Democratic Merits Research Articles

Exploring the Democratic Merits of Hybrid Democratic Innovation. Combining Deliberation and Voting in Participatory Budgeting New Style

ABSTRACT In this paper we theorize hybrid democratic innovations (HDIs) which combine concentrated deliberation with large-scale voting. We focus on a field of hybridization that has not been investigated extensively yet: the rise of Participatory Budgeting-new style, characterized by an increased emphasis on large-scale voting—using technologies that became widely available in the 2010s— combined with continued attention to deliberative participation. We investigate an exemplary case—Antwerp’s Citizens’ Budget—to assess this type of HDI in terms of democratic values, specifically input, throughput, and output values. We conclude with implications for further debate on HDIs and an agenda for future research.

“The Circumstances of Democracy”: Why Random Selection Is Not Better Than Elections if We Value Political Equality and Privacy

Elections are generally considered the only way to create a democratic legislature where direct democracy is not an option. However, in recent years that assumption has been challenged by individuals who claim that lotteries are a democratic way of selecting people for office, elections are aristocratic or oligarchic, not democratic, and that elections as we know them are inadequate if true democracy is prioritized. In opposition to this wave, my paper argues that the assertions made to support the democratic merits of lotteries are unpersuasive. Current evidence that sortition is either more egalitarian or produces epistemically better results than elections is poor. Instead, these assertions illuminate the importance of elections in enabling the constituents of a democracy to reconcile the personal and political dimensions of their lives and, therefore, better reflect citizens’ claims to privacy and equality. The paper begins by recapping the main arguments for treating sortition as a democratic way to select a legislature, outlines their deficiencies, and then turns to what these perceived failings actually suggest about the democratic value of elections.

The two faces of power-sharing

Lijphart’s claim that power-sharing spurs democratization in divided societies has strongly influenced ‘institutional engineering’ and is widely accepted among scholars despite the fact that empirical tests of its merits remain rare. This article revisits the democratic effect of power-sharing, arguing that it has two antagonist faces. On the positive side, it provides guarantees of inclusion to political elites, allowing them to commit to democratic rules. On the negative side, it also has an illiberal face, entailing limits on competition and individual rights. In this article, these contrary characteristics are traced back to two institutional types of power-sharing: a more flexible and open, liberal, type and a more rigid, corporate one. Using a novel dataset on power-sharing rules for 138 multi-ethnic countries and the period from 1945 to 2016, their respective democratic merits are tested. Conforming to theoretical expectations, the findings indicate that only liberal forms of power-sharing exhibit strong positive effects on democracy while corporate forms exert mixed or even negative ones. These findings are robust to a series of alternate model specifications and operationalizations as well as to instrumental variable approaches. In conclusion, the article indicates only a partial democratic effect of power-sharing, limited to its liberal subtype.

Responding to Socioeconomic Diversity in the European Union (and to Steven Klein’s Essay) with Democracy-Enhancing Conflicts Law

Responding to Socioeconomic Diversity in the European Union (and to Steven Klein’s Essay) with Democracy-Enhancing Conflicts Law

Creating participatory expert bodies. How the targeted selection of policy advisers can bridge the epistemic-democratic divide

ABSTRACTThis study explores the room for reconciliation between democratic and epistemic claims to modern policy-making. The key institutional design question it deals with is how to compose arenas of policy advice and consultation in such a way that they are able to generate both reliable, knowledge-based policy solutions and represent the perspectives of those affected – without becoming dysfunctional. After an inclusive re-conceptualisation of ‘participation’ and ‘expertise’, the study compares different group selection mechanisms in terms of their epistemic and democratic merits and makes the case for the ‘targeted selection’ of policy advisors in the phase of policy development. It delineates conditions of creating ‘participatory expert bodies’ that are primarily made up of societal stakeholders from intermediary organisations, who can assume the double role of expert and civil society representative and are supported by researchers, civil servants and lay citizens.

Non-material matters: A call for integrated assessment of benefits from ecosystems in research and policy

Systematic assessment of non-material benefits from healthy ecosystems is a critical complement to economic valuations in policy. Several frameworks of increasing nuance and complexity have been proposed to facilitate collection of data on non-material benefits from healthy ecosystems, as well as transmission of these data to policymakers. However, systematic incorporation of such data in policy arenas lags behind the theory. We argue that failure to incorporate data on non-material benefits, and thus failure to account for the full range of values at stake for impacted parties, leaves natural resource policy processes especially vulnerable to partisan influences. We examine a recently published account of conflicting economic benefit-cost analyses and their policy contexts to illustrate opportunities for robust analysis of non-material benefits to strengthen the policy process. Building on this analysis, we call for practical applications, complementing recent theoretical advances, to more comprehensively research the full range of benefits from ecosystems and incorporate such research into policy decisions. Doing so would enhance both the scientific and democratic merit of natural resource policy efforts.

