IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/polstu/v55y2007i2p362-383.html

Turning Up the Heat: Partisanship in Deliberative Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Carolyn M. Hendriks
  • John S. Dryzek
  • Christian Hunold

Abstract

Two forum types have featured prominently in deliberative practice: (1) forums involving partisans (such as key ‘stakeholders’) and (2) forums involving non‐partisans (such as ‘lay citizens’). Drawing on deliberative theory and cases from Germany, we explore the relative merits of these forum types in terms of deliberative capacity, legitimacy and political impact. The two types offer deliberative governance something different. Non‐partisan forums such as citizens' juries or consensus conferences rate favorably in deliberative capacity, but can fall short when it comes to external legitimacy and policy impact. Contrary to expectations, partisan forums can also encounter substantial legitimation and impact problems. How can designed forums contribute to deliberative democratization, given that partisanship is an inevitable fact of politics? We offer some suggestions about how deliberative theory and practice might better accommodate the reality of partisanship, while securing benefits revealed in non‐partisan forums.

Suggested Citation

  • Carolyn M. Hendriks & John S. Dryzek & Christian Hunold, 2007. "Turning Up the Heat: Partisanship in Deliberative Innovation," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 55(2), pages 362-383, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:polstu:v:55:y:2007:i:2:p:362-383
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00667.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00667.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00667.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Éric Montpetit & Francesca Scala & Isabelle Fortier, 2004. "The paradox of deliberative democracy: The National Action Committee on the Status of Women and Canada's policy on reproductive technology," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 37(2), pages 137-157, June.
    2. John Parkinson, 2003. "Legitimacy Problems in Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51(1), pages 180-196, March.
    3. Graham Smith & Corinne Wales, 2000. "Citizens' Juries and Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 48(1), pages 51-65, March.
    4. Carolyn M. Hendriks, 2006. "When the Forum Meets Interest Politics: Strategic Uses of Public Deliberation," Politics & Society, , vol. 34(4), pages 571-602, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ishan Joshi, 2022. "The evolution of consensus through coordinated action," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 34(4), pages 552-588, October.
    2. Cuppen, Eefje, 2012. "A quasi-experimental evaluation of learning in a stakeholder dialogue on bio-energy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 624-637.
    3. Robert Weymouth & Janette Hartz-Karp & Dora Marinova, 2020. "Repairing Political Trust for Practical Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-25, August.
    4. Jonathan White & Lea Ypi, 2010. "Rethinking the Modern Prince: Partisanship and the Democratic Ethos," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(4), pages 809-828, October.
    5. Chris Skelcher & Jacob Torfing, 2010. "Improving democratic governance through institutional design: Civic participation and democratic ownership in Europe," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(1), pages 71-91, March.
    6. A. Russell & Frank Vanclay & Janet Salisbury & Heather Aslin, 2011. "Technology assessment in Australia: the case for a formal agency to improve advice to policy makers," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 44(2), pages 157-177, June.
    7. Hodgetts, Katherine & Elshaug, Adam G. & Hiller, Janet E., 2012. "What counts and how to count it: Physicians’ constructions of evidence in a disinvestment context," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(12), pages 2191-2199.
    8. Matheus Alves Zanella & Ariane Goetz & Stephan Rist & Oscar Schmidt & Jes Weigelt, 2018. "Deliberation in Multi-Stakeholder Participation: A Heuristic Framework Applied to the Committee on World Food Security," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-21, February.
    9. Andrew F Smith, 2014. "Political deliberation and the challenge of bounded rationality," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 13(3), pages 269-291, August.
    10. Gunn, Callum J. & Bertelsen, Neil & Regeer, Barbara J. & Schuitmaker-Warnaar, Tjerk Jan, 2021. "Valuing patient engagement: Reflexive learning in evidence generation practices for health technology assessment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 280(C).
    11. Buizer, Marleen & Van Herzele, Ann, 2012. "Combining deliberative governance theory and discourse analysis to understand the deliberative incompleteness of centrally formulated plans," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 93-101.
    12. Margaret Gollagher & Janette Hartz-Karp, 2013. "The Role of Deliberative Collaborative Governance in Achieving Sustainable Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(6), pages 1-24, May.
