Principles Of Deliberative Democracy Research Articles

Advocacy non-governmental organizations (NGOs) resiliency to shrinking civic space in Tanzania

PurposeThe world is experiencing democratic backsliding such that the situation is down back to 1986. This has resulted in the global shrinking of civic space for civil society organizations (CSOs). NGOs engaging in advocacy activities are seen to be among the CSOs affected. Using four NGOs cases from Tanzania, the study contributes to the civic space debate by uncovering how advocacy NGOs become resilient.Design/methodology/approachThe study is anchored in interpretivism and a cross-sectional case study design, following a qualitative approach path. Data were collected through interviews and a documentary review.FindingsResults show that several strategies such as complying, building community back-up, collaboration, strategic litigation, using digital media and changing the scope are applied. However, strategies face obstacles including scope limitations, expected democratic roles, high cost, changes in the scope and being outsmarted by the government, and hence their effectiveness is questionable.Research limitations/implicationsThis study focused on advocacy NGOs. More studies can be conducted for other advocacy-related CSOs on how they become resilient.Practical implicationsWhile NGOs are allowed to exist in the country, their freedom continue to be curtailed. Even the effectiveness of resiliency becomes temporary and depends on the political will of the existing regime.Originality/valueTanzania NGOs have to build strong bonds with citizens, expand the scope of strategies and use deliberative democratic principles to educate the government to change laws and tolerate plural political culture. Also, NGOs in other countries with confined civic space can apply the same.

Reversing Control Over Digital Public Sphere Through the Hashtag #BlokirKominfo

The hashtag #BlokirKominfo promotes discussions within the public sphere, particularly on Twitter, as a digital activism movement advocating for the blocking of various digital platforms, websites, and online platforms due to their failure to register with PSE. This study examines interactions among individuals from three accounts, specifically @secgron, @teamsecret, and @renjiro_Junichi, thereby shaping a digital public sphere. These individuals contribute a wide range of viewpoints and arguments to the public arena, fostering discussions and debates that align with the principles of deliberative democracy. Through virtual ethnographic methods, this research reveals that interactions take the form of public opinions, critiques, protests, and calls for an end to arbitrary actions. These interactions encourage resistance from digital activists, internet users, and even legal advocates, all seeking the revocation of the Ministry of Communication and Information Policy Number 5 of 2020. This policy is criticized for negatively impacting the economic livelihood of freelance workers, infringing upon the freedom of expression for content creators, and the E-sports community. Ironically, Kominfo has yet to block online gambling sites that are causing public disturbances. The interactions among individuals reflect communicative actions, as netizens simultaneously employ Twitter to exchange information, share their opinions, convey ideas about internet restrictions, and coordinate protests and campaigns. Social media, as a platform for digital activism, encourages more people to participate in the #BlokirKominfo hashtag movement.

DELIBERATIVE DEMOCRACY IN THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN CONSTRUCTION OF SEMAMBU ISLAND VILLAGE, INDRALAYA UTARA DISTRICT, OGAN ILIR REGENCY

The background of the research is to analyze the application of deliberative democracy in the implementation of the Village Development Planning deliberations in Pulau Semambu Village, North Indralaya District, Ogan Ilir Regency. The research method used is a qualitative research method with a descriptive approach. Data collection techniques were carried out through interviews, observations, and literature studies. The data were analyzed using an interactive model technique. The data analysis carried out was strengthened by using the NVivo 12 Plus supporting software. The selection of informants was done through the purposive sampling technique and the use of the source triangulation method to measure the validity of the data. The results of the study show that deliberative democracy has not been implemented optimally due to the lack of public understanding regarding development and the Musrenbangdes, so it has an impact on the low participation of the people involved. In addition, budget constraints and the lack of open dialogue are also other problems that become an evaluation of the implementation of the Musrenbangdes that have been implemented. so that the study of village problems and needs is not carried out in depth. Overall causes the principles of deliberative democracy have not been achieved optimally prioritizing community participation. To realize a deliberative village policy formulation process, the village government can take various approaches such as involving academics to assist the Musrenbangdes process. The government also needs to provide space for the widest possible community to be actively involved in the Musrenbangdes process through the availability of an open dialogue forum.

Research about inclusive education: Are the scope, reach and limits empirical and methodological and/or conceptual and evaluative?

