scholarly journals Deliberative Processes in Practice

2016 ◽  
pp. 59-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cobi Smith ◽  
Gene Rowe
Keyword(s):  
Deliberative Processes

Paradoxes of democracy: Rousseau and Hegel on democratic deliberation

2021 ◽  
pp. 019145372199070
Author(s):  
Lorenzo Rustighi
Keyword(s):  
Social Contract ◽  
Relevant Literature ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Democratic Participation ◽  
Democratic Deliberation ◽  
Pluralistic Society ◽  
Critical Response ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Deliberative Processes

In this article, I engage with what relevant literature addresses as the ‘paradox of democracy’ and trace it back to the dialectic between authorization and representation established by social contract theories. To make my argument, I take Rousseau’s Social Contract as a paradigmatic example of the paradox and analyse it in light of Hegel’s critical response. My aim is to show that, although Rousseau rejects the idea of representing the popular will, representation resurfaces in his Republic from top to bottom and engenders a structural opposition between citizens and rulers: drawing on the Hegelian scrutiny of contractarianism, I focus on three key moments in Rousseau’s theory, namely the Lawgiver, the majority rule and the executive power. After illustrating how the social contract undermines democratic participation in deliberative processes, I suggest that Hegel’s philosophy of right overcomes the paradox by positively assuming it as a dialectical contradiction that requires a specific constitutional approach to democracy. In this sense, I argue, the Hegelian perspective on democratic deliberation helps us to better frame Rousseau’s ambition to conceive the Republic as a free community of equals and urges us to elaborate a more coherent understanding of participation in a pluralistic society.

scholarly journals Integrating Sustainable Development and Children’s Rights: A Case Study on Wales

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 100
Author(s):  
Rhian Croke ◽  
Helen Dale ◽  
Ally Dunhill ◽  
Arwyn Roberts ◽  
Malvika Unnithan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Children's Rights ◽  
Children’S Rights ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Rights Of The Child ◽  
Development Goals ◽  
Deliberative Processes

The global disconnect between the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), has been described as ‘a missed opportunity’. Since devolution, the Welsh Government has actively pursued a ‘sustainable development’ and a ‘children’s rights’ agenda. However, until recently, these separate agendas also did not contribute to each other, although they culminated in two radical and innovative pieces of legislation; the Rights of Children and Young Persons (Wales) Measure (2013) and the Well-being and Future Generations (Wales) Act (2015). This article offers a case study that draws upon the SDGs and the CRC and considers how recent guidance to Welsh public bodies for implementation attempts to contribute to a more integrated approach. It suggests that successful integration requires recognition of the importance of including children in deliberative processes, using both formal mechanisms, such as local authority youth forums, pupil councils and a national youth parliament, and informal mechanisms, such as child-led research, that enable children to initiate and influence sustainable change.

scholarly journals Deliberative processes for comprehensive evaluation of agroecological models. A review

2014 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 589-605 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gianni Bellocchi ◽  
Mike Rivington ◽  
Keith Matthews ◽  
Marco Acutis
Keyword(s):  
Comprehensive Evaluation ◽  
Deliberative Processes

The Burgeoning but Still Experimental Practice of Deliberative Governance in South Korean Local Policy Making: The Cases of Seoul and Gwangju

2016 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 907-934 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tae In Park ◽  
Pan Suk Kim ◽  
David H. Rosenbloom
Keyword(s):  
Consensus Building ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Local Policy ◽  
South Korean ◽  
Policy Choices ◽  
Citizen Empowerment ◽  
Limited Degree ◽  
Deliberative Processes ◽  
Deliberative Governance ◽  
Experimental Stage

Research on deliberative governance does not include many case studies on South Korea. We analyze deliberative governance in the Seoul and Gwangju Metropolitan Governments, drawing comparisons and lessons for operating effective deliberative governance to promote consensus building, citizen empowerment, and legitimation of policy choices through collective decision making. The two cases incorporate the characteristics of deliberative governance to a limited degree and in an experimental stage. Based on a comparison of the two cases, we discuss the application and limitations of deliberative processes along with suggestions for potentially improving the practice of deliberative governance in the South Korean context.

scholarly journals Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for Health Benefit Package Design – Part II: A Practical Guide

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wija Oortwijn ◽  
Maarten Jansen ◽  
Rob Baltussen
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Exchange ◽  
Stakeholder Involvement ◽  
Health Benefit ◽  
Companion Paper ◽  
Benefit Package ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
Package Design ◽  
Academic Knowledge ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Deliberative Processes

