Search Results

Adele Webb, Nardine Alnemr, Selen Ercan, John Dryzek, Michael Neblo, Hans Asenbaum < Back Connecting to Parliament: Creating authentic engagement between citizens and their elected representatives Project Team: Adele Webb, Nardine Alnemr, Selen Ercan, John Dryzek, Michael Neblo, Hans Asenbaum The world is rapidly changing. Parliaments have a vital role to play in not only recognising new challenges but enabling citizens to connect with and participate in policy-making processes that will impact their lives now and into the future. In amongst the gloomy picture for democracy worldwide, where citizen disengagement is pervasive and palpable, there are glimmers of hope. Instances of parliaments and legislatures finding new ways to augment traditional institutions of representation – exploring innovations in democracy to meaningfully engage with citizens between elections. Project Description Connecting to Parliament (C2P) is one of the CDDGG’s flagship initiatives, which aims to involve more Australians in the processes of parliament, by making democracy more deliberative. The project involves a series of deliberative engagements, including online deliberative town halls, which link a representative sample of constituents with their elected official in productive town hall conversations about the issues that are subject to parliamentary debate in Australia. Through these deliberative processes, parliamentarians gain the opportunity to deepen their understanding of their constituency’s diverse voices, considerations and concerns. Participants make connections with formal decision-makers and have the opportunity for their voice to be heard outside of elections. At the same time, the project provides the opportunity to expand our knowledge about the potential benefits and uses of deliberative democracy. The project builds on the insights gained from the successful Connecting to Congress project led by Professor Michael Neblo and his team at the Institute for Democratic Engagement and Accountability, Ohio State University. Connecting to Parliament replicates this work by designing and analyzing a series of deliberative forums with citizens and elected representatives. Through administering a range of Deliberative Town Halls (in-person, hybrid, and online) C2C aims to identify the modes of deliberative engagement that produce the greatest gains in engagement and increase positive aspects of civic behavior among diverse populations of citizens. Town Hall on Mitochondrial Donation In September 2020, Connecting to Parliament held two Deliberative Town Halls with Member of Parliament Andrew Leigh. These events focused on Mitochondrial Donation, a medical procedure – illegal at the time – that was set to undergo a conscience vote in Parliament. As a “conscience vote,” a relatively rare (occurring roughly once per term) type of vote where MP’s do not have to vote along party lines, Leigh MP was free to vote entirely at his discretion. Greeted with this unique opportunity, Andrew Leigh MP partnered with the Connecting to Parliament project to engage in a deliberative democracy exercise with his electorate. In two town hall meetings, one online and one face-to-face, a series of constituents from Leigh’s electorate of Fenner were randomly selected to weigh the issues surrounding mitochondrial donation. Prior to these events, Member of Parliament Leigh agreed that his vote would be guided by the conclusions of these Deliberative Town Halls. Overwhelmingly, participants in both town halls believed that Mitochondrial Donation should be made legal in Australia. In a statement on the Mitochondrial Donation Law Reform Bill in late 2021, Leigh MP said that: “the overwhelming sentiment among those who attended the forum was to support mitochondrial donation, and I will be voting in favour of this bill.” The majority of the House of Representatives, including Leigh MP, voted in favor of the Bill on December 1, 2021. The Bill passed in the Senate on March 30, 2022; mitochondrial donation became legal in Australia starting October 2, 2022. More information on the Bill may be found here at the Parliament of Australia website . Town Hall on Young People and Australian Politics In August 2021, Connecting to Parliament held a Deliberative Town Hall with Member of Parliament Alicia Payne on the issue of increasing youth participation in politics. The focus of young people was chosen as there is an increasing generational gap between those in power and the nation’s youth; today, the average age of an Australian MP is 52. As the decisions these lawmakers make will have lasting effects for decades, including young people more in the political process will give them greater agency over those who make the decisions that will affect their futures. Partner With Us Connecting to Parliament is a collaborative process that seeks to establish innovative and substantive conversations between constituents and public officials on important policy issues. By working with our team, elected officials will: Co-design the goals for deliberative town halls Participate in 60–90-minute non-partisan, unscripted, third-party facilitated conversations with constituents Learn about informed public interests while opening new channels of communication to a broadly representative sample of the local population Work with academic institutions focused on the public good, which means that our processes are designed to be cost-effective Garner qualitative and quantitative information from participants on their experiences attending townhalls as well as their opinions about specific policy issues. For more information, contact Adele Webb at connecting2parliament@canberra.edu.au

