Deliberative group dynamics: power, status and affect in interactive policy making

Stokkom, B.A.M. van

doi:10.1332/0305573054325701

Cited by 35 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other authors have disputed this equalization of participants' power as an ideal not always represented in deliberative practice. van Stokkom [62] emphasises that deliberative processes to inform policy do not always meet equality and rationality ideals. Behind the ideal of rational dialogue between equal participants the author finds an interplay of power and emotion dynamics that can aid or impede deliberation.…”

Section: Social Sustainability Stakeholder Participation and Dialoguementioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualizing a social sustainability framework for energy infrastructure decisions

Whitton

Parry

Akiyoshi

et al. 2015

Energy Research & Social Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe concept of social sustainability is discussed in a wide range of literatures, from urban planning to international development. Authors agree a notion of social sustainability is difficult to define, comprising numerous component parts (criteria), such as community cohesion, human wellbeing, effective dialogue and the access that citizens have to those that make important decisions on their behalf. The definition and measurement of these criteria and the role of social sustainability in energy decision making is a contentious issue. We argue that a community led, asset based approach is required to achieve any sense of how social sustainability can be defined in a community setting within the context of energy developments. We propose a conceptual framework based on a process of community group prioritization and visioning. Our earlier research on public participation and the role of dialogue for nuclear energy development in the UK, US and Japan is used to demonstrate barriers to be overcome if our systemic model of social sustainability is to become a reality. We highlight the importance of fairness and justice, place based approaches and socio-energy systems, concluding that these are necessary to promote a community and institutional awareness of social sustainability for large energy developments.

show abstract

Section: Social Sustainability Stakeholder Participation and Dialoguementioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualizing a social sustainability framework for energy infrastructure decisions

Whitton

Parry

Akiyoshi

et al. 2015

Energy Research & Social Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It suggested that bloggers engage in group discussions (Young, 1996;Sanders, 1997, Stokkom, 2003Mansbridge et al, 2006). In contrast, when the rational criticism was monopolized by the elite and ignored the masses, it demeaned the silent masses, which then became more assertive and confrontational.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bloggers and Deliberative Democracy in Indonesia's Blogosphere

Jacky¹

2015

ASS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study of the relationship between the Internet and democracy has produced two main debates. Some studies have said that the Internet has significantly contributed to democracy while others disagree. This study challenged the thesis of Habermas (2006) about the relationship between the Internet and Deliberative Democracy. This study was built on the following propositions: that the Internet causes bloggers to become parasitic, fragmented, and isolated; that it is effective in breaking down authoritarian regimes to create an egalitarian relationship, but it fails as a deliberative medium. This study used the concept of the public sphere and Habermas ' Deliberative Democracy (2006). It also explored the use of 2.0 qualitative methods with a hacking analysis perspective. Moreover, it gained data from the Internet by using the latest version of 2.0 Web and a virtual community. It focused on both discursive and non-discursive construction. The results of this study support only one of Habermas' three propositions: that the Internet creates egalitarianism. Thus, this study rejects Habermas' thesis apart from this one proposition. Furthermore, this study recommends that further research be done using the same propositions but on Twitter instead of the Internet.

show abstract

“…However, in the case of large-scale exercises, some aggregation or analysis by sub-group is likely to be necessary (Dienel, 1999;Orr, 2007). Crocker (2003) encourages attention to disagreement within the group including dissent which may not be verbalised as such, and placing emphasis in the report on the process as well as the outcome (Van Stokkom, 2005;White et al, 1999). Davies et al (2006) recommend that where there are unresolved disagreements, facilitators should produce a report giving an account of the reasoning behind the different conclusions.…”

Section: Analysis and Interpretationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deliberative research as a tool to make value judgements

Burchardt

2013

Qualitative Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of deliberation as a research technique (as opposed to policymaking or public consultation) is distinctive: to uncover the public’s informed, considered and collective view on a normative question. Such questions often arise in relation to research on poverty and inequality, where there is a need to justify the thresholds and concepts adopted on a deeper basis than convention alone can offer. But can deliberative research provide the answer, and if so in what circumstances? By comparing deliberative research to more traditional methods, such as in-depth interviewing, attitudinal surveys, ethnography and participatory approaches, this article reveals that deliberative designs involve a number of assumptions, including a strong fact/value distinction, an emphasis on ‘outsider’ expertise and a view of participants as essentially similar to each other rather than defined by socio-demographic differences. Using an example of deliberative research in which the author was involved, developing a list of ‘capabilities’ for monitoring inequalities in Britain, it also demonstrates that normative decisions permeate the design and implementation of deliberative research in practice. Thus, while deliberative research has the potential to provide uniquely considered, insightful and well-justified answers to the problem of defining a collective position on key questions in social science, it is currently under-theorised as an approach, and transparency at all stages of the process is essential to avoid the charge of simply reflecting the researchers’ implicit values.

show abstract

Deliberative group dynamics: power, status and affect in interactive policy making

Cited by 35 publications

References 0 publications

Conceptualizing a social sustainability framework for energy infrastructure decisions

Conceptualizing a social sustainability framework for energy infrastructure decisions

Bloggers and Deliberative Democracy in Indonesia's Blogosphere

Deliberative research as a tool to make value judgements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About