Democratic Partisanship: From Theoretical Ideal to Empirical Standard

In recent years, a number of scholars have taken parties and partisanship as objects of normative theorizing. They posit partisanship as a fundamentally democratic practice and develop a model of what partisans can do at their best to contribute to liberal democracy. However, the standards the literature puts forth remain insufficiently specified to serve as empirical benchmarks. This article further conceptualizes this model of democratic partisanship and offers a theoretical framework within which to empirically evaluate the democratic merits of partisan discourses. It establishes a series of indicators for assessing the extent to which partisan discourse displays two main qualities: cohesiveness and respect for political pluralism. The article then discusses the implications of using this theoretical framework as a basis for empirical studies and shows how the model can thereby benefit both political scientists and theorists.

Is the city the appropriate scale for participatory democracy? Some answers from Brazil

This study compares participatory budgeting at the city and state level in Brazil. It shows that, that even though the practice of participatory budgeting more closely resembles the ideals of participatory democracy at the city level, this does not mean that participatory democracy is impossible at larger scales. To the contrary, the difference between participatory budgeting at the city and state level is more a question of gradations than vast leaps of democratic merit. Furthermore, some of the features that are considered unique to the city – neighborhood-based community associations that mobilize and discuss with citizens in local public spheres – are also important in participatory budgeting at the state level. The experiences of participatory budgeting at the city and state level in Brazil suggest that it is wrong to overemphasize the uniqueness of the city and also to undervalue the special role the city might play in larger participatory processes.

Private Regulatory Strategies: Theory and Evidence from the Global Apparel Industry

Despite considerable theory on the democratic and problem-solving merit of multi- stakeholder initiatives (MSIs), business-led initiatives (BLIs) have become prominent private regulatory organizati...

Looking into the Hearts of Native Peoples: Nation Building as an Institutional Orientation for Graduate Education

In this article, we suggest that graduate programs in predominantly white institutions can and should be sites of self-education and tribal nation building. In arguing this, we examine how a particular graduate program and the participants of that program engaged tribal nation building, and then we suggest that graduate education writ large must also adopt an institutional orientation of nation building. We connect Guinier’s notion of democratic merit to our discussion of nation building as a way to suggest a rethinking of “success” and “merit” in graduate education. We argue that higher education should be centrally concerned with capacity building and graduates who aim to serve their communities.

Evaluating the Democratic Merit of Young Adult Literature: Lessons from Two Versions of Wes Moore’s Memoir

The authors compare a memoir intended for adults with another on the same subject meant for a teen readership and argue that didactic YA literature grounded in a developmental stage model of adolescence is undemocratic.

Directing the Dialogue: The Relationship Between YouTube Videos and the Comments They Spur

ABSTRACT This study performs a content analysis of 207 YouTube videos and 45,759 comments about the Proposition 8 campaign in California. Specifically, we examine how a video's tone and focus are related to comment features. We find consistent support for the flow of information from topics mentioned in the video to topics addressed in commentary, as well as uptake of an uncivil tone from the video to the comments. Implications are discussed for promoting higher quality online information exchanges and the democratic merits of social media.

Democratic theory and citizen participation: democracy models in the evaluation of public participation in science and technology

We argue that some of the controversies over the democratic merits of (participatory) technology assessment can be traced to conflicting assumptions about what constitutes a legitimate democratic procedure. We compare how two influential normative models of democracy – ‘representative’ and ‘direct’ – value public engagement processes according to different criteria. Criteria drawn from this analysis are used to compare a series of case studies on xenotransplantation policy-making. We show that the democratic merits of participatory technology assessments probably owe as much to the institutional context as to the precise evaluative criteria or procedural designs. This calls for a closer interaction between science and technology studies research on public engagement and comparative politics scholarship.

Two networks, one city: Democracy and governance networks in urban transformation

Governance networks are increasingly important in urban planning, in policy implementation and in service provision, and are often organized to improve efficiency and innovation in the pursuit of some public purpose. We argue that their democratic merits, in addition to their efficiency and output aspects, must be taken into consideration if they are to be understood as legitimate problem solvers on behalf of a local democratic authority. Here we draw on entrepreneurial and deliberative perspectives on urban governance, and work out criteria for assessing network performance. The insights of both perspectives are needed, we argue, to study legitimacy in contemporary urban policies, and we ask whether it is possible to strike a balance between democratic procedural standards and producing the desired outcomes. Empirically we compare the performance of a network with a strong entrepreneurial orientation with that of a network with a deliberative orientation, both located in the same city and operating within the same time frame.

