The crisis of democracy and the science of deliberation

Dryzek, John S.; Bächtiger, André; Chambers, Simone; Cohen, Joshua; Druckman, James N.; Felicetti, Andrea; Fishkin, James S.; Farrell, David M.; Fung, Archon; Gutmann, Amy; Landemore, Hélène; Mansbridge, Jane; Mariën, Sofie; Neblo, Michael A.; Niemeyer, Simon; Setälä, Maija; Slothuus, Rune; Suiter, Jane; Thompson, Dennis F.; Warren, Mark E.

doi:10.1126/science.aaw2694

Cited by 338 publications

(218 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

184

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While some observers of this process argue that citizen input through the process of public commenting has little impact on policies adopted [20], other studies show that city leaders are in fact broadly responsive to public concerns [21]. Moreover, there is growing evidence that members of the public want to participate in the policy-making processes and are capable of high quality deliberation, especially when such deliberation is well arranged, including the "provision of balanced information, expert testimony, and oversight by a facilitator" [22]. While soliciting public input for sustainability planning is typical in all geographical settings, it is considered to be particularly important in the Arctic [6].…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strengthening Food Security Near the Arctic Circle: Case Study of Fairbanks North Star Borough, Alaska

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reliable food supply is a central concern for residents of cities located in remote locations with extreme climate conditions. The purpose of this article is to examine how stake-holders in such northern cities ensure a high level of food security. We examine a case study of the Fairbanks North Star Borough, Alaska, which is located in the interior of the state near the Arctic Circle. Borough policymakers are seeking to address community concerns through a collaborative, multi-stakeholder process of working with local farmers, distributors, consumers, activists, and academics. We examine the effectiveness of this process through participant-observation and process tracing of the initial results of the newly established Fairbanks North Star Borough sustainability commission. The new commission has adopted a sustainability plan drawing upon the input of community stakeholders, but it remains to be seen how the plan will be implemented and if it will meet the needs of diverse groups within the community. This analysis makes a contribution by examining the hypothesis that university-based teams and public input can improve public policy outputs in the area of food security by organizing their work around a focus on data. Specifically, the article examines the most effective mechanisms for collaboration among academics and policymakers to incorporate public input into food security policies.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strengthening Food Security Near the Arctic Circle: Case Study of Fairbanks North Star Borough, Alaska

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The main conductor of communicative rationality within a state becomes the public. In communication, representatives of civil society can approve a plan of action in the state, leading to the solution of common goals (Dryzek & Fishkin, 2019).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Meaning Of Phenomenological Approach To Communication (In Comparison With System Approach)

Linde¹

2020

European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper defines the meaning of phenomenological approach to communication as one of the main directions of communication research. To determine its advantages, it is compared to the systemicfunctional approach. Communication in phenomenology is understood as interpersonal semantic communication at the philosophical, sociological level of this approach, its application in political communication is defined. Phenomenological and systemic-functional approaches to communication are compared on the following five points. Firstly, they have different scientific grounds. Cybernetics and mathematical information theory had the main influence on the theory of systems in sociology, while philosophy had the main influence on phenomenology. Secondly, the system analysis studies communication at the macro level. Conversely, the primary object of micro level research in phenomenology is the "inductive" study of the individual's mind. Thirdly, the normative-value level of society, which is reproduced by means of communication, is interpreted differently. Fourthly, the study defines the fundamental differences in understanding the meaning of language. Systemic approach sees a language as a set of symbols corresponding to the cybernetic code to regulate and maintain the regulatory system of society. Phenomenology assumes that a language fixes and expresses subjective ideas initially set in the "lifeworld" of a person. Fifthly, the political significance of communication is determined in different ways. The systemic approach leads to the technocratic rule of the informed elite, rather than to the democratic regime. The role of the phenomenological approach for the shaping of a genuine public opinion and the concept of the deliberative democracy is justified. 384 ConclusionThus, the systemic-functional and phenomenological approaches essentially offer the opposite understanding of the meaning and role of communication. If the systems theory assumes that communication serves to maintain the state apparatus and the political subsystem, the phenomenological approach emphasizes the free personal communication, a sense communicated by an individual. These directions form opposite models of political regimes, technocratic management of the elite and deliberative democracy, which perceives the inherent importance of public opinion. Phenomenological methodology both offers applied methods of communication research at the qualitative and interpretive level and defines the normative model of organization of uniform and fair social communication.

show abstract

“…Deliberative processes among diverse actors may be crucially important to facilitate a comprehensive and inclusive identification of partnerships for transformations and to provide support and legitimacy for implementing them. Participatory processes are experiencing a surge of popularity based on growing evidence on the capacity of diverse actors to make sound judgements in well-designed deliberative systems [120][121][122]. The Open Working Group (OWG) that negotiated the SDGs highlights how a well-designed intergovernmental deliberative process involving delegates and UN staff informed by stakeholders and expert inputs can deliver a comprehensive plan for action [17,18] Second, there is the implementation problem.…”

Section: Concluding Discussion and Steps Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

A New Approach to Partnerships for SDG Transformations

Horan

2019

Sustainability

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent scientific reports highlight the urgent need for transformations to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and long-term sustainability. This paper presents a new approach to partnerships that focuses on their role in transformations, the types of partnerships that may be needed and their enabling environment. It introduces transformation effectiveness as a criterion to evaluate a portfolio of partnerships and pathways as a tool to frame discussion of required partnerships. Guided by energy decarbonization and using a simple model of partnership formation, I highlight a (potential) mismatch between the types of partnerships required for transformation and the partnership types arising under the currently dominant voluntary approach. The model suggests the bottom-up approach can deliver some, but not all, of the partnerships needed. Five specific problems are identified—compensation for losers, partnering capacity, short-time horizons, inadequate coordination mechanisms and misaligned incentives. The paper then outlines some policy tools—transfers, regulation, public investment—governments could use to strengthen the bottom-up framework and orchestrate missing partnerships. The conclusion addresses two problems specific to the transformation approach: how to identify more systematically the partnerships needed (identification problem) and how to implement them (implementation problem); and outlines some ways to deal with these—science, deliberation, international leadership coalitions and frameworks/monitoring systems for transition partnerships.

show abstract

The crisis of democracy and the science of deliberation

Abstract: Competing interests: A.Fu. serves on the Board of Directors of Common Cause and Everyday Democracy and is an occasional consultant to Apple.

Cited by 338 publications

References 17 publications

Strengthening Food Security Near the Arctic Circle: Case Study of Fairbanks North Star Borough, Alaska

Strengthening Food Security Near the Arctic Circle: Case Study of Fairbanks North Star Borough, Alaska

The Meaning Of Phenomenological Approach To Communication (In Comparison With System Approach)

A New Approach to Partnerships for SDG Transformations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About