John S. Dryzek, Simon Niemeyer, Nicole Curato < Back Global Citizen Deliberation: Analysing a Deliberative Documentary Project Team: John S. Dryzek, Simon Niemeyer, Nicole Curato Funded by Australian Research Council Linkage Project (AU$439,000), the Project Team includes: John S. Dryzek Simon Niemeyer Nicole Curato Global Citizen Deliberation: Analysing a Deliberative Documentary. The project aims to enact and film the world’s first truly global citizens’ deliberation, a global citizens’ assembly (GCA) on genome editing, and proceed to analyse the impact of the ‘deliberative documentary’ film on public understanding of complex, fast-evolving science and technology. It will investigate the cross-cultural capacity of citizens to deliberate complex value-laden issues, and so ascertain prospects for an informed global public response to challenges posed by genome editing. Research will test the effects of the deliberative documentary on viewers, examining benefits of communicating complex issues via the work of the GCA. Other benefits include improving public trust in governance and advancing the Australian film industry.

Prof Selen Ercan, A/Prof Hans Asenbaum, Dr Bernard Brown, Prof Rousiley Maia, Dr Julia Ester de Paula, Thales Antonelli, Dr Friedel Marquardt, Harshith Ghana < Back Deliberation Game – Australia Edition Project Team: Prof Selen Ercan, A/Prof Hans Asenbaum, Dr Bernard Brown, Prof Rousiley Maia, Dr Julia Ester de Paula, Thales Antonelli, Dr Friedel Marquardt, Harshith Ghana This project explores how deliberative capacity can be developed through interactive and game-based learning. Grounded in the theory and practice of deliberative democracy, the project builds on Compartilha , an educational initiative developed by the Democracy and Public Sphere Research Group at the Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Brazil, led by Professor Rousiley Maia. The project aims to generate innovative knowledge about how people can learn and practise the principles and behaviours of deliberation, including listening, reflection, respectful disagreement. Through structured and interactive gameplay, participants engage with social and political disagreements in ways that encourage constructive dialogue across differences. The field experiment involves short rounds of gameplay and facilitated discussions on topical public issues. The project examines how game-based approaches can support deliberative learning and help participants navigate disagreement and social conflict more effectively. The Australian edition of the project is developed through a partnership between the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and the Media and Public Sphere Research Group at UFMG. The Australian edition of the project is led by Professor Selen Ercan and Associate Professor Hans Asenbaum, in collaboration with Dr Bernard Brown from the Faculty of Education. The Australian field experiments are scheduled to take place in May 2026 in Canberra and Brisbane as part of a research visit by UFMG researchers, Dr Julia Ester de Paula and Thales Antonelli.

David Schlosberg and Simon Niemeyer < Back Rethinking Climate Justice In An Age Of Adaptation: Capabilities, Local Variation, And Public Deliberation Project Team: David Schlosberg and Simon Niemeyer Funding through Discovery Project (DP120104797) ($250,000), the Project Team includes David Schlosberg (Chief Investigator) and Simon Niemeyer (Chief Investigator) Project Description This project aims to produce recommendations, designed by citizens and stakeholders, for climate adaptation policies in three regions of Australia. These recommendations will be based on a definition of climate justice that incorporates basic needs and resources to be protected, as identified by impacted communities.

Simon Niemeyer, Hemant Ojha < Back Governing Climate Resilient Futures: gender, justice and conflict resolution in resource management Project Team: Simon Niemeyer, Hemant Ojha Funded through the Swedish Research Council (VR), “Sustainability and Resilience grant, Governing Climate Resilient Futures: gender, justice and conflict resolution in resource management (JUSTCLIME)” has now entered the last year of its operation. It is a partnership initiative among Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences and other partners based on Norway, Kenya, Nepal and Nicaragua. It has produced two papers with Hemant Ojha as either lead or contributing author in 2022: Khatri, D. B., A. J. Nightingale, H. Ojha, G. Maskey and P. N. Lama ‘Tsumpa’ (2022). "Multi-scale politics in climate change: the mismatch of authority and capability in federalizing Nepal." Climate Policy: 1-13. Ojha, H., A. J. Nightingale, N. Gonda, B. O. Muok, S. Eriksen, D. Khatri and D. Paudel (2022). "Transforming environmental governance: critical action intellectuals and their praxis in the field." Sustainability Science 17(2): 621-635.