Background. Countries around the world are using health technology assessment (HTA) for health benefit package design. Evidence-informed deliberative processes (EDPs) are a practical and stepwise approach to enhance legitimate health benefit package design based on deliberation between stakeholders to identify, reflect and learn about the meaning and importance of values, informed by evidence on these values. This paper reports on the development of practical guidance on EDPs, while the conceptual framework of EDPs is described in a companion paper. Methods. The first guide on EDPs (2019) is further developed based on academic knowledge exchange, surveying 27 HTA bodies and 66 experts around the globe, and the implementation of EDPs in several countries. We present the revised steps of EDPs and how selected HTA bodies (in Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Scotland, Thailand and the United Kingdom) organize key issues of legitimacy in their processes. This is based on a review of literature via PubMed and HTA bodies’ websites. Results. HTA bodies around the globe vary considerable in how they address legitimacy (stakeholder involvement ideally through participation with deliberation; evidence-informed evaluation; transparency; and appeal) in their processes. While there is increased attention for improving legitimacy in decision-making processes, we found that the selected HTA bodies are still lacking or just starting to develop activities in this area. We provide recommendations on how HTA bodies can improve on this. Conclusion. The design and implementation of EDPs is in its infancy. We call for a systematic analysis of experiences of a variety of countries, from which general principles on EDPs might subsequently be inferred.

scholarly journals On Neurorights

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcello Ienca
Keyword(s):  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Academic Literature ◽  
Mainstream Media ◽  
Legal Studies ◽  
Legal Implications ◽  
Legal Challenges ◽  
History Of ◽  
Policy Work ◽  
Deliberative Processes ◽  
The Mind

In recent years, philosophical-legal studies on neuroscience (mainly in the fields of neuroethics and neurolaw) have given increasing prominence to a normative analysis of the ethical-legal challenges in the mind and brain sciences in terms of rights, freedoms, entitlements and associated obligations. This way of analyzing the ethical and legal implications of neuroscience has come to be known as “neurorights.” Neurorights can be defined as the ethical, legal, social, or natural principles of freedom or entitlement related to a person’s cerebral and mental domain; that is, the fundamental normative rules for the protection and preservation of the human brain and mind. Although reflections on neurorights have received ample coverage in the mainstream media and have rapidly become a mainstream topic in the public neuroethics discourse, the frequency of such reflections in the academic literature is still relatively scarce. While the prominence of the neurorights debate in public opinion is crucial to ensure public engagement and democratic participation in deliberative processes on this issue, its relatively sporadic presence in the academic literature poses a risk of semantic-normative ambiguity and conceptual confusion. This risk is exacerbated by the presence of multiple and not always reconcilable terminologies. Several meta-ethical, normative ethical, and legal-philosophical questions need to be solved in order to ensure that neurorights can be used as effective instruments of global neurotechnology governance and be adequately imported into international human rights law. To overcome the shortcomings above, this paper attempts to provide a comprehensive normative-ethical, historical and conceptual analysis of neurorights. In particular, it attempts to (i) reconstruct a history of neurorights and locate these rights in the broader history of idea, (ii) outline a systematic conceptual taxonomy of neurorights, (iii) summarize ongoing policy initiatives related to neurorights, (iv) proactively address some unresolved ethico-legal challenges, and (v) identify priority areas for further academic reflection and policy work in this domain.

scholarly journals From conflict to collaboration: the contribution of co-management in mitigating conflicts in Mole National Park, Ghana

Oryx ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 483-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ophelia Soliku ◽  
Ulrich Schraml
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Management ◽  
Protected Areas ◽  
National Park ◽  
Economic Incentives ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
Group Discussions ◽  
Conflict Escalation ◽  
Collaborative Community ◽  
Deliberative Processes ◽  
Collaborative Efforts

AbstractFew studies exist about the extent to which co-management in protected areas contributes to conflict prevention or mitigation and at what level of the conflicts such collaborative efforts are possible. Following varying degrees of conflict, Mole National Park, Ghana, embarked on a collaborative community-based wildlife management programme in 2000. Using Glasl's conflict escalation model, we analysed the contribution of co-management to mitigating and preventing conflicts from escalating. We conducted a total of 22 interviews with local traditional leaders, Park officials and local government officials, and 26 focus group discussions with farmers, hunters, women and representatives of co-management boards, selected from 10 of the 33 communities surrounding the Park. Our findings indicate that co-management can help mitigate or prevent conflicts from escalating when conflicting parties engage with each other in a transparent manner using deliberative processes such as negotiation, mediation and the use of economic incentives. It is, however, difficult to resolve conflicts through co-management when dialogue between conflicting parties breaks down, as parties take entrenched positions and are unwilling to compromise on their core values and interests. We conclude that although co-management contributes to successful conflict management, factors such as understanding the context of the conflicts, including the underlying sources and manifestations of the conflict, incorporating local knowledge, and ensuring open dialogue, trust and transparency between conflicting parties are key to attaining sustainable conflict management in protected areas.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document