Power and Citizen Deliberation : The Contingent Impacts of Interests, Ideology, and Status Differences
Holdo, Markus LU
(2019)
In Journal of Deliberative Democracy
15(3).
- Abstract
- Both advocates and critics of deliberative theory have regarded power relations as problems for public deliberation. Three aspects—interests, ideology and status differences—have been thought to distort deliberative processes. This article discusses a growing body of case studies that indicate that these “problems” may actually, under certain conditions, help facilitate inclusion and equality in deliberation. The crucial task is to specify the mechanisms that explain such unexpected outcomes and the conditions under which they may appear in other cases. This article specifies three such mechanisms that help explain positive outcomes in a number of case studies. The argument for focusing on mechanisms and conditions serves as a correction... (More)
- Both advocates and critics of deliberative theory have regarded power relations as problems for public deliberation. Three aspects—interests, ideology and status differences—have been thought to distort deliberative processes. This article discusses a growing body of case studies that indicate that these “problems” may actually, under certain conditions, help facilitate inclusion and equality in deliberation. The crucial task is to specify the mechanisms that explain such unexpected outcomes and the conditions under which they may appear in other cases. This article specifies three such mechanisms that help explain positive outcomes in a number of case studies. The argument for focusing on mechanisms and conditions serves as a correction both to critics who find the theory of deliberation naïve and to advocates who have taken the critique against deliberative theory too lightly. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/3eb4b85d-3fb9-4242-a23b-e3054245c7fe
- author
- Holdo, Markus
LU
- publishing date
- 2019
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- deliberation, power, interests, status, inequality, domination
- in
- Journal of Deliberative Democracy
- volume
- 15
- issue
- 3
- publisher
- University of Westminster Press
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85086836198
- ISSN
- 2634-0488
- DOI
- 10.16997/jdd.340
- language
- Swedish
- LU publication?
- no
- id
- 3eb4b85d-3fb9-4242-a23b-e3054245c7fe
- date added to LUP
- 2023-11-18 11:13:29
- date last changed
- 2023-11-21 10:55:51
@article{3eb4b85d-3fb9-4242-a23b-e3054245c7fe,
abstract = {{Both advocates and critics of deliberative theory have regarded power relations as problems for public deliberation. Three aspects—interests, ideology and status differences—have been thought to distort deliberative processes. This article discusses a growing body of case studies that indicate that these “problems” may actually, under certain conditions, help facilitate inclusion and equality in deliberation. The crucial task is to specify the mechanisms that explain such unexpected outcomes and the conditions under which they may appear in other cases. This article specifies three such mechanisms that help explain positive outcomes in a number of case studies. The argument for focusing on mechanisms and conditions serves as a correction both to critics who find the theory of deliberation naïve and to advocates who have taken the critique against deliberative theory too lightly.}},
author = {{Holdo, Markus}},
issn = {{2634-0488}},
keywords = {{deliberation; power; interests; status; inequality; domination}},
language = {{swe}},
number = {{3}},
publisher = {{University of Westminster Press}},
series = {{Journal of Deliberative Democracy}},
title = {{Power and Citizen Deliberation : The Contingent Impacts of Interests, Ideology, and Status Differences}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.16997/jdd.340}},
doi = {{10.16997/jdd.340}},
volume = {{15}},
year = {{2019}},
}