IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/rischp/978-3-032-02302-5_11.html

The Danish Consensus Conference: A Critical Evaluation

In: Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation

Author

Listed:
  • Tanja Perko

    (Science and Technology Studies, Belgian Nuclear Research Center
    University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Social Sciences, Defence Studies)

Abstract

This chapter critically evaluates the format of the Danish consensus conference as a participatory model in which a panel of citizens assesses a socially controversial issue related to science and technology. The outcome of this process is a consensus document intended to inform both decision-makers and the public. The chapter focuses on the Danish model of the consensus conference, where 12–16 individuals engage in two preparatory study weekends before participating in a final public conference involving stakeholders and policymakers as witnesses. Rather than being the result of a majority vote or negotiation, consensus in this model emerges through deliberation, where participants work toward a shared understanding and agreement. The chapter assesses the model’s strengths and limitations based on key criteria, including input, procedural, and outcome legitimacy; clarity and transparency; equal opportunity; effectiveness and impact; process design; constructive deliberation; participant capacity-building; clarity of purpose; closure determination; timing challenges; institutional commitment; knowledge claims; and resource requirements. The chapter provides insights into the practical and theoretical implications of consensus conferences for democratic deliberation.

Suggested Citation

  • Tanja Perko, 2025. "The Danish Consensus Conference: A Critical Evaluation," Risk, Governance and Society, in: Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation, pages 189-212, Springer.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:rischp:978-3-032-02302-5_11
    DOI: 10.1007/978-3-032-02302-5_11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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:spr:rischp:978-3-032-02302-5_11. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.