    13. Jennifer J. Roberts & Ruth Lightbody & Ragne Low & Stephen Elstub, 2020. "Experts and evidence in deliberation: scrutinising the role of witnesses and evidence in mini-publics, a case study," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(1), pages 3-32, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brian Witt, 2019. "Evaluating the Effects of a Minimalist Deliberative Framework on the Willingness to Participate in a Payment for Ecosystem Services Program," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-26, June.
    2. Maija Karjalainen & Lauri Rapeli, 2015. "Who will not deliberate? Attrition in a multi-stage citizen deliberation experiment," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 407-422, January.
    3. Carolyn M. Hendriks, 2006. "When the Forum Meets Interest Politics: Strategic Uses of Public Deliberation," Politics & Society, , vol. 34(4), pages 571-602, December.
    4. Ana Yetano & Sonia Royo & Basisilo Acerete, 2009. "What is driving the increasing presence of citizen participation initiatives?," Documentos de Trabajo dt2009-02, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Universidad de Zaragoza.
    5. Christoph Niessen, 2019. "When citizen deliberation enters real politics: how politicians and stakeholders envision the place of a deliberative mini-public in political decision-making," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(3), pages 481-503, September.
    6. Gastón de los Reyes & Markus Scholz, 2023. "Assessing the Legitimacy of Corporate Political Activity: Uber and the Quest for Responsible Innovation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(1), pages 51-69, April.
    7. Liz Barry, 2022. "Community science and the design of climate governance," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 1-17, April.
    8. Michael Haus & David Sweeting, 2006. "Local Democracy and Political Leadership: Drawing a Map," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 54(2), pages 267-288, June.
    9. Baker, Rachel & Mason, Helen & McHugh, Neil & Donaldson, Cam, 2021. "Public values and plurality in health priority setting: What to do when people disagree and why we should care about reasons as well as choices," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 277(C).
    10. Crystal Legacy & Ryan van den Nouwelant, 2015. "Negotiating Strategic Planning's Transitional Spaces: The Case of ‘Guerrilla Governance’ in Infrastructure Planning," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(1), pages 209-226, January.
    11. repec:elg:eechap:14395_25 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Mark Pennington, 2003. "Hayekian Political Economy and the Limits of Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51(4), pages 722-739, December.
    13. Piotr Lorens & Agnieszka Zimnicka, 2023. "Planning Around Polarisation: Components of Finding Common Ground Based on Regeneration Projects in London and Gdańsk," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 389-400.
    14. Sangbum Shin & Taedong Lee, 2021. "Credible Empowerment and Deliberative Participation: A Comparative Study of Two Nuclear Energy Policy Deliberation Cases in Korea," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(1), pages 97-112, January.
    15. Wolff, François-Charles & Mahieu, Pierre-Alexandre & Trouillet, Brice & Pigeault, Alexia & Rollo, Nicolas, 2026. "Participatory democracy in question: The case of “the sea in debate”," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    16. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/5405 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Hugh Ward & Aletta Norval & Todd Landman & Jules Pretty, 2003. "Open Citizens’ Juries and the Politics of Sustainability," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51(2), pages 282-299, June.
    18. Manuel Fischer & Philip Leifeld, 2015. "Policy forums: Why do they exist and what are they used for?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(3), pages 363-382, September.
    19. Azad Singh Bali & Michael Howlett & Jenny M Lewis & M Ramesh, 2021. "Procedural policy tools in theory and practice [The stick, the carrot, and other strategies: A theoretical analysis of governmental intervention]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(3), pages 295-311.
    20. Robert E. Goodin & Simon J. Niemeyer, 2003. "When Does Deliberation Begin? Internal Reflection versus Public Discussion in Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51(4), pages 627-649, December.
    21. Paul, Charlotte & Nicholls, Rachel & Priest, Patricia & McGee, Rob, 2008. "Making policy decisions about population screening for breast cancer: The role of citizens' deliberation," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 314-320, March.
    22. Ruth Wouters & Bieke De Fraine & Maarten Simons, 2019. "What is at Stake in Deliberative Inquiry? A Review About a Deliberative Practice," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 193-217, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:polstu:v:55:y:2007:i:2:p:362-383. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0032-3217 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.