Beyond the Fact of Disagreement? The Epistemic Turn in Deliberative Democracy

Landemore, Hélène

doi:10.1080/02691728.2017.1317868

Cited by 90 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(Unfortunately, the April 2016 directive on the subject [Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat, 2016c] does not do the job, because subsection 2.4 leaves wide open the definition of "Cabinet confidences" that lies at the heart of the issue.) 15 On these more ambitious ideas, going beyond open government to open source governance, collective intelligence, and "upstreaming citizen participation, " see Lenihan (2012), Landemore (2013) and online portals (Open Governance Research Exchange, n.d.) (Hudson, (2016). 16 See Bostrom (2014) and Grace, Salvatier, Dafoe, Zhang, and Evans (2017) for examples.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…And, finally, as will be mentioned briefly in our concluding comments, we have to look now not just to access by citizens to information, but to participation of citizens in decision processes, reflecting ideas of open democracy and collective intelligence enabled by the transformation of information and communications technologies (Landemore, 2013(Landemore, , 2016Sevinc, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sunshine, Scrutiny, and Spending Review in Canada, Trudeau to Trudeau: From Program Evaluation and Policy to Commitment and Results

Dobell

Zussman

2018

Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review surveys experience with evaluation practices in the Government of Canada since the mid-1960s, particularly with respect to spending reviews, concluding that there is little reason to expect any direct link from ongoing evaluation practices to Cabinet decisions. The renewed commitment to evidence-based decision-making announced by the new Liberal government is unlikely to change this conclusion. The introduction of Deliverology as a support function centered in the Privy Council Office shifts attention from policy formation to implementation and program delivery, with important emphasis on innovation and adaptation. But the crucial challenge still rests in achieving greater public access to information, and greater inclusiveness in decision processes. Résumé:Cet article fait état du rôle de l’évaluation au niveau du Gouvernement du Canada depuis le milieu des années 1960. En particulier, il analyse le lien entre l’évaluation et les exercices de révision budgétaire, concluant qu’il a peu de raison d’attendre de l’évaluation qu’elle ait une influence directe sur les décisions du Cabinet. L’engagement renouvelé du nouveau gouvernement libéral à ce que les décisions soient fondées sur les connaissances ne changera probablement cette conclusion. L’introduction de la résultologie, comme une fonction en support au Bureau du Conseil Privé, détourne l’attention de la conception des politiques vers l’implantation et l’exécution des programmes, en mettant l’accent sur l’innovation et l’adaptation. L’enjeu principal reste toutefois le même, de réussir à améliorer l’accès public à l’information, et à être plus inclusif dans les processus décisionnels.

show abstract

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sunshine, Scrutiny, and Spending Review in Canada, Trudeau to Trudeau: From Program Evaluation and Policy to Commitment and Results

Dobell

Zussman

2018

Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More tempered defenses of epistemic versions of deliberative democracy can be found in Estlund () and Peter (), among others. More recently, Landemore () pronounces that deliberative democracy has taken an “epistemic” turn. Surveying the empirical deliberative literature, Habermas () recognizes that deliberative democracy still has an epistemic dimension…”

Section: Normative Foundations Of Epistemic Deliberative Democracymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even if democracy could track the truth (under suitably ideal conditions), it is unclear as to whether democracy tracks the truth in real political situations (Muirhead, ; Schwartzberg, ). This is worrisome because if deliberative democracy were not better at making, in practice, better decisions than other types of democracy, then its desirability would be questionable (Landemore, ). Cristina Lafont admonishes that the improvement of quality of deliberation—its truth‐tracking potentials—is a “non‐negotiable aim for the realization of deliberative democracy” (Lafont, , p. 7).…”

Section: Normative Foundations Of Epistemic Deliberative Democracymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Epistemic approaches to deliberative democracy

Min

Wong

2018

Philosophy Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article offers a comprehensive review of the major theoretical issues and findings of the epistemic approaches to deliberative democracy. Section 2 surveys the norms and ideals of deliberative democracy in relation to deliberation's ability to "track the truth." Section 3 examines the conditions under which deliberative minipublics can "track the truth." Section 4 discusses how "truth-tracking" deliberative democracy is possible through the division of epistemic labor in a deliberative system.

show abstract

A policy impact tool: Measuring the policy impact of public participation in deliberative e‐rulemaking

Deligiaouri

Suiter

2021

Policy & Internet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to integrate epistemic versions of deliberative democracy into policy studies in order to develop a policy impact tool (PIT) for e-rulemaking initiatives. In building its argumentation, the paper assesses and engages with epistemic democracy and online deliberation design while considering policy-related dilemmas and the specific challenges of deliberative e-rulemaking. The PIT aims to introduce a concise procedure along with a number of basic indicators that can be used to understand and evaluate the quality of discourse and the policy potential of deliberative e-rulemaking. In order to build this tool, (a) we rely on the importance of comparative text analysis; (b) we develop a threads index, which will categorize citizens' input in the major arguments spelt out in the deliberation; (c) we propose argumentation and discourse analysis to evaluate arguments vis a vis their justification and identify the policy-valuable arguments and; (d) we provide a concise procedure and the benchmark for the assessment of the policy potential and impact of the preceding deliberation.

show abstract

Beyond the Fact of Disagreement? The Epistemic Turn in Deliberative Democracy

Cited by 90 publications

References 51 publications

Sunshine, Scrutiny, and Spending Review in Canada, Trudeau to Trudeau: From Program Evaluation and Policy to Commitment and Results

Sunshine, Scrutiny, and Spending Review in Canada, Trudeau to Trudeau: From Program Evaluation and Policy to Commitment and Results

Epistemic approaches to deliberative democracy

A policy impact tool: Measuring the policy impact of public participation in deliberative e‐rulemaking

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About