Centre for Deliberative Democracy < Back Deliberative Engagement in Action Masterclass Series Project Team: Centre for Deliberative Democracy We design interactive masterclasses for public servants, engagement practitioners, and researchers seeking to deepen their skills in designing and delivering high-quality deliberative processes. Each session blends practical exercises, peer learning, and expert guidance to equip you with the tools, strategies, and confidence to make deliberation more inclusive, representative, and impactful.  Masterclass topics We've designed a suite of masterclasses on core topics in deliberative engagement, but we also work with organisations to create tailored sessions that address specific challenges or learning goals. Whether you choose one of our existing masterclasses or collaborate with us to design something bespoke, each session is adapted to suit your context and needs. Our core masterclass topics include: From invitation to inclusion: building representative deliberative spaces Representation lies at the heart of effective deliberation, but achieving it requires more than just assembling a group of people. This masterclass explores how representation can be meaningfully achieved in deliberative processes, from recruiting diverse participants to ensuring the voices of those not in the room are still heard. We’ll examine different strategies for inclusion, practical ways to incorporate varied perspectives, and approaches for integrating expert opinion without overshadowing community voices. Through case examples and collaborative exercises, participants will leave with a toolkit of methods to create deliberative spaces that are truly representative and inclusive.    By the end of this masterclass, participants will be able to:  Explore and apply diverse strategies for achieving meaningful, inclusive, and balanced representation in deliberative processes.   Apply strategies to ensure the voices of people not directly participating are meaningfully incorporated into deliberations.  Design recruitment and selection approaches that support diversity and inclusivity.  Integrate expert knowledge in ways that inform, without dominating, community perspectives.  Recognise and address barriers that limit participation from underrepresented groups.  Select and adapt methods to support inclusive discussion and equitable participation during deliberations.  Methods in focus: Crafting the Right deliberative process Different goals, contexts, and communities call for different deliberative methods, but how do you choose the right one? This interactive masterclass begins with an introduction to a “library” of deliberative engagement methods, exploring their purposes, strengths, and trade-offs. Participants will then take part in short, immersive deliberations to experience selected methods in action. In the second half of the day, participants will work in teams to design a deliberative process for a chosen scenario, selecting and adapting methods to suit the purpose and context. Expert facilitators will provide feedback on designs, offering practical insights and strategies participants can take back to their own work.    By the end of this masterclass, participants will be able to:  Compare a range of deliberative engagement methods and understand their respective purposes, strengths, and limitations.  Select appropriate methods to match different policy goals, contexts, and communities.  Experience and reflect on the dynamics of different deliberative formats through hands-on participation.  Adapt and combine methods to address practical considerations such as timeframes, resources, and participant needs.  Design a deliberative process that aligns with clear objectives and desired outcomes.  Critically assess a process design to ensure inclusivity, clarity, and effectiveness.  Registration Our 2026 masterclass series is coming soon, with sessions planned across multiple states. Want to be the first to know when registration opens? Email delibdem@canberra.edu.au to join our mailing list. What's Included Certificate of participation from the Centre for Deliberative Democracy, University of Canberra.  A take-home handbook with resources, links, and recommended readings.  An overview of a range of deliberative methods, provided in a handy reference PDF.  Interactive learning through small-group activities, scenario-based exercises, and opportunities to design and test processes.  Pre-reading to set the scene, plus optional articles and resources for ongoing learning after the session.  Catering, coffee, and a collaborative learning environment.    Who should attend These masterclasses are designed for:  Public servants and policy officers involved in community engagement or strategic planning.  Engagement practitioners working in government, non-profits, or consultancy.  Community leaders and advocates interested in strengthening participatory decision-making.  Researchers and students focused on democratic innovation or public policy.  Anyone looking to deepen their skills in designing and delivering inclusive, representative, and effective deliberative processes.    No prior experience with deliberative engagement is required, just an interest in creating meaningful spaces for public participation.  PAST MASTERCLASSES Deliberative Democracy in Action Masterclasses 14-16 May 2025 Effective community engagement starts with the right tools and approaches—and deliberation offers both. The Deliberative Democracy in Action Masterclasses offer a hands-on introduction to the principles and tools of deliberative engagement—an evidence-based approach that leads to more inclusive, constructive, and legitimate outcomes. Whether you're designing consultations, facilitating conversations, or shaping policy, these masterclasses will equip you with practical strategies to engage communities in ways that build trust and deliver impact. Through these sessions, you'll learn how to: Improve the quality of public engagement by creating spaces where participants feel heard, respected, and empowered to contribute. Broaden the reach of public engagement by designing inclusive processes that engage people from all walks of life—not just the usual voices. Balance diverse perspectives by exploring the trade-offs between competing values and interests. Bridge divisions and disagreements through meaningful dialogue and active listening. Drawing from real-world examples in Australia and around the world, the sessions explore fresh, practical approaches to deliberative engagement. Hosted by the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance — a world leader in the study of public participation — this series brings together expert thinkers and practitioners who are helping to reshape democracy for the better. You’ll also have the chance to connect with some of Australia’s leading experts in deliberative engagement and become part of our growing network of practitioners working to make public engagement more meaningful and effective. Participants will also receive a certificate from the Centre of Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance. Full program here: Masterclass Programme .pdf Download PDF • 1.06MB

