 불허 측의 건강의 공공성 담론은 건강과 보건의료와 관계된 다양한 도덕적 가치를 명시화하였고, 숙의에서 다루어지는 공공의 의미가 제주도에 한정되지 않고 한국 사회 전체로 확장되는 결과를 가져왔다. 또한, 준공된 녹지국제병원을 공공병원 혹은 비영리병원으로 전환하자고 제안한 불허 측의 대안은 시장포퓰리즘 담론에 직접적으로 대항하는 효과를 나타냈다.BR 건강과 보건의료를 상품화하고 시장 메커니즘에 그대로 노출시키는 영리병원은 건강의 공공성 그리고 그와 관계된 도덕적 가치들을 훼손한다. 녹지국제병원 공론조사 사례에서 건강의 공공성을 시민들이 인식하고 동의하고 있음이 드러났다. 그리고 건강의 공공성은 신자유주의, 발전주의, 도구적 이성의 헤게모니에 대항하고 있다.

Understanding Smart Energy Transitions as a New Source of Distrust:The Perspectives of Hong Kong Citizens on the Risks of Regional Intercity Energy Collaboration in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (GBA)

Hong Kong has an ambitious carbon neutral goal to meet by 2050. Achieving this goal requires a departure from a traditional city-scale centralised, fossil fuel-based energy infrastructure to a more decentralised, locally-generated renewable energy (RE) while expanding the regional intercity smart grid system to accommodate RE import in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (GBA). Such energy transitions inevitably bring new social challenges, but how Hong Kong citizens perceive such transitions in the GBA context is not well studied. This study draws on quantitative and qualitative data derived from an online deliberative poll (DP) (N = 174) on smart energy transitions. We have four key findings. Firstly, citizens showed a low level of trust in the national, provincial, and city governments whilst a high level of trust towards the incumbent electricity companies. Secondly, citizens showed distrust to the governments, suspecting that the genuine motives of the governments were to prioritise regional RE import over local RE production. Thirdly, citizens raised concerns over five types of risks (price volatility risks, energy reliability risks, cost overrun risks, data privacy risks, and environmental risks) that contributed to new sources of public distrust in governments’ competence. Fourthly, the public distrust toward multilevel governments was found to be underpinned by demographic factors (age group and family size) and a sociopolitical context of recent social movements against government policies. Our findings suggest that policymakers in the GBA need to give sufficient attention to enhancing public trust, and thereby the policy legitimacy of regional smart energy transitions.

Depolarizing Through Deliberation in Civics Education: A Case Study of Like-Minded High School Students

Abstract This article presents a successful example of fostering pluralism by reducing affective polarization through facilitated conversations. Drawing from the results of a Deliberative Polling experiment, this article finds significant depolarization and moderation as a result of deliberation on policy issues by like-minded high school students who predominantly self-identified as liberal. While critics of deliberation are concerned with like-minded participants becoming more extreme and living in echo chambers, this article shows that Deliberative Polling, even among like-minded individuals can depolarize. Deliberation of eighteen economic and healthcare reform proposals by thirty-eight groups of participants demonstrated no systematic trend of group polarization. A split-half experimental design allowed inference that deliberation was not just correlated with but caused decreases in both affective and issue polarization. Remarkably, deliberation not only moderated opinions on the issues deliberated, but also moderated opinions on related issues not deliberated. The deliberation procedures necessary to achieve such an outcome are discussed, including not setting consensus as a goal, providing supplementary information, and moderating discussions. After a literature review, the methods of the experiment are detailed, followed by a discussion of the results and a brief conclusion about future prospects for bridge building.

Deliberative Distortions? Homogenization, Polarization, and Domination in Small Group Discussions

AbstractDeliberation is widely believed to enhance democracy by helping to refine the ‘public will’, moving its participants' policy attitudes closer to their ‘full-consideration’ policy attitudes – those they would hypothetically hold with unlimited information, to which they gave unlimited reflection. Yet there have also been claims that the social dynamics involved generally ‘homogenize’ attitudes (decreasing their variance), ‘polarize’ them (moving their means toward the nearer extreme), or engender ‘domination’ (moving their overall means toward those of the attitudes held by the socially advantaged) – attitude changes that may often beawayfrom the participants' full-consideration attitudes and may thus distort rather than refine the public will. This article uses 2,601 group-issue pairs in twenty-one Deliberative Polls to examine these claims. Reassuringly, the results show no routine or strong homogenization, polarization, or domination. What little pattern there is suggests some faint homogenization, but also some faintmoderation(as opposed to polarization) andopposition(as opposed to domination) – all as is to be expected when the outside-world forces shaping pre-deliberation attitudes are slightly more centrifugal than centripetal. The authors lay out a theoretical basis for these expectations and interpretations and probe the study's results, highlighting, among other things, deliberation's role in undoing outside-world effects on pre-deliberation attitudes and the observed homogenization's, polarization's, and domination's dependence on deliberative design.