Minding the gap: Applying a service marketing model into government policy communications

Abstract In order to bolster the emerging but still underdeveloped conceptualization of public communication over potential policies, we apply a framework primarily used in business service marketing to improve service quality (“gap analysis”). We argue that this model has strong heuristic qualities that can alert practitioners who are interested in improving communication regarding potential policies. While we recognize problems implementing the model, we suggest some ways that both practitioners and the public ameliorate the identified issues. Seeing communication about potential policies as a crucial part of the political process, we argue that such efforts have democratic merit.

The future and diversity in higher education

PurposeThis paper describes and reflects upon the “Future of Diversity and Opportunity in Higher Education: A National Forum on Innovation and Collaboration”.Design/methodology/approachParticipant observation, journaling and content analysis comprise data sources for this work.FindingsFeatured sessions center upon the need for leaders in higher education to play key roles in advocating for diversity on postsecondary campuses and the move from individual to democratic merit in student admission and faculty hiring or promotion.Originality/valueAdjudication against institutions working toward diversity requires new ways of promoting opportunity for underrepresented members of the postsecondary community. The following work describes such strategies.

Fixed Election Cycles: A Genuine Alternative to Responsible and Responsive Government?

Canada's federal government and several provinces have recently moved to fixed election cycles on the assumption that the ability to pick the election date endogenously (1) gives the incumbent government an unfair advantage and (2) curbs the discretionary powers of the Governor General. Electoral opportunism is posited as a problem that fixed election cycles will remedy by virtue of ensuring greater turnover among governments. This article subjects these claims to empirical scrutiny. It examines why Canada did not follow the American example in the first place. It surveys some of the unintended consequences of fixing election cycles. And it ponders some of the complications that might arise when trying to reconcile a key constitutional principle of the Westminster parliamentary system, responsible government, with fixed election cycles. Evidence for the apparent democratic merits of a fixed election cycle is found to be less conclusive than its proponents acknowledge. The article concludes by speculating about the motivations behind Canada's new-found passion for electoral reform.

Collaborative Public Management and Democracy: Evidence from Western Watershed Partnerships

This article provides a framework for assessing the democratic merits of collaborative public management in terms of seven normative ideals: inclusiveness, representativeness, impartiality, transparency, deliberativeness, lawfulness, and empowerment. The framework is used to analyze a random sample of 76 watershed partnerships in California and Washington State. The study reveals the exclusionary nature of some partnerships and suggests that critical stakeholders are missing from many partnerships. However, representation was generally balanced. National and statewide advocacy groups were absent from most of these place‐based partnerships; public agencies were the primary source of nonlocal perspectives. Deliberativeness was relatively strong, indicated by the prevalence of educational and fact‐finding strategies and participants’ perceptions of respectful discussion and improved social capital. Half the partnerships had implemented new policies, and two‐thirds of stakeholders believed their partnership had improved watershed conditions, indicating empowerment.

E-Government to E-Democracy

Abstract Significant claims have been made that developments in e-government can lead to e-democracy. However, the ‘league tables’ that are regularly published rating different governments' performance and the laudatory tones in which governments identify their own actions as more democratic in the field of e-government need to be treated with some caution. Assessments of democratisation can be marred by the enthusiasm of technological determinists or governments themselves. This paper reviews aspects of this literature, empirical data gathering and e-democracy trials and advances a possible framework for assessing the democratic merits of technological innovations.

Is Devolution Democratic? Assessing Collaborative Environmental Management

This paper proposes a normative framework for evaluating the democratic merits of collaborative policymaking processes in which authority is ostensibly devolved from higher levels of government to lower levels or from the public sector to the private sector. The framework casts the democracy of devolution in terms of six criteria: inclusiveness, representativeness, procedural fairness, lawfulness, deliberativeness, and empowerment. The framework is then applied to a random sample of 76 watershed-based stakeholder partnerships in California and Washington State. Although the study reveals potential problems related to the exclusionary nature of some partnerships and the nearly complete absence of national environmental groups, the overall picture is relatively positive. Representation was generally balanced, with environmental and economic stakeholders comparable in terms of number, costs of participation, and level of formal education. Stakeholders typically gave partnerships high marks for procedural fairness, and reported improvements in human and social capital, suggesting quality deliberation. Half of the sampled partnerships had implemented new policies or projects, indicating empowerment. Finally, the study detected no evidence of a diminished role for government in watershed management; federal and state agencies are among the most prevalent and influential participants in stakeholder partnerships.