James S. Fishkin
- Published in print:
- 2018
- Published Online:
- June 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780198820291
- eISBN:
- 9780191860188
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198820291.003.0003
- Subject:
- Political Science, Democratization
Eight criteria are discussed for microcosms or mini-publics that can offer input to policy. These include demographic and attitudinal representativeness, sample size, the opportunity to engage policy ...
More
Eight criteria are discussed for microcosms or mini-publics that can offer input to policy. These include demographic and attitudinal representativeness, sample size, the opportunity to engage policy arguments for and against proposals for action, knowledge gain, opinion change, distortions from polarization and domination by the more advantaged, and whether there are identifiable reasons for the final considered judgments. These criteria are applied in depth to four case studies from different parts of the world: California (on a statewide basis), the city of Ulaanbaatar (capital of Mongolia), two projects in Uganda (in Bududa and Butaleja), and a European-wide Deliberative Poll in Brussels engaging a sample from all twenty-seven countries deliberating in twenty-two languages. These four cases illustrate the prospects and challenges of applying Deliberative Polling to specific policy choices. They illustrate different entry points for the considered judgments of the public. Both qualitative and quantitative data are considered in each project.Less
Eight criteria are discussed for microcosms or mini-publics that can offer input to policy. These include demographic and attitudinal representativeness, sample size, the opportunity to engage policy arguments for and against proposals for action, knowledge gain, opinion change, distortions from polarization and domination by the more advantaged, and whether there are identifiable reasons for the final considered judgments. These criteria are applied in depth to four case studies from different parts of the world: California (on a statewide basis), the city of Ulaanbaatar (capital of Mongolia), two projects in Uganda (in Bududa and Butaleja), and a European-wide Deliberative Poll in Brussels engaging a sample from all twenty-seven countries deliberating in twenty-two languages. These four cases illustrate the prospects and challenges of applying Deliberative Polling to specific policy choices. They illustrate different entry points for the considered judgments of the public. Both qualitative and quantitative data are considered in each project.
James S. Fishkin
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- February 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780199604432
- eISBN:
- 9780191803574
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199604432.003.0005
- Subject:
- Political Science, Democratization
This chapter applies the four questions on deliberative democracy raised in Chapter 4 to a local decision-making case in a town in China. Collaborating with a leading expert on local democracy in ...
More
This chapter applies the four questions on deliberative democracy raised in Chapter 4 to a local decision-making case in a town in China. Collaborating with a leading expert on local democracy in China, researchers assisted the government of Zeguo township, Wenling City (about 300 km south of Shanghai), in using Deliberative Polling to make key decisions about what infrastructure to build. The outcome of the project showed that making deliberative democracy practical can accomplished under challenging conditions.Less
This chapter applies the four questions on deliberative democracy raised in Chapter 4 to a local decision-making case in a town in China. Collaborating with a leading expert on local democracy in China, researchers assisted the government of Zeguo township, Wenling City (about 300 km south of Shanghai), in using Deliberative Polling to make key decisions about what infrastructure to build. The outcome of the project showed that making deliberative democracy practical can accomplished under challenging conditions.
James S. Fishkin
- Published in print:
- 2018
- Published Online:
- June 2018
- ISBN:
- 9780198820291
- eISBN:
- 9780191860188
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198820291.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, Democratization
Democracy requires a connection to the “will of the people.” What does that mean in a world of “fake news,” relentless advocacy, dialogue mostly among the like-minded, and massive spending to ...
More
Democracy requires a connection to the “will of the people.” What does that mean in a world of “fake news,” relentless advocacy, dialogue mostly among the like-minded, and massive spending to manipulate public opinion? What kind of opinion can the public have under such conditions? What would democracy be like if the people were really thinking in depth about the policies they must live with? This book argues that “deliberative democracy” is not utopian. It is a practical solution to many of democracy’s ills. It can supplement existing institutions with practical reforms. It can apply at all levels of government and for many different kinds of policy choices. This book speaks to a recurring dilemma: listen to the people and get the angry voices of populism or rely on widely distrusted elites and get policies that seem out of touch with the public’s concerns. Instead, there are methods for getting a representative and thoughtful public voice that is really worth listening to. Democracy is under siege in most countries. Democratic institutions have low approval and face a resurgent threat from authoritarian regimes. Deliberative democracy can provide an antidote. It can reinvigorate our democratic politics. This book draws on the author’s research with many collaborators on “Deliberative Polling”—a process he has conducted in twenty-seven countries on six continents. It contributes both to political theory and to the empirical study of public opinion and participation, and should interest anyone concerned about the future of democracy and how it can be revitalized.Less
Democracy requires a connection to the “will of the people.” What does that mean in a world of “fake news,” relentless advocacy, dialogue mostly among the like-minded, and massive spending to manipulate public opinion? What kind of opinion can the public have under such conditions? What would democracy be like if the people were really thinking in depth about the policies they must live with? This book argues that “deliberative democracy” is not utopian. It is a practical solution to many of democracy’s ills. It can supplement existing institutions with practical reforms. It can apply at all levels of government and for many different kinds of policy choices. This book speaks to a recurring dilemma: listen to the people and get the angry voices of populism or rely on widely distrusted elites and get policies that seem out of touch with the public’s concerns. Instead, there are methods for getting a representative and thoughtful public voice that is really worth listening to. Democracy is under siege in most countries. Democratic institutions have low approval and face a resurgent threat from authoritarian regimes. Deliberative democracy can provide an antidote. It can reinvigorate our democratic politics. This book draws on the author’s research with many collaborators on “Deliberative Polling”—a process he has conducted in twenty-seven countries on six continents. It contributes both to political theory and to the empirical study of public opinion and participation, and should interest anyone concerned about the future of democracy and how it can be revitalized.