This paper argues for a broader conception about research into inclusive education, one that extends beyond a focus on empirical factors associated with inclusive education and the effects of inclusive education. It starts with a recent summary of international research into the effects of inclusive education on students with SEN/disabilities and those without. On the basis of this review, it examines a model showing the complexity of factors involved in asking questions about the effects of inclusive education. This complexity reflects the ambiguity and complexity of inclusive education, which is discussed in terms of varied contemporary positions about inclusive education. The analysis illustrates how there has been more focus on thin concepts of inclusion (as setting placement or in general terms) rather than its normative and value basis, which reflects a thick concept of inclusion. The paper concludes by illustrating with the use of a version of the capability approach how there are value tensions implicit in inclusion about difference and about personal vs. public choice. This requires value clarification and some settlement about the balance of values, which is where deliberative democratic principles and processes have a crucial role. The proposed answer to the paper’s question about the scope, reach and limits of research in inclusive education is that such research involves both empirical, methodological, and evaluative matters. Educational research about inclusive education is not just empirical, it also involves value and norm clarification, a process which has been too often ignored.

Rapprochement and Reform: Overcoming Factionalism in Policy Making for Serious Mental Illness.

This article traces the history of factionalism in policy making and advocacy for persons with serious mental illness from deinstitutionalization to the present. The authors draw on deliberative democratic theory to illustrate how factionalist advocacy causes advocates and policy makers to fail in their duties to represent and develop policy in support of people with serious mental illness. The authors discuss how this factionalism has bred distrust and undermined efforts to address the needs of people with serious mental illness. They propose the formation of a Public Mental Health Policy Commission, guided by principles of deliberative democracy, to overcome factionalism and to improve policy making to meet the needs of people with serious mental illness. The commission must include a diverse array of stakeholders, especially individuals with lived experience of serious mental illness.

Can Deliberative Democracy Favor a Flourishing Relationship Between Humans and Carnivores?

There is considerable interest in improving participatory governance in decision-making processes for the conservation of biodiversity and management of conflicts between humans and wildlife. Among the various modes of participatory governance, deliberative democracy has received virtually no attention for decisions focused on conserving biodiversity. This is surprising given that deliberative democracy is an important branch of democratic theory and is associated with decision-making processes that have been successfully applied to a wide range of complicated decisions across diverse cultural settings. Moreover, deliberative democracy has several distinctive properties that would seem to make it well-suited for many conservation decisions. First, deliberative democracy is better-designed than other processes to handle cases where the object of conservation appears to be insufficiently valued by those who have the most detrimental impacts on its conservation. Second, deliberative democracy engenders a rich kind of representation and impartiality that is nearly impossible to achieve with participatory governance focused on managing conflicts among hyper-engaged stakeholders. Here, we review the principles of deliberative democracy, outline procedures for its application to carnivore conservation, and consider its likelihood to favor carnivore conservation.

The democracy in a network society: Problems and prospects of development

This article examines the role of the new media and social networks as a factor in the development of deliberative democracy. In the late 1990s, it was thought that the communication revolution would be a way to overcome the crisis of representative democracy. With the development of the Internet, the transition from a hierarchical model of communications to a network was supposed to bring changes to the sphere of politics. New media and social networks should guarantee ac- cess of civil society to the political public sphere and help narrow the gap between the elite and the people. Requirements are being formulated to increase the transparency and accountability of state institutions, and to strengthen policy control. It was believed that the Internet will become a place where the principles of deliberative democracy will be embodied. But now we should admit that the new media development causes disappointment, and a times anxiety. Instead of the growth of public discussions, we may encounter “echo chambers”, a victim of the essence of information for effect, which as a result, leads to the radicalization of citizens. Governments and IT-corporations exploit the increased capabilities of social networks and Big Data to control and manipulate information, which jeopardizes the possibility of free discussion. The impact on emotions and simple slogans turned out to be more acceptable in the Internet age than a reflec- tive discussion on social issues. The communication revolution has led to changes in the public sphere, but at the same time, it can lead to the erosion of democracy.

