Democratic Meta-Deliberation: Towards Reflective Institutional Design

2014 ◽  
Vol 63 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 38-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Landwehr
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
Democratic Governance ◽  
Democratic Practices ◽  
Participatory Politics ◽  
Democratic System

Theories of deliberative democracy are popular for their promise that in a deliberative polity, democracy can realise both participatory politics and rational policies. However, they are also confronted with the allegation that by qualifying essentially non-democratic practices as deliberative, they inadvertently (or not) become accomplices in the trend towards post-democratic governance. A central example of such a development is the rise of non-majoritarian bodies to which governments delegate decision making, thereby de-politicising conflicts and turning democratic discourses into technocratic ones. This article adopts a systemic perspective on deliberative democracy, asking whether non-majoritarian forums can be legitimated in a democratic system and whether they can contribute to their deliberative quality. It is argued that the legitimation of delegated decision-making is not possible without a culture and practice of democratic meta-deliberation which enables reflective institutional design.

Depoliticization, Repoliticization, and Deliberative Systems

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Landwehr
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
Political Systems ◽  
System Perspective ◽  
Deliberative System ◽  
Decision Making Processes

Deliberative democracy is increasingly criticized as inherently elitist and technocratic, and it is blamed not only for the rise of depoliticized institutions, but also for the rise of anti-political and even populist attitudes in citizens. The chapter analyses the discussion about the depoliticizing implications and effects of deliberation and argues that, contrary to these critics, deliberation must be viewed as a genuinely political mode of interaction. A systemic perspective on deliberation allows us to critically assess the deliberative and democratic qualities of political systems and to see when and where they fail to deliver on their promises. Applied with critical intentions, the deliberative system perspective can be used to identify depoliticized policy areas and undemocratic decision-making processes. Moreover, it can feed into processes of meta-deliberation that allow for a democratization of institutional design.

Citizens' Juries and Deliberative Democracy

2000 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graham Smith ◽  
Corinne Wales
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
Democratic Deliberation ◽  
Democratic Practice ◽  
The Face ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Political Decision Making

In the face of widespread dissatisfaction with contemporary democratic practice, there has been a growing interest in theories of deliberative democracy. However theorists have often failed to sufficiently address the question of institutional design. This paper argues that recent experiments with citizens' juries should be of interest to deliberative democrats. The practice of citizens' juries is considered in light of three deliberative democratic criteria: inclusivity, deliberation and citizenship. It is argued that citizens' juries offer important insights into how democratic deliberation could be institutionalized in contemporary political decision-making processes.

The Field and Study of Deliberative Democracy in Australia

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolyn M. Hendriks
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Political Institutions ◽  
Collective Decision ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
Public Reasoning ◽  
Practical Project ◽  
Australian Context ◽  
Democratic System

Australia is recognized globally as an important hub for the study and practice of deliberative democracy. Both a normative and practical project, the field of deliberative democracy aims to improve the quality and inclusivity of public reasoning in collective decision-making. This chapter explores deliberative democracy in Australia from two angles. First, it discusses how a nation typically characterized by its adversarial and more majoritarian democratic system has become a significant international hotspot for scholars and practitioners of deliberative democracy. Second, the chapter examines how deliberative democracy has been applied as a lens to empirically study aspects of Australian politics. There is, the author argues, much more work for deliberative democrats to undertake in the Australian context, particularly in assessing and strengthening the deliberative capacity of the nation’s key political institutions.

scholarly journals Health Committees as Vehicles for Democratic Governance in Health Systems: Lessons from Selected Health Unit Management Committees in Uganda

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moses Mulumba ◽  
Kristien Roelens ◽  
Leslie London ◽  
Lorena Ruano
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health System ◽  
Community Participation ◽  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Democratic Governance ◽  
Health Unit ◽  
Case Study Methodology ◽  
Unit Management

