Suchergebnisse

The fabric of democracy is threadbare in many contemporary societies. Connections that are vital to the functioning and integrity of our democratic systems are wearing thin. Citizens are increasingly disconnected from their elected representatives and from each other in polarised public spheres, and alienated from complex systems of public policy. In such disconnected times, how can we strengthen and renew our democracies? This book develops the idea of democratic mending as a way of advancing a more connective approach to democratic reform. It is informed by three rich empirical cases of connectivity in practice, as well as cutting-edge debates in deliberative democracy. The empirical cases uncover empowering and transformative modes of political engagement that are vital for democratic renewal.

This article explores the role of institutional listening in deliberative democracy, focusing particularly on its contribution to the transmission process between the public sphere and formal institutions. We critique existing accounts of transmission for prioritizing voice over listening and for remaining constrained by an 'aggregative logic' of the flow of ideas and voices in a democracy. We argue that formal institutions have a crucial role to play in ensuring transmission operates according to a more deliberative logic. To substantiate this argument, we focus on two recent examples of institutional listening in two different democracies: Australia's Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse and the United States' Senate Judiciary Committee's confirmation hearing for Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh. These cases show that institutional listening can take different forms; it can be purposefully designed or incidental, and it can contribute to the realization of deliberative democracy in various ways. Specifically, institutional listening can help enhance the credibility and visibility of minority groups and perspectives while also empowering these groups to better hold formal political institutions accountable. In these ways, institutional listening helps transmission operate according to a more deliberative logic.

Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how a systemic view of democracy can provide insights into the myriad ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic affects democracies worldwide. This enables the authors to offer practical suggestions for strengthening democracy through meaningful participation in the spaces where deficits are most apparent.


Design/methodology/approach
The authors use the systems approach that has emerged from the deliberative and participatory democracy literature in recent years to map out the impacts of COVID-19. In this paper, the authors set out this approach as an agenda for future, more comprehensive research.


Findings
The authors' preliminary overview suggests that democratic spaces are reconfigured during COVID-19, with participatory spaces shrinking, overlapping and invading each other. Based on the systemic overview, the authors suggest participatory interventions to address particular points of weakness such as accountability.


Originality/value
Taking a systemic approach to analysing COVID-19's impacts on democracy enables the authors to understand the pressure points where democratic values and participation are under strain and where citizens' participation is essential not only for strengthening democracy but also addressing the public health challenge of COVID-19.

Since its inception, a core aspiration of deliberative democracy has been to enable more and better inclusion within democratic politics. In this article, we argue that deliberative democracy can achieve this aspiration only if it goes beyond verbal forms of communication and acknowledges the crucial role of non-verbal communication in expressing and exchanging arguments. The article develops a multidimensional approach to deliberative democracy by emphasizing the visual, sonic and physical dimensions of communication in public deliberation. We argue that non-verbal modes of communication can contribute to public deliberation when they (1) are used as part of reason-giving processes, (2) enable the inclusion of marginalized actors in public debates and (3) induce reflection and encourage new ways of thinking about the public controversies at hand.

The recent shift towards a deliberative systems approach suggests understanding public deliberation as a communicative activity occurring in a diversity of spaces. While theoretically attractive, the deliberative systems approach raises a number of methodological questions for empirical social scientists. For example, how does one identify multiple communicative sites within a deliberative system, how does one study connections between different sites, and how does one assess the impact of the broader context on deliberative forums and systems? Drawing on multiple case studies, this article argues that interpretive research methods are well-suited to studying the ambiguities, dynamics and politics of complex deliberative systems.

What is the state of deliberative democracy in the age of serial crisis? This survey article provides a descriptive and reflective assessment of recent developments in the field in the light of a political context in which there is growing incivility, political polarization, normalization of disinformation and the growing appeal of finding simplistic solutions to complex problems. We describe deliberative democracy as a field of research that has evolved to become (a) assertive in practice, (b) precise in theory, (c) global in reach and (d) ambitious in empirical research. For each of these facets of deliberative democracy, we reflect on the extent to which the field has responded to conceptual, empirical and political challenges, and identify its shortcomings, which warrant further attention. We conclude by drawing attention to research imperatives that the field needs to address to remain relevant in a highly unequal, climate-challenged and increasingly fragile global public sphere.