Political Deliberation and E-Participation in Policy-Making (original) (raw)
Related papers
Information, Communication & Society, 2001
Three prominent 'camps' have emerged within Internet democracy rhetoric and practice, each drawing upon different models of democracy: communitarian, liberal individualist and deliberative. Much interest has been shown in the former two camps by researchers and policy makers. This paper turns to an examination of the possible realization of the third camp's vision -that the public sphere of rational-critical discourse will be extended through cyberspace. This paper's method is to compare existing online discourse with a set of requirements of the public sphere developed from the work of Jürgen Habermas. Previous research of cyber-interactions reveals a number of factors limiting the expansion of the public sphere online. To explore how these limitations may be overcome, the paper examines an online democracy project that explicitly attempts to foster deliberation. It is shown how this initiative has been able to successfully surmount many of the impediments identi ed in less structured online deliberations, but that it has, along with similar projects, failed to gain a representative sample of the population and is increasingly marginalized by commercial sites, virtual communities of common interest, and liberal individualist political practices. The paper concludes that the expansion of the public sphere through the Internet requires not only developing deliberative spaces but also attracting participation from citizens who have been socialized within a commercialized and individualized culture hostile towards public deliberation.
Citizen's Deliberation on the Internet: An Exploratory Study
Within the frame of the deliberative democratic theory, development of ICT has been proposed as a solution to enhance discussion in large groups and foster political participation among citizens. Critics have however underlined the limits of such technological innovations which do not generate the expected diversity of viewpoints. This article highlights the limits of a Habermassian conception of deliberation which restrains it to a specific type of rational discourse and harnesses citizen’s expression within strict procedural constraints. Our case study, the DUCSAI debate, i.e. the French public debate about the location of the 3rd international Parisian airport, shows that the added value of Internet-based deliberation rests in that it has widened both the participant’s profile, the nature of their argumentation and their means of expression. The use of ICT in this context has empowered the actors by giving them the opportunity to master the technical constraints of the debate.
Web 2.0 and Deliberation: An introduction
The deliberative ideal, rooted in the highly influential Habermasian notion of criticalrational discussion that should guide citizen interaction in the public sphere, has held a strong normative grip on political imagination of 'strong' democracy and 'thick' forms of citizenship. Since the 1990s, the significant developments in communication technologies have fuelled theoretical and empirical investigation of ICT-assisted applications of deliberative political processes as a serious alternative to existing liberal models of democracy and the conventional individualistic and aggregative ethos regarding citizen participation. Kies (2010, pp.30-32) summarises the ground on which normative superiority of deliberative democracy vis-à-vis liberal and republican models rests: deliberative processes are more likely to (a) narrow down risks of strong moral conflicts, typical of complex and multicultural societies, as they are better adapted to produce agreement or at least mutual respect between conflicting parties; (b) increase the legitimacy and acceptance of collective decisions; (c) limit polarisation of social groups; (d) foster civic attitudes that are oriented more strongly towards the public interest, inviting citizens to take into consideration the perspectives and concerns of the weaker sections of involved populations.
How Much Deliberative Democracy Is There In “Internet Politics”
Regular Issue, 2006
This is quite a book. No, actually it is a treatise on its subject. Although nearly exhaustive of its subject matter up to the time it was proofread for the final time, it is, like its subject matter, already well beyond the confines of its contents and into further reaches of The Great Unknown.. So what did I think after reading this book?. Who, these days, is going to sit down and read a lengthy treatise on a subject that has already metastasized well beyond its confines ? Trying to pin down "Internet Politics" would be like, to use John F. Kennedy's phrase, "nailing Jell-o to the wall." However, in leafing through the Table of Contents and the index, it occurred to me that this would be a very good book to review
Citizen’s deliberation on the Internet : a french case
Within the frame of the deliberative democratic theory, development of ICT has been proposed as a solution to enhance discussion in large groups and foster political participation among citizens. Critics have however underlined the limits of such technological innovations which do not generate the expected diversity of viewpoints. This article highlights the limits of a Habermassian conception of deliberation which restrains it to a specific type of rational discourse and harnesses citizen’s expression within strict procedural constraints. Our case study, the DUCSAI debate, i.e. the French public debate about the location of the 3rd international Parisian airport, shows that the added value of Internet-based deliberation rests in that it offers, under specific conditions, another arena of public debate. The article shows that hybrid forms of debate can widen participant’s profile, the nature of their argumentation and their means of expression if it provides them with the opportunity to voice their concern the way they choose to do so.
Online Democratic Deliberation in a Time of Information Abundance
uta.edu
The intensified use of the Internet by civil society groups and governments for political purposes has left many questions unexplainedespecially in terms of the Internet's effects upon deliberative democratic processes. The Internet was first imagined as a means to revitalize ...
Deliberative Democracy in the Digital Age Opportunities and Challenges of Online Public Discourse
Elektronik Cumhuriyet İletişim Dergisi, 2024
Deliberative democracy is a model of democracy in which decision-making processes are based on public participation, and public debate is prioritised. In this model, citizens make joint decisions through rational discussion and negotiation, and this process forms the basis of democratic legitimacy. As one of the main actors in 21st-century democracy debates, deliberative democracy aims to create more inclusive and fair policies by encouraging broad participation. In the digital age, the concept of deliberative democracy faces new challenges and opportunities. This study examines the intersection between deliberative democracy and digital technologies, focusing on how online platforms influence public discourse and democratic engagement. The core objective is to explore how digital technologies enhance inclusivity, speed, and scalability in deliberative processes while simultaneously raising concerns about misinformation, polarization, and exclusion. Drawing from the theoretical framework of deliberative democracy, which emphasizes rational discourse and public reasoning, the paper investigates the benefits and challenges that arise when deliberation moves online. Through case studies such as Iceland's crowdsourced constitution, global climate change discussions, and the role of social media during the 2020 U.S. election, the paper highlights how digital platforms facilitate rapid, large-scale deliberation but also contribute to political fragmentation and echo chambers. The study employs a qualitative research methodology, analyzing the impact of digital platforms on deliberative processes through literature reviews and case studies. The hypothesis is that while digital platforms offer significant potential for enhancing democratic deliberation by broadening participation, they also present new risks to the integrity of public discourse, particularly due to misinformation and the manipulation of algorithms. Ultimately, the paper argues that deliberative democracy must adapt to the realities of the digital age by integrating online and offline deliberation, fostering digital literacy, and establishing regulatory frameworks for transparency and accountability. The findings offer theoretical contributions to understanding the relationship between digital technology and democracy while also providing practical recommendations for enhancing the quality of digital public discourse.
A U.S. Department of State funded program, the Ben Franklin Transatlantic Fellows Summer Institute, has taught hundreds of high-school aged students from Eurasia and the United States practices of democratic deliberation using networked media. A survey of the program's curricular innovations since 2006, involving integration of YouTube, Facebook, and documentary film, yields insight on how the advent and circulation of "(de-)liberation" technologies present pathways for young students to practice efficacious and convivial forms of cosmopolitan citizenship in our digital age.