Individual and Social Preferences in Participatory Multi-Criteria Evaluation

Decisions on environmental issues are complex and multidimensional as they represent multiple interests and values. Nevertheless, the ability of participatory multi-criteria methodologies to deal with this kind of problem is widely acknowledged. Traditionally, multi-criteria methods have focused more on technical issues than on the representation of participants’ preferences. In participatory processes there are questions such as who establishes the mechanisms of participation, in what terms these processes are developed and who is going to participate, which are determining factors that have not been sufficiently studied in multi-criteria analysis. This paper, in order to shed light on this gap, aims to compare the creation of social preferences under two different participatory approaches. For this purpose, two different participatory approaches are compared. On the one hand, applying the social multi-criteria evaluation (SMCE) method, a deliberative process is developed following the principles of deliberative democracy. On the other hand, an aggregation process of individual preferences has been developed based on information collected through surveys. Both approaches have advantages as well as constraints. Our main finding is that the information obtained through the different participatory methods is different and complementary. Therefore, we can state that both participatory methods can be enriching assessment processes.

From the Warnock Report (1978) to an Education Framework Commission: A Novel Contemporary Approach to Educational Policy Making for Pupils With Special Educational Needs/Disabilities

This paper argues that the significance of the Warnock Report after 40 years goes beyond the impact of its deliberations and recommendations on UK policy and practice and its wider international influence. The Report’s significance also highlights the nature of provision for pupils with SEN and disabilities and the changing context of policy making in contemporary liberal democratic society. This paper shows the strong inter-connection between SEN and inclusion with other aspects of educational provision as the basis for proposing that future policy directions depend on general policy processes. It then argues that policy for pupils with SEN illustrates the democratic deficits in educational and policy-making processes in general. It uses this analysis to conclude that without grappling with these bigger policy issues we cannot expect some crucial questions in the field to be addressed more coherently and convincingly either conceptually or practically. Drawing on a post-democracy political analysis (Crouch, 2000). and contemporary ideas about deliberative democracy (Fishkin, 2018), with a recognition of the plural values that underlie policy tensions (Dahl, 1982). it proposes an Education Framework Commission (EFC). The Commission would set policy priorities as a settlement that has the potential to reconcile plural and sometimes contrary value positions. It would aim to design a ten-year consensual educational policy framework, within which political parties and governments will work; a framework that could be renewed after this period. An EFC would cover all key aspects of education including designs for including the diversity of learners. Finding common ground between different social and political value perspectives involves deliberative democratic principles and approaches that could influence representative democratic policy making. Though this proposal arises in an English context it has international relevance to the project of renewing ideas and values about the nature of schooling in a way that takes genuine account of SEN and disabilities.

Principles for Integrating the Implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals in Cities

The implementation of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals in the urban centres of the world is one of the most consequential and ambitious projects that the nations of the world have undertaken. Guidance for achieving the goals in an integrated way that creates true sustainability is currently lacking because of the wicked nature of the problem. However, its wickedness highlights the critical importance of governance and decision-making processes for such integration, including the relationship between governments and their citizens. In particular, there is strong evidence to suggest that managing wicked problems like the SDGs is best done through forms of democracy that are deliberative, representative and influential. Called “deliberative democracy”, we draw on an existing body of research and case studies of deliberative democracy in action to apply its principles to a step-by-step process for the implementation and integration of the Goals in Cities. The paper concludes with the beginnings of a framework based on deliberative democratic principles, and an outline of methods for the scaling and expansion of the implementation process to cope with the global nature of the problem.

Mainstreaming deliberative principles in Environmental Impact Assessment: current practice and future prospects in the Great Barrier Reef, Australia

The Great Barrier Reef (GBR) is a highly complex social-ecological system that is under pressure from a variety of human activities, including coastal development for industrial purposes. A 2012 World Heritage Committee review found that the speed and scale of large industrial developments along the GBR coast exceeded the capacity of governments to manage their impacts. Ameliorating the impacts of large developments in the GBR is likely to require changes to the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) processes that form the centrepiece of Australian environmental legislation. As part of this, environmental managers must find ways to ensure that EIA decisions reflect both best-available science and community concerns. It has been suggested that innovative forms of structured decision making, such as public deliberation, could democratise impact assessment decisions, and could be accommodated within existing EIA processes, but the literature on this question is predominantly theoretical. In this paper, we explore the extent to which participatory and deliberative approaches have been integrated into existing EIA processes, using data from a survey of local residents in an area of the Great Barrier Reef coast undergoing rapid industrial development. We find that current processes provide few formalised opportunities for deliberative engagement, but that the principles of deliberative democracy could provide a foundation for more robust decision making, provided that such processes are part of an adaptive strategy of review over the life of a project, combined with genuine openness on the part of proponents and regulators to accept and respond to community knowledge. We elaborate on this through discussing a series of principles to support the integration of deliberative practices into EIA decision making.