John Gastil and Katherine R. Knobloch
- Published in print:
- 2020
- Published Online:
- January 2020
- ISBN:
- 9780190084523
- eISBN:
- 9780190084561
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780190084523.003.0007
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics, Comparative Politics
Deliberation encourages participants to reason with one another chapter 6 details how cultural biases often impede such reasoning. Cultural predispositions are an indication of people’s beliefs along ...
More
Deliberation encourages participants to reason with one another chapter 6 details how cultural biases often impede such reasoning. Cultural predispositions are an indication of people’s beliefs along two dimensions: hierarchical-egalitarian and individualism-collectivism. The first relates to whether government should regulate individual behavior and the second to whether government should provide a social safety net. US political parties and subsequent policies map onto these dimensions, with Republicans more likely to identify as hierarchical individualists and Democrats more likely to identify as egalitarian collectivists. As outlined here, deliberative processes, such as the CIR and Deliberative Polling, ask participants to overcome their cultural predispositions in the interest of reaching the best decision possible. Deliberation can produce such results, particularly when the available evidence clearly favors specific policy proposals. On values-based questions, however, deliberative participants may ultimately rely on their cultural cognitions to reach decisions.Less
Deliberation encourages participants to reason with one another chapter 6 details how cultural biases often impede such reasoning. Cultural predispositions are an indication of people’s beliefs along two dimensions: hierarchical-egalitarian and individualism-collectivism. The first relates to whether government should regulate individual behavior and the second to whether government should provide a social safety net. US political parties and subsequent policies map onto these dimensions, with Republicans more likely to identify as hierarchical individualists and Democrats more likely to identify as egalitarian collectivists. As outlined here, deliberative processes, such as the CIR and Deliberative Polling, ask participants to overcome their cultural predispositions in the interest of reaching the best decision possible. Deliberation can produce such results, particularly when the available evidence clearly favors specific policy proposals. On values-based questions, however, deliberative participants may ultimately rely on their cultural cognitions to reach decisions.
John Gastil and Katherine R. Knobloch
- Published in print:
- 2020
- Published Online:
- January 2020
- ISBN:
- 9780190084523
- eISBN:
- 9780190084561
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780190084523.003.0010
- Subject:
- Political Science, American Politics, Comparative Politics
Deliberative processes generally result in increased issue-specific knowledge for participants and can lead to opinion change as a result. The question asked in chapter 9 is: Does this translate into ...
More
Deliberative processes generally result in increased issue-specific knowledge for participants and can lead to opinion change as a result. The question asked in chapter 9 is: Does this translate into increased knowledge and opinion change for the wider public who these processes aim to assist? The chapter summarizes research suggesting that voters often lack the information they need to cast their votes on ballot measures. As detailed in this chapter, studies of Citizens’ Initiative Reviews (CIRs) show the reviews can help voters overcome these information deficiencies. Voters who read the CIR statements were more likely to form opinions that aligned with the balance of information and arguments provided by review participants. Further, voters tend to find the statements both reliable and useful and learn new information about the ballot measure, even if that information does not align with their cultural predispositions.Less
Deliberative processes generally result in increased issue-specific knowledge for participants and can lead to opinion change as a result. The question asked in chapter 9 is: Does this translate into increased knowledge and opinion change for the wider public who these processes aim to assist? The chapter summarizes research suggesting that voters often lack the information they need to cast their votes on ballot measures. As detailed in this chapter, studies of Citizens’ Initiative Reviews (CIRs) show the reviews can help voters overcome these information deficiencies. Voters who read the CIR statements were more likely to form opinions that aligned with the balance of information and arguments provided by review participants. Further, voters tend to find the statements both reliable and useful and learn new information about the ballot measure, even if that information does not align with their cultural predispositions.