John S. Dryzek, Hayley Stevenson, Beibei Tang < Back Deliberative Global Governance Project Team: John S. Dryzek, Hayley Stevenson, Beibei Tang Funded through Federation Fellowship (FF0883522) ($1,638,730), the Project Team includes: · John S. Dryzek, Chief Investigator · Hayley Stevenson, Postdoctoral Research Fellow · Beibei Tang, Postdoctoral Research Fellow Project Description The project investigates democratisation of the international system, with special reference to climate change issues; as well as the democratisation of authoritarian systems, with special reference to China. Research results find application in the worldwide movement to put deliberative democracy into practice, be it in global politics, in newly democratic societies, or in the institutions of established democracies. The Federation Fellowship has three sub-projects: (1) Deliberative Democratization in China. In China, traditional democratization paths involving constitutionalism and party competition are obstructed or problematic. China has however allowed substantial deliberative innovation at the local level, in part to help cope with the social and environmental dislocation attending rapid economic growth. The broader intent is to develop a generalizable approach to democratization, emphasizing deliberative capacity. (2) The Deliberative Global Governance of Climate Change. In taking deliberative democracy to the global level, no topic is more important than climate change. The idea is to map the key components of the global deliberative system for the governance of climate change, and assess how effectively they are working in deliberative terms. To the extent this proves to be a deliberative system in disrepair, we need to develop ideas for realistic reform of the system. The international system currently suffers from a severe democratic deficit, but any strengthening of democracy at international and global levels will almost certainly look very different from familiar models found in liberal democratic states. (3) A Deliberative Global Citizens’ Assembly. Building on the successful Australian Citizens’ Parliament held in 2009, the idea is to explore the prospects for a global assembly composed of more or less randomly selected participants. This can be contrasted with existing proposals for a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly, which rely upon problematic combinations of state-nominated participants and a tortuous path to global elections.