Disengaging citizens? Climate change communication and public receptivity

ABSTRACTThe mainstreaming of climate change through processes of media communication and political advocacy carries with it an imagined public. Drawing on qualitative data from 11 focus groups and 19 life history interviews carried out in the Republic of Ireland1 in 2010, the paper reveals a significant mismatch between the perceived characteristics of this imagined audience, and the practices and experiences of a socially embedded Irish public. Moreover, we observe the emergence of restrictive forms of discourse around climate change that leave little room for connecting with the topic, thereby serving to delegitimise it as a matter of public interest. Given the necessity for climate action and decarbonisation efforts that reach across diverse social and cultural arenas, we see potential for a broadening of public debate in line with key principles of deliberative democracy, with a view to achieving a more open and inclusive politics of climate change. Although we recognise the limitations of mainstream deliberative democracy thinking, including its inherent rationalism, we believe that its explicit commitment to inclusiveness and transparency offers a viable alternative to current disengagement and exclusion of citizens from meaningful climate change debate and action.

Influencing health policy through public deliberation: Lessons learned from two decades of Citizens'/community juries

Citizens’/community juries [CJs] engage members of the public in policy decision-making processes. CJs can be employed to develop policy responses to health problems that require the consideration of both community values and scientific evidence. Based on the principles of deliberative democracy, recent reviews indicate that findings from CJs have successfully been used to influence health policy decision-making. Despite this evidence of success, there appears to be a gap between the goals of health researchers who organize CJs and the needs of policy actors and decision makers. Drawing on our experiences working with CJs and recent research on CJ methods, we describe a synopsis of the current state of the art organized around four key questions, and informed by insights from deliberative theory and critical policy studies. Our intention is to stimulate further discussion as to the types of health policy questions that can be usefully addressed through public deliberation, and provide guidance on the methodological and political dimensions that need to be considered in deciding whether a CJ is an appropriate approach for informing a policy decision-making process.

Advancing environmental sustainability via deliberative democracy

Purpose This paper aims to examine the planning and policy processes in relation to the pollution in Lake Taupo. This paper describes and explains the manifestation of the tenets of deliberative democracy and the impediments of mobilising the tenets in the planning and policy-making processes. Design/methodology/approach This interpretive case study makes sense of interview transcripts, minutes of meetings, media reports and public documents and adopts deliberative democratic theory as the theoretical framework for the interpretive analysis. Findings Some factors fostered and others challenged the mobilization of the tenets of deliberative democracy. Local government processes facilitated the expression of multiple views in relation to the impacts of human activities on the Lake. Confrontations and tensions were inevitable elements of the deliberative processes. Pre-determined outcomes and domination of local authorities, aiming for environmental sustainability of Lake Taupo, posed as challenges to the operation of deliberative democracy. Some stakeholders need to sacrifice more than others, but recognition of pluralism, conflicts and differences is an essential part of deliberative democracy. Originality/value There is scarcity of research that empirically examines local government processes in light of deliberative democratic principles. The study also extends environmental and social studies that have explored the arena approach to accountability and decision-making.

Legitimate Security? Understanding the Contingencies of Security and Deliberation

Comprehensive security politics and policy build on the development of the societal security field in Europe and especially in the Nordic countries. Societal security has clear consequences for society and its functioning, social institutions, civil society and democracy. The purpose of the article is to critically analyse the consequences of security policy, societal security processes and governing practices, in order to understand the limitations of democratic security policymaking, citizen participation and deliberation. By legitimate security, we mean societal security that is based on principles of deliberative democracy and citizen participation. The point of departure in this analysis of the limitations of democratic security policymaking and deliberation is the contingent nature of both security and deliberation. Contingency refers to possibility, unexpectability, unpredictability and risk. This article argues that the objective of contemporary policy of comprehensive security and its implementation is to tame contingencies rather that to support genuine political deliberation. We argue that the source of legitimacy is not the government-driven democratization of community safety and resilience, and predetermined will of citizens, but rather the process of its formation—that is, genuine political deliberation itself. 1

Updating the definition and role of public health nursing to advance and guide the specialty.

