IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v6y2018i1p11-21.html

Four Parameters for Measuring Democratic Deliberation: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges and How to Respond

Author

Listed:
  • Dannica Fleuß

    (Department of Political Science, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg)

  • Karoline Helbig

    (Department of Political Science, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg)

  • Gary S. Schaal

    (Department of Political Science, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg)

Abstract

Although measuring democratic deliberation is necessary for a valid measurement of the performance of democracies, it poses serious theoretical and methodological challenges. The most serious problem in the context of research on democratic performance is the need for a theoretical and methodological approach for “upscaling” the measurement of deliberation from the micro and meso level to the macro level. The systemic approach offers a useful framework for this purpose. Building on this framework, this article offers a modular approach consisting of four parameters for conceptualization, measurement, and aggregation which can be adjusted to make the measurement of democratic deliberation compatible with the various general measurement approaches adopted by different scholars.

Suggested Citation

  • Dannica Fleuß & Karoline Helbig & Gary S. Schaal, 2018. "Four Parameters for Measuring Democratic Deliberation: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges and How to Respond," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 11-21.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v6:y:2018:i:1:p:11-21
    DOI: 10.17645/pag.v6i1.1199
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/1199
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/pag.v6i1.1199?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. 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.
    2. Schouten, Greetje & Leroy, Pieter & Glasbergen, Pieter, 2012. "On the deliberative capacity of private multi-stakeholder governance: The Roundtables on Responsible Soy and Sustainable Palm Oil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 42-50.
    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. Heiko Giebler & Saskia P. Ruth & Dag Tanneberg, 2018. "Why Choice Matters: Revisiting and Comparing Measures of Democracy," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 1-10.

    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. Dannica Fleuß & Karoline Helbig & Gary S. Schaal, 2018. "Four Parameters for Measuring Democratic Deliberation: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges and How to Respond," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 11-21.
    2. Fleuß, Dannica & Helbig, Karoline & Schaal, Gary S., 2018. "Four Parameters for Measuring Democratic Deliberation: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges and How to Respond," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 6(1), pages 11-21.
    3. Verena Bitzer & Alessia Marazzi, 2021. "Southern sustainability initiatives in agricultural value chains: a question of enhanced inclusiveness? The case of Trustea in India," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(2), pages 381-395, June.
    4. Emmanuelle Cheyns, 2014. "Making “minority voices” heard in transnational roundtables: the role of local NGOs in reintroducing justice and attachments," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 31(3), pages 439-453, September.
    5. Shahimi, Shahida & Hafizuddin-Syah, B.A.M & Fuad, Siti Hanisah, 2018. "The Effect of Sustainability Certification for Export on Operational Profitability of Malaysian Palm Oil Companies," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 52(2), pages 55-67.
    6. Natalia Aguilar Delgado & Paola Perez-Aleman, 2021. "Inclusion in Global Environmental Governance: Sustained Access, Engagement and Influence in Decisive Spaces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-24, September.
    7. Fiona Haines & Kate Macdonald, 2020. "Nonjudicial business regulation and community access to remedy," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 840-860, October.
    8. Schleifer, Philip & Fiorini, Matteo & Fransen, Luc, 2019. "Missing the Bigger Picture: A Population-level Analysis of Transnational Private Governance Organizations Active in the Global South," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    9. Bennett, Elizabeth A., 2017. "Who Governs Socially-Oriented Voluntary Sustainability Standards? Not the Producers of Certified Products," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 53-69.
    10. Janina Grabs & Graeme Auld & Benjamin Cashore, 2021. "Private regulation, public policy, and the perils of adverse ontological selection," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1183-1208, October.
    11. Nibedita Saha & Do Le Nhu Quynh & Tomas Sáha & Petr Sáha, 2017. "Multi-stakeholder initiatives in Vietnam to meet the societal challenges of horizon 2020," Marketing and Branding Research, EUROKD, vol. 4(1), pages 100-111.
    12. Glasbergen, Pieter, 2018. "Smallholders do not Eat Certificates," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 243-252.
    13. Anica Zeyen & Markus Beckmann & Stella Wolters, 2016. "Actor and Institutional Dynamics in the Development of Multi-stakeholder Initiatives," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 341-360, May.
    14. Domenico Dentoni & Verena Bitzer & Greetje Schouten, 2018. "Harnessing Wicked Problems in Multi-stakeholder Partnerships," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(2), pages 333-356, June.
    15. Russo Lopes, Gabriela & Bastos Lima, Mairon G. & Reis, Tiago N.P. dos, 2021. "Maldevelopment revisited: Inclusiveness and social impacts of soy expansion over Brazil’s Cerrado in Matopiba," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    16. Fayezi, Sajad & Zomorrodi, Maryam, 2025. "Navigating the multiplicity of sustainability policies in agribusiness supply networks: The role of policy brokers and advocates," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    17. Ahmed Zainul Abideen & Veera Pandiyan Kaliani Sundram & Shahryar Sorooshian, 2023. "Scope for Sustainable Development of Small Holder Farmers in the Palm Oil Supply Chain—A Systematic Literature Review and Thematic Scientific Mapping," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-24, January.
    18. Peter Horton & Steve A. Banwart & Dan Brockington & Garrett W. Brown & Richard Bruce & Duncan Cameron & Michelle Holdsworth & S. C. Lenny Koh & Jurriaan Ton & Peter Jackson, 2017. "An agenda for integrated system-wide interdisciplinary agri-food research," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(2), pages 195-210, April.
    19. Vallim, Diogo & Leichsenring, Alexandre, 2025. "The effect of the beef zero deforestation commitment in the Brazilian Amazon: A spatial panel data analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    20. Otto Hospes, 2014. "Marking the success or end of global multi-stakeholder governance? The rise of national sustainability standards in Indonesia and Brazil for palm oil and soy," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 31(3), pages 425-437, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:cog:poango:v6:y:2018:i:1:p:11-21. 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: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    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.