Abstract Introduction: For over forty years, community participation has been a central component of a well-functioning health system. Despite its important role there are many difficulties in defining and understanding community participation as part of governance. Through a case study of selected health unit management committees in Uganda, this paper demonstrates that these committees can be structures for community participation and vehicles for democratic governance in health systems that advance health equity. Guided by the theoretical underpinnings of deliberative democracy the paper evaluates the performance of health unit management committees as a mechanism for citizen participation in health systems. Methods: This paper uses a qualitative, case-study methodology. Through an in-depth look at the health unit management committees of Kiboga and Kyankwanzi in Uganda, the study considered these as examples of structures for democratic community participation in health system. The study undertook literature review on the theories of deliberative democracy and human rights principles, and this provided the theoretical underpinnings of the study. Findings: Our findings underscore that community participation in health systems through health unit management committees ought to be grounded in the principles of deliberative democracy. The core of deliberative democracy is considered to be authentic deliberation and consensus decision-making, which can happen in both direct and representative democracies, giving rise to the notions of populist and elitist deliberative democracy, respectively. As such, a balance needs to be struck between the competitive notions of democracy and the public health requirements of inclusive and direct participation of communities in decision making processes on matters that affect their health. Conclusions: Community participation in the health sector in Uganda hinges on health unit management committees at the lower service provision points. These HUMCs are also perceived as vehicles to strengthen health governance through realizing the right to health of the communities. However, these have been established without attention to investing in capacity building needed to enable them to exercise community voice in the health system.

scholarly journals A Deliberative Model of Intra-Party Democracy

2019 ◽  
pp. 35-65
Author(s):  
Fabio Wolkenstein
Keyword(s):  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
Critical Function ◽  
Bottom Up ◽  
Democratic Practices ◽  
The Status ◽  
Democratic Parties

This chapter aims to answer the question of how exactly internally democratic parties should look, developing a ‘deliberative model of intra-party democracy’. The main justification of such a model is first, that deliberation can cater better to the demand for political self-expression many citizens share than merely aggregative democratic practices, and second, that deliberation can perform an important critical function within parties, allowing the status quo to be questioned and transformed. The challenge is to devise mechanisms and institutions that can enhance deliberation within parties, and the chapter looks here to the more practice-oriented literature on deliberative democracy and democratic innovations for inspiration. As an instantiation of bottom-up democracy, it is suggested, a deliberative model of intra-party democracy must empower the active members on the ground and offer numerous fora in which they can make their voices heard and bring them to bear on decisions. Chief amongst the institutional design paths suggested are problem-oriented fora, partisan deliberative networks, and larger deliberative conferences. These proposals are discussed in turn, and empirical illustrations of how they could be realised are provided.

scholarly journals Using Deliberative Democracy for Better Urban Decision-Making through Integrative Thinking

Urban Science ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 3
Author(s):  
Janette Hartz-Karp ◽  
Dora Marinova
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Capital City ◽  
City Region ◽  
Multiple Sources ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Urban Issues ◽  
Sustainability Challenges

This article expands the evidence about integrative thinking by analyzing two case studies that applied the collaborative decision-making method of deliberative democracy which encourages representative, deliberative and influential public participation. The four-year case studies took place in Western Australia, (1) in the capital city Perth and surrounds, and (2) in the city-region of Greater Geraldton. Both aimed at resolving complex and wicked urban sustainability challenges as they arose. The analysis suggests that a new way of thinking, namely integrative thinking, emerged during the deliberations to produce operative outcomes for decision-makers. Building on theory and research demonstrating that deliberative designs lead to improved reasoning about complex issues, the two case studies show that through discourse based on deliberative norms, participants developed different mindsets, remaining open-minded, intuitive and representative of ordinary people’s basic common sense. This spontaneous appearance of integrative thinking enabled sound decision-making about complex and wicked sustainability-related urban issues. In both case studies, the participants exhibited all characteristics of integrative thinking to produce outcomes for decision-makers: salience—grasping the problems’ multiple aspects; causality—identifying multiple sources of impacts; sequencing—keeping the whole in view while focusing on specific aspects; and resolution—discovering novel ways that avoided bad choice trade-offs.