National changes in the context for public health services are influencing the nature of public health nursing practice. Despite this, the document that defines public health nursing as a specialty--The Definition and Role of Public Health Nursing--has remained in wide use since its publication in 1996 without a review or update. With support from the American Public Health Association (APHA) Public Health Nursing Section, a national Task Force, was formed in November 2012 to update the definition of public health nursing, using processes that reflected deliberative democratic principles. A yearlong process was employed that included a modified Delphi technique and various modes of engagement such as online discussion boards, questionnaires, and public comment to review. The resulting 2013 document consisted of a reaffirmation of the one-sentence 1996 definition, while updating supporting documentation to align with the current social, economic, political, and health care context. The 2013 document was strongly endorsed by vote of the APHA Public Health Nursing Section elected leadership. The 2013 definition and document affirm the relevance of a population-focused definition of public health nursing to complex systems addressed in current practice and articulate critical roles of public health nurses (PHN) in these settings.

Deliberative Democracy Nationwide?—Evaluating Deliberativeness of Healthcare Reform in China

To date, China’s deliberative institutions have mainly been seen as small-scale mechanisms for controlling local social unrest. This paper explores how deliberative principles in China work at the national level. The case under scrutiny is China’s new healthcare reform. Drawing on the existing empirical studies, Chinese-language reports and articles, official document analysis, and on several unstructured interviews with Chinese academics, the article attempts to evaluate the extent to which deliberative democratic principles are present in the process of healthcare policy making. To achieve this analytical goal, it develops and applies five criteria of good deliberation. The analysis suggests that the public policy process in China is now more inclusive and pluralistic than it was in the past. This arguably indicates that China’s political system is moving in a new direction.

Reconsidering the Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform Phenomena: Castoriadis and Radical Citizen Democracy

The British Columbia and Ontario Citizens' Assemblies on Electoral Reform have justifiably generated much discussion on the part of political theorists, who see in these phenomena the actualization of certain deliberative democratic principles that have traditionally not been able to be affirmed within increasingly corporatized political orders. These phenomena, it is argued, give a form to a relatively new model of representation which emphasizes not the reproduction of an already existent popular will, but rather the critical construction of a potential political will under institutional conditions allowing for adequate knowledge acquisition. It will be argued, however, that such readings are in the final instance limited from a democratic standpoint to the degree that politics is still primarily considered in terms of political competency and rationality. Rather than interpret Citizens' Assemblies (CAs) as manifestations of a new mode of representation, the article will attempt to read them through the radical democratic prism articulated by Cornelius Castoriadis, emphasizing the CAs' possible deployment in a germinal project of autonomy which gives an expression to the non-determinate drives of social-historical individuals and communities. The possibility of the CAs contributing to a rejuvenation of the democratic experience is to be located in their shifting of the terms of democracy away from issues of representation and rationality, and toward those of creativity and imagination.

Potencial participativo e função deliberativa: um debate sobre a ampliação da democracia por meio dos conselhos de saúde

This article reflects upon the relation between democracy and health councils. It seeks to analyze the councils as a space for broadening the scope of democracy. First, some characteristics and principles of the liberal democratic regime are presented, with an emphasis on the minimalist and procedural approach of decision-making. The fragilities of the representative model and the establishment of new relations between the Government and society are then discussed in light of the new social grammar and the complexity of the division between governmental and societal responsibilities. The principles of deliberative democracy and the idea of substantive democracy are subsequently presented. Broadening the scope of democracy is understood not only as the guarantee of civil and political rights, but also especially, of social rights. Lastly, based on discussion of the participation and deliberation categories, the health councils are analyzed as potential mechanisms for broadening the scope of democracy.

Involving citizens in the ethics of biobank research: Informing institutional policy through structured public deliberation

This paper reports on the design, implementation, and results of a structured public deliberation on human tissue biobanking conducted in Vancouver, Canada, in 2009. This study builds on previous work on the use of deliberative democratic principles and methods to engage publics on the social and ethical implications of human tissue biobanking. In a significant refinement of methods, we focus on providing public input to institutional practice and governance of biobanks using a tailored workbook structure to guide participants' discussion. Our focus is on the local context and practices of a particular institution, the BC BioLibrary. However, elements of both the methodological innovations and the ethical guidance implied by our findings are generalisable for biobanking internationally. Recommendations from the deliberative forum include issues of informed consent, privacy protections, collection of biospecimens, governance of biobanks, and how to manage the process of introduction between biobanks and potential donors. Notable findings include public support for research use of anonymised un-consented tissue samples when these come from archived collections, but lack of support when they are collected prospectively.