IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/polstu/v58y2010i4p715-730.html

Public Bioethics and Deliberative Democracy

Author

Listed:
  • Alfred Moore

Abstract

This article aims to specify the dynamics of the democratisation of expertise by analysing public bioethics as a form of deliberative democracy. Public bioethics refers to the whole range of bodies and procedures, such as national ethics councils, parliamentary ethics commissions or public consultations on ‘ethical issues’, which are meant to inform and guide political decision making with respect to ethical considerations. The article draws from empirical research on three UK public bioethics bodies (the Human Genetics Commission, Nuffield Council on Bioethics and the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority). The article will show how public bioethics addresses some established problems of expert domination and rejects the aim of revealing substantial ethical unity in favour of facilitating and preparing public debate by representing the range of ethical positions on a particular issue, and as such seems to resemble more closely the ‘mixed’ discursive spheres advocated by Hendriks. However, the article argues that problems of expertise are transformed but not removed. By assuming the authority to categorise different publics and arrange them in a hierarchy, and framing ethical questions such that some kinds of concerns appear legitimately ethical while others are merely political or transient matters of public concern, public bioethics may be reproducing problems of expert domination at the more rarefied level of the construction of ethical positions.

Suggested Citation

  • Alfred Moore, 2010. "Public Bioethics and Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(4), pages 715-730, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:polstu:v:58:y:2010:i:4:p:715-730
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2010.00836.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2010.00836.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2010.00836.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. 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.
    2. 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, pages 627-649, December.
    3. Carolyn M. Hendriks, 2006. "Integrated Deliberation: Reconciling Civil Society's Dual Role in Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 54, pages 486-508, October.
    4. Carolyn M. Hendriks, 2006. "Integrated Deliberation: Reconciling Civil Society's Dual Role in Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 54(3), pages 486-508, October.
    5. Daniel J. Fiorino, 1989. "Technical and Democratic Values in Risk Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 293-299, September.
    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. Edwards, Kyle T., 2014. "Methods of legitimation: How ethics committees decide which reasons count in public policy decision-making," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 34-41.

    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. 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.
    2. Ronald Byaruhanga, 2025. "NGOisation and food sovereignty: unearthing the intricacies of NGO-driven food sovereignty efforts. Insights from Uganda," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 42(2), pages 905-922, June.
    3. Michael B. Wironen & Robert V. Bartlett & Jon D. Erickson, 2019. "Deliberation and the Promise of a Deeply Democratic Sustainability Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, February.
    4. John Dryzek, 2015. "Deliberative engagement: the forum in the system," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 5(4), pages 750-754, December.
    5. Lehtonen, Markku, 2019. "Ecological Economics and Opening up of Megaproject Appraisal: Lessons From Megaproject Scholarship and Topics for a Research Programme," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 148-156.
    6. Andrés Rolando Ciro Gómez, 2020. "El derecho fundamental a deliberar : análisis de la moralidad política de su privación a los miembros de la Fuerza Pública en Colombia," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 1187.
    7. Alex Y Lo & Kim S Alexander & Wendy Proctor & Anthony Ryan, 2013. "Reciprocity as Deliberative Capacity: Lessons from a Citizen's Deliberation on Carbon Pricing Mechanisms in Australia," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 31(3), pages 444-459, June.
    8. Jennifer Dodge, 2014. "Civil society organizations and deliberative policy making: interpreting environmental controversies in the deliberative system," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(2), pages 161-185, June.
    9. Lisette Beek & Niek Mouter & Peter Pelzer & Maarten Hajer & Detlef Vuuren, 2024. "Experts and expertise in practices of citizen engagement in climate policy: a comparative analysis of two contrasting cases," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 177(1), pages 1-22, January.
    10. M. Jae Moon & Seulgi Lee & Seunggyu Park, 2023. "Citizensourcing policy advisory systems in a turbulent era," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(3), pages 303-318.
    11. Jonathan Benson, 2019. "Deliberative democracy and the problem of tacit knowledge," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 18(1), pages 76-97, February.
    12. repec:sae:envval:v:18:y:2009:i:2:p:129-152 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Harri Raisio & Pirkko Vartiainen, 2015. "Accelerating the public’s learning curve on wicked policy issues: results from deliberative forums on euthanasia," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(3), pages 339-361, September.
    14. Shane Doheny & Claire O'Neill, 2010. "Becoming Deliberative Citizens: The Moral Learning Process of the Citizen Juror," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(4), pages 630-648, October.
    15. Ya Li, 2015. "Think tank 2.0 for deliberative policy analysis," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(1), pages 25-50, March.
    16. Rebecca Sandover & Alice Moseley & Patrick Devine-Wright, 2021. "Contrasting Views of Citizens’ Assemblies: Stakeholder Perceptions of Public Deliberation on Climate Change," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(2), pages 76-86.
    17. Carey Doberstein, 2016. "Designing Collaborative Governance Decision-Making in Search of a ‘Collaborative Advantage’," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(6), pages 819-841, July.
    18. Valerie P. Hans & John Gastil & Traci Feller, 2014. "Deliberative Democracy and the American Civil Jury," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), pages 697-717, December.
    19. Joanna Sleigh & Shannon Hubbs & Alessandro Blasimme & Effy Vayena, 2024. "Can digital tools foster ethical deliberation?," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-10, December.
    20. Helen Pallett & Jason Chilvers, 2013. "A Decade of Learning about Publics, Participation, and Climate Change: Institutionalising Reflexivity?," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 45(5), pages 1162-1183, May.
    21. Ben B Davies & Kirsty Blackstock & Felix Rauschmayer, 2005. "‘Recruitment’, ‘Composition’, and ‘Mandate’ Issues in Deliberative Processes: Should we Focus on Arguments Rather than Individuals?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 23(4), pages 599-615, August.

    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:58:y:2010:i:4:p:715-730. 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.