Democracy Doctorate

Can democratic innovations change democracy?

#5Papers: mini-publics – macro consequences?

Citation

Dryzek JS, with Niemeyer S. Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010. Chapter 8 ‘Mini-publics and their Macro Consequences’ pp155-176

What attracted me to this Article / Chapter?

I was surprised I hadn’t come across this chapter before, even though I had borrowed this book from the library before. The macro consequences or macro impact (as I’m calling it) of deliberative mini-publics is what my PhD research is all about, so I wanted to know how John approached this topic and to see how his conceptualization of macro consequences relates to my macro impacts.

What is it about? (Problem / Purpose / Research Questions)

This chapter is part of a larger book about deliberative democracy, as the title of the book suggests, looking at the foundational aspects of deliberative democracy as well as future directions (frontiers). As well as the lessons that these processes can provide for deliberative democrats more broadly – both practically and normatively.
This chapter looks at the role of mini-publics in the broader system of democracy as well as the ‘deliberative system’. Read the rest of this entry »

Advertisements

#5Papers, May 2016

Citation                                

Dryzek, J.S. The Informal Logic of Institutional Design in The Theory of Institutional Design Goodin, R.E. (ed.) 1996 Cambridge University Press Cambridge pp103-125

What attracted me to this Article / Chapter?     

Selen Ercan referred me to this chapter as she thought it would be relevant to my research. Thanks Selen!

What is it about? (Problem / Purpose / Research Questions)

Dryzek is proposing a particular approach to achieving institutional change/redesign. He suggests there is an important relationship between attempts at institutional design and discourses – what he calls the “informal aspect of institutional design” p103

He uses an analogy saying, “Discourses may best be treated as institutional software.” p104. Dryzek believes that without taking discourses into account institutional (re)design can only be maintained through dictatorship. Read the rest of this entry »

#5PAPERS – Week 5

  1. Reference to the Article 

Landemore, H. E. (2012). Why the Many Are Smarter thatn the Few and Why it Matters. Journal of Public Deliberation, 8(1), 1-14.

  1. What attracted me to this Article?

I’ve had Helene’s book for some time but haven’t read much of it and I want to know the ‘guts’ of her argument. Plus I need to know a bit more about the theory around the ‘wisdom of crowds’ for a work related purpose – so this paper helps me in both with my PhD and my work.

  1. What is it about? (Problem / Purpose / Research Questions)

Landemore’s paper addresses the tension, particularly in relation to democracy, between the idea that people as a group (can) make better decisions than individuals and the opposite view that sees group decision-making as equating to ‘mob rule’. Read the rest of this entry »

#5PAPERS – Week 4 Day 4

  1. Reference to the Article 

Hendriks, C. M. (2009). The Democratic Soup: Mixed Meanings of Political Representation in Governance Networks. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 22(4), 689-715.

  1. What attracted me to this Article?

Firstly it’s written by one of my supervisors and secondly it goes to an issue of interest to me: how governance networks relate to democracy, in this case the meaning of political representation.

  1. What is it about? (Problem / Purpose / Research Questions)

Hendriks notes, as Warren did in the paper I reviewed yesterday, that there has been a growth in ‘new’ forms of representation (often self-styled) without a commensurate growth in our understanding of them and ‘their implications for democratic practice and theory.’ p.690 This paper addresses this gap in the context of governance networks. Read the rest of this entry »

#5PAPERS – Week 4 Day 3

  1. Reference to the Article 

Warren, M. E. (2009). Citizen Participation and Democratic Deficits: Considerations from the Perspective of Democratic Theory. In J. DeBardeleben & J. H. Pammett (Eds.), Activating the citizen (pp. 17– 40). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

  1. What attracted me to this Article?

The title says it all really – it includes almost everything I’m interested in knowing more about as underpinning for my research.

  1. What is it about? (Problem / Purpose / Research Questions)

Warren wants to ‘clarify the question of democratic deficits as they relate to the participatory elements of democracy.’ p.17 In particular he wants to understand how participatory elements could be ‘in deficit’. Read the rest of this entry »