Bora Kanra, John Dryzek, Selen A. Ercan, Alessandra Pecci < Back Communication Across Difference In A Democracy: Australian Muslims And The Mainstream Project Team: Bora Kanra, John Dryzek, Selen A. Ercan, Alessandra Pecci Funded through a Discovery Project ($269,000), the Project Team includes: Bora Kanra, Chief Investigator John Dryzek, Chief Investigator Selen A. Ercan, Research Assistant Alessandra Pecci, Research Assistant Project Description Australian Muslims have been at the centre of media attention particularly since September the 11th. Even though they comprise no more than 1,5 per cent of the total population, the debate on the compatibility of Islamic and Western values has been very prominent. To date, this debate has focused little attention on the attitudes of Australian Muslims and how they perceive themselves in relation to Western values. This gap, often filled by negative stereotypes, has a wide range of implications in the area of contemporary governance and public policy. This research project studies the relationship between Islamic communities in Australia and the wider society in the context of ideas about cultural difference and democracy. The degree to which Australian Muslims develop a sense of belonging and social responsibility towards mainstream society is directly linked to the level of their inclusion as well as participation in Australia's multicultural scheme. This project aims to contribute to the possibilities to foster a more productive social and political relationship between Australian Muslims and the mainstream. The empirical substance consists of interviews with both Muslims and non-Muslims, with a view to mapping and analysing discourses about difference and democracy in Australia. The knowledge generated can then be deployed to identify exactly how communication across difference can be promoted in this kind of case. The research is informed by a theoretical perspective that highlights the role of social learning in deliberation in a diverse and democratic society. The project studies both ordinary citizens and opinion leaders in Islamic and non-Islamic communities. Project Outputs Kanra, Bora. (2016) Islam, democracy and dialogue in Turkey: deliberating in divided societies . Routledge. Dryzek, J. S., & Kanra, B. (2014). Muslims and the Mainstream in Australia: Polarisation or Engagement? Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies , 40(8), 1236-1253. Dryzek, J. S., & Kanra, B. (2014). Australian Muslims’ orientations to secular society: Empirical exploration of theoretical classifications. Journal of Sociology , 50(2), 182-198. Kanra, B. (2012). Binary deliberation: The role of social learning in divided societies. Journal of Public Deliberation , 8(1), Kanra, B. and Ercan, S.A. (2012) Negotiating difference in a Muslim society: A longitudinal study of Islamic and secular discourses in the Turkish public sphere. Digest of Middle East Studies , 21(1): 69-88.

Pierrick Chalaye and Kei Nishiyama, together with the Centre’s Associate Wendy Russel < Back Deliberation in Schools Project Team: Pierrick Chalaye and Kei Nishiyama, together with the Centre’s Associate Wendy Russel Funded by The International Association for Public Participation, the Project Team includes: Kei Nishiyama Wendy Russell Pierrick Chalaye Project Description This project is a pilot program to introduce deliberation into public schools. Currently, students learn civic communication skills through debating. This may provide skills for the adversarial, win-at-all-cost, antagonistic style of current political debate, but we think our democracy will be strengthened by bringing a different set of skills to young people. The Deliberation in Schools program will build the capacity of school children to listen, reason, think, communicate and collaborate, so that they have the resources to engage productively as citizens in our democracy, both now and in the future. Classroom deliberation enables students to get a clearer understanding of issues in their society and everyday lives, find their own vocabulary to explain the issue at stake, and thereby cultivate their motivation for further engagement in and beyond school. The pilot begins with programs in two public schools in the ACT (a primary school and a secondary college). Each program involves a series of about 5 teaching sessions (approx. 2 hours each) over one term, focusing on topics selected from the Australian Curriculum and skills relating to the General Capabilities. The team will work with teachers to co-design the teaching sessions to fit with the curriculum and the learning needs of the class. It is anticipated that the deliberative approach being piloted will be used by teachers, but will also be delivered in schools by external practitioners/facilitators working with teachers. Based on our experiences and findings from the pilot, we will develop professional development (PD) resources aimed at teachers and engagement practitioners, which will provide guidance and resources to conduct similar programs in other schools and other settings. The first phase pilot and development of the PD resource is supported by the Australasian branch of the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2), through their Pitch for Practice program. A second phase of the pilot is planned that will extend the program to additional schools (including a high school), build on insights and outcomes of the first phase, and develop a collaborative research project. We are particularly interested in exploring student agency, the role of teachers, and how the program can help to empower students from marginalised groups. As well as providing skills consistent with curriculum requirements and building student agency and civic engagement, the Deliberation in Schools program will build the capacity of schools to govern and make decisions in a genuinely student-centred, inclusive way. It will also stimulate schools and school students to engage in political debates and decision-making, as students become motivated to write letters to politicians, make submissions, launch initiatives, and participate in community engagement activities. Beyond advocacy, this will help to build deep and enduring commitment and capacity for public participation and public deliberation. Project Outputs Russell, Wendy., Nishiyama, Kei., & Chalaye, Pierrick. (2019a) Deliberation in Ainslie School . Project Report submitted to International Association for Public Participation Australasia. Russell, Wendy., Nishiyama, Kei., & Chalaye, Pierrick. (2019b) Deliberation in Hawker College . Project Report submitted to International Association for Public Participation Australasia. Public Engagement Nishiyama, Kei., Russell, Wendy., Chalaye, Pierrick. (2019). What is the Deliberation in School pilot? What we learn? DeliberateACT (14 Feb). Nishiyama, Kei. (2018). Democratic education in multicultural societies. At Waseda University Department of Education Lifelong Education Course (15 Oct).

Kei Nishiyama < Back Practicing and Visualising Democratic Disagreements in the Classroom Project Team: Kei Nishiyama Funded by the Uehiro Foundation on Ethics and Education ($7,468.92), Project Team includes Kei Nishiyama Project Description The project aims to understand the role of democratic disagreements and deliberation in democratic education. Working with school teachers (National Institute for Technology, Tokyo College) in Japan, Kei will engage in action research by introducing and practicing well-designed deliberative activities in the classroom where students talk and think about controversial ethical, moral, and political questions (e.g. abortion, ethics of human enhancement, animal rights). The project considers the following questions: (1) What is the role of deep political, moral, ethical disagreement in democratic education? (2) When students are deeply divided as a result of deliberation, what sort of activities should be designed for enabling them to engage in "democratic" disagreement (rather than merely political, moral, ethical disagreements)?(3)How can meta-consensus mitigate students' deep disagreements and how can we visualise our meta-consensus?

John S. Dryzek, Selen Ercan, Paul Fawcett, Carolyn Hendriks and Michael Jensen < Back Realising Democracy Amid Communicative Plenty: A Deliberative Systems Approach Project Team: John S. Dryzek, Selen Ercan, Paul Fawcett, Carolyn Hendriks and Michael Jensen Funded through a Discovery Project (DP150103615) ($369,700), the Project Team includes: · John S. Dryzek, Chief Investigator · Selen A. Ercan, Chief Investigator · Paul Fawcett, Chief Investigator · Carolyn Hendriks, Chief Investigator · Michael Jensen, Chief Investigator · Hedda Ransan-Cooper, Postdoctoral Research Fellow · Sonya Duus, Research Associate Project Description The ever-increasing volume of political communication (especially online) challenges democracy and effective policy making. This project examines whether, how, why, and to what effect discourse flows within and between different deliberative sites in the new politics of communicative plenty. We apply the idea of deliberative democracy, which puts meaningful communication between citizens and policy makers at the heart of effective governance. It develops a deliberative analysis of controversy surrounding coal seam gas in Australia, using qualitative and ‘big data techniques to collect information.

Nicole Curato < Back Strongmen of Asia: Democratic bosses and how to understand them Project Team: Nicole Curato Funded by the Norwegian Research Council (AU$1.8M via University of Oslo). Project Description This research project investigates a set of strongmen – including presently ruling, fledgling, or former strongmen – in order to compare and understand a political style increasingly dominant in South and Southeast Asia and which we preliminarily call ‘bossism’. These strongmen are explored through fieldwork, online ethnography and media analysis of original language sources. This project is funded by the Norwegian Research Council and administered by the University of Oslo. Nicole Curato is examining the case of the Philippines. Preliminary findings of her research are documented in Strongmen , Inc , published in Australian Foreign Affairs .

Hemant Ojha < Back Enhancing livelihoods from improved forest management in Nepal (EnLiFT 2) Project Team: Hemant Ojha The project “Enhancing livelihoods from improved forest management in Nepal (EnLiFT 2)”, is a forestry research project with funding assistance from the Government of Australia through the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR). The project builds on the success and lessons of the 5-year project FST/2011/076, Enhancing livelihoods and food security from agro forestry and community forestry in Nepal, also known as the EnLiFT project. EnLiFT 2 runs from 2018-2023 aiming to enhance forest management practices in community forests and private land to improve livelihoods, social equity and reasearch paper help environmental impact in Nepal. It is implemented in Kavre and Lamjung Districts in Nepal. Project website: https://enliftnepal.org Project Linkedin Page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/enliftnepal/posts/

Simon Niemeyer < Back Deliberative democracy and climate change: building the foundations of an adaptive system Project Team: Simon Niemeyer Funded through Future Fellowship (FT110100871) ($629,090), Simon Niemeyer (Chief Investigator) Project Description This research seeks to develop an appropriate conception of deliberative democracy to identify those elements of democratic systems that impede the ability to identify and respond to the challenges posed by climate change and identify shortcomings in the theory of deliberative democracy and develop solutions. It does so using empirical evidence relating to the operation of deliberation in real world settings, including evidence from a sister ARC funded Discovery project on mechanisms for scaling up deliberation. As well as contributing to the theory of deliberative democracy and earth systems governance, the research will produce practical recommendations and contribute to public debate.

Mirca Madianou, Nicole Curato, Jonathan Corpus Ong and Jayeel Cornelio < Back Technologies of Humanitarianism: An Ethnographic Assessment of Communication Environments in Disaster Recovery and Humanitarian Intervention Project Team: Mirca Madianou, Nicole Curato, Jonathan Corpus Ong and Jayeel Cornelio Funded by the Economic and Social Research Council Urgency Grant (UK).

Jordan McSwiney < Back The far-right challenge to democracy Project Team: Jordan McSwiney Project description This project examines the varied manifestations of the far right across political parties, social movements, and online platforms in contemporary democracies. It explores the ways far-right groups organise, mobilise, and spread their supremacist ideas. The project aims to generate insights into the challenges the far-right poses to democracy in Australia and abroad, including violent extremism, the undermining of democratic institutions and processes like elections, and the perpetuation (and normalisation) of racism and white supremacy. Project outputs McSwiney, J. (Forthcoming). Far-right political parties in Australia: Disorganisation and electoral failure . Routledge. McSwiney, J., & Sengul, K. (2023). Humour, ridicule, and the far right: Mainstreaming exclusion through online animation . Television and New Media . E-pub ahead of print. Jasser, G., McSwiney, J., Pertwee, E., & Zannettou, S. (2023). ‘ Welcome to #GabFam’: Far-right virtual community on Gab . New Media & Society , 25 (7), 1728–1745. Maher, H., Gunaydin, E., & McSwiney, J. (2022). Western civilizationism and white supremacy: The Ramsay Centre for Western Civilisation . Patterns of Prejudice , 55 (4), 309-330. McSwiney, J. (2022). Organising Australian Far-Right Parties: Pauline Hanson’s One Nation and Fraser Anning’s Conservative National Party . Australian Journal of Political Science , 80 (1), 37-52. Public engagement (select list) Why it’s so hard to stop neo-Nazi public hate parade . The Age . 2023, November 12. Jenna Price: How do we stop misinformation spreading online? The Canberra Times . 2022, December 16. Far-right groups targeting young people, inquiry finds . The Age . 2022, August 30. Right-wing parties line up for make-or-break Victorian state election . The New Daily . 2022, 22 June. Dr Jordan McSwiney on One Nation & Western Civilisation . Yeah Nah Pasaran! 2022, 9 June.

John Parkinson (Chief Investigator) and Núria Franco-Guillén (Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Griffith University) < Back Sparking a National Conversation Project Team: John Parkinson (Chief Investigator) and Núria Franco-Guillén (Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Griffith University) Funded through a Discovery Project (DP160102598) ($224,000) the Project Team includes John Parkinson (Chief Investigator) and Núria Franco-Guillén (Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Griffith University) Project Description This project aims to understand why some promises of a ‘national conversation’ on a policy issue seem to be mere hyperbole, while others seem more authentic. It will compare cases in Australia and Scotland, using an evaluative framework based on both deliberative systems theory and the aims and understandings of key actors in each case, to identify why some real-world efforts work better than others. The result will be new, practical guidance for policy makers that goes well beyond the traditional public engagement literature. Project Webpage Project Outputs Bächtiger, Andrè and Parkinson, John (2019) Mapping and Measuring Deliberation: Towards a New Deliberative Quality . Oxford: Oxford University Press. Franco-Guillén, Núria and Parkinson, John (2018). On Measuring Mass Deliberative Quality : Preliminary Results of a Novel, Electronic Comparative Project. Paper presented at the European Consortium for Political Research Joint Sessions, University of Nicosia. April 10-14.