CORRUPTION IN ADVERSARIAL SYSTEMS: THE CASE OF DEMOCRACY

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (02) ◽  
pp. 221-241
Author(s):  
Daniel M. Weinstock
Keyword(s):  
Institutional Design ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Institutional Framework ◽  
Central Feature ◽  
Central Task ◽  
Perverse Incentives ◽  
Democratic System ◽  
Democratic Systems ◽  
Positive Traits ◽  
In Virtue Of

Abstract:In this essay I argue that adversarial institutional systems, such as multi-party democracy, present a distinctive risk of institutional corruption, one that is particularly difficult to counteract. Institutional corruption often results not from individual malfeasance, but from perverse incentives that make it the case that agents within an institutional framework have rival institutional interests that risk pitting individual advantage against the functioning of the institution in question. Sometimes, these perverse incentives are only contingently related to the central animating logic of an institution. In these cases, immunizing institutions from the risk of corruption is not a theoretically difficult exercise. In other cases, institutions generate perverse or rival incentives in virtue of some central feature of the institution’s design, one that is also responsible for some of the institution’s more positive traits. In multi-party democratic systems, partisanship risks giving rise to too close an identification of the partisan’s interest with that of the party, to the detriment of the democratic system as a whole. But partisanship is also necessary to the functioning of such a system. Creating bulwarks that allow the positive aspects of partisanship to manifest themselves, while offsetting the aspects of partisanship through which individual advantage of democratic agents is linked too closely to party success, is a central task for the theory and practice of the institutional design of democracy.

Deliberative Democracy and Public Dispute Resolution

2018 ◽  
pp. 709-727 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence Susskind ◽  
Jessica Gordon ◽  
Yasmin Zaerpoor
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
The Public ◽  
New Strategy ◽  
Fact Finding

Deliberative democracy and public dispute resolution (PDR) have the same goal—to inform and determine the public interest—but they involve different skills and practices. This article considers the ways in which deliberative democratic approaches to policy-related decision-making can be supplemented with tools used in public dispute resolution—specifically, the use of an independent mediator, the well-developed technique of stakeholder assessment, and a new strategy called joint fact-finding, where stakeholders with different interests work together with outside experts to identify common assumptions, gather information together, and formulate and clarify opinions. All are designed to achieve fairer, wiser, more stable and more efficient outcomes.

scholarly journals The shift towards democratic governance: System change versus regime change analysis in The Gambia 2017-2019

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 339
Author(s):  
Sunkung Danso ◽  
Sulikah Asmorowati
Keyword(s):  
Regime Change ◽  
Case Study Research ◽  
System Change ◽  
Democratic Governance ◽  
The Gambia ◽  
Coalition Government ◽  
Governance System ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Change Analysis ◽  
Democratic System

Democratic governance has been seen as a catalyst for inclusive growth and meaningful development in many countries. Shifting from authoritarian rule to more democratic rule has also been seen as essential for many governments worldwide. Democratic governance is often a problem for developing countries, including most African countries and particularly The Gambia. This paper analyses the shift towards a more democratic governance style that is heated debated in The Gambia. The debate started when one of the coalition government members asserted that they could achieve regime change; however, a democratic system change remains lacking. This paper has sought to analyze whether the shift toward a more democratic leadership style in The Gambia is one of system change or regime change and ascertain what has democratically changed and bad governance in the new government. This article’s main objective is to create political awareness and enlighten the readers on the change’s misconceptions towards democratic governance. The discussion focuses on democratic governance and the collective action theory of governance to explain the democratic process in New Gambia. This study adopts qualitative case study research methods; the research employed a systematic review of the existing scholarly journal articles, books, newspapers, and television interview recordings. The observation used to identify, understand, and interpret the democratic governance situation in The Gambia from 2017 to 2019. The findings show that the coalition government has succeeded in achieving a democratic regime change; however, the democratic system change itself is too slow, or it is not happening. For the first time in The Gambia’s history, a seating president defeat through the ballot box. In conclusion, the democratic governance system change is far-fetched. It is vital to state that there is little or no difference between Jammeh’s regime and the current regime under President Barrow’s leadership. The same problems continue to persist. Finally, the transparency and accountability mechanisms must be enhanced to address the endemic problem of corruption.

scholarly journals Kampanye sebagai Komunikasi Politik: Esensi dan Strategi dalam Pemilu

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Siti Fatimah ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Political Campaign ◽  
Political Communications ◽  
Election Process ◽  
Democratic System

In a state with democratic system, political campaign tremendously becomes essential for introducing a candidate to the society. Political campaign is understood as an organised attempt trying to influence the decision making process in a particular group. Aiming at winning an election, every candidate has to consider some adequate strategies and plans. The strategies and plans are important because they determine the winning of the candidate in the election process. This paper examines the concept of campaign as a part of political communications. By explaining the concept of messages and strategies, this paper concludes that the success of a political campaign requires the planning and formation of a sufficient team to maximize the strategies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document