A Deliberative Rural Community Consultation to Assess Support for Flood Risk Management Policies to Strengthen Resilience in Malawi

As disasters increase in frequency and magnitude with adverse effects on population health, governments will be forced to implement disaster risk management policies that may include forced relocation. Ineffective public consultation has been cited as one reason for failure of these policies. Using the deliberative polling method, this study assessed the capacity of rural communities to participate in flood risk management policy priority setting and the impact of providing accurate and balanced information on policies by comparing pre-and post -deliberation data. The study also assessed the level of trust on whether government and community would use the results of this study. Results indicated strong community support for policy options to reduce vulnerability in communities and strong resistance to relocation. As all the top five ranked policy options were concerned with population pressure, gender, and social service issues, which are all conceptually considered social determinants of a healthy community, this study concludes that public health considerations are central to flood risk policy development and implementation. The study revealed high levels of trust in government and the community relating to flood risk management, which policymakers in low-to-middle income countries can capitalise on for meaningful community consultation for effective disaster risk management.

EU Trade Sustainability Impact Assessments: Revisiting the Consultation Process

ABSTRACT Trade sustainability impact assessments (SIAs) are the main tool used by the European Commission to assess the potential effects of trade policy initiatives and to engage with stakeholders. SIAs have two elements: a model-based quantitative analysis and a consultation process (CP). Both include a focus on a broad range of non-trade issues, many of which are included in sustainable development chapters of EU trade agreements. This paper argues for making CPs a more useful input into the design of trade cooperation. Scaled responses to a survey with closed end questions on a broad range of non-trade policy objectives combined with deliberative polling of a representative sample of survey respondents could help identify what stakeholders in the EU and partner countries perceive to be priority non-trade objectives, as well as issue-specific baselines, performance targets, and appropriate instruments to apply. Building bridges between a revamped ex ante CP and mechanisms that encompass public and private actors to support implementation, resolve problems, and assess progress over time could further help achieve trade and sustainable development goals.

Deliberative Public Consultation via Deliberative Polling: Criteria and Methods.

This article poses the problem of public consultation on contested policies involving new technologies and competing values or value-laden goals. It argues that Deliberative Polling, an approach developed by the author, can be usefully employed to engage representative samples to deliberate in depth in controlled experiments so as to yield a picture of the public's considered judgments. It also argues from recent experience that such consultations can be cost effectively conducted online with stratified random samples. It draws on examples from various issue domains including climate and energy as well as prototype deliberations conducted on gene editing in the wild. It sets out criteria that Deliberative Polling, as well as other designs, should satisfy if policy recommendations based on the data generated by these public consultations are to be credible.

Using a Deliberative Poll on breast cancer screening to assess and improve the decision quality of laypeople.

Balancing the benefits and harms of mammography screening is difficult and involves a value judgement. Screening is both a medical and a social intervention, therefore public opinion could be considered when deciding if mammography screening programmes should be implemented and continued. Opinion polls have revealed high levels of public enthusiasm for cancer screening, however, the public tends to overestimate the benefits and underestimate the harms. In the search for better public decision on mammography screening, this study investigated the quality of public opinion arising from a Deliberative Poll. In a Deliberative Poll a representative group of people is brought together to deliberate with each other and with experts based on specific information. Before, during and after the process, the participants' opinions are assessed. In our Deliberative Poll a representative sample of the Danish population aged between 18 and 70 participated. They studied an online video and took part in five hours of intense online deliberation. We used survey data at four timepoints during the study, from recruitment to one month after the poll, to estimate the quality of decisions by the following outcomes: 1) Knowledge; 2) Ability to form opinions; 3) Opinion stability, and 4) Opinion consistency. The proportion of participants with a high level of knowledge increased from 1% at recruitment to 56% after receiving video information. More people formed an opinion regarding the effectiveness of the screening programme (12%), the economy of the programme (27%), and the ethical dilemmas of screening (10%) due to the process of information and deliberation. For 11 out of 14 opinion items, the within-item correlations between the first two inquiry time points were smaller than the correlations between later timepoints. This indicates increased opinion stability. The correlations between three pairs of opinion items deemed theoretically related a priori all increased, indicating increased opinion consistency. Overall, the combined process of online information and deliberation increased opinion quality about mammography screening by increasing knowledge and the ability to form stable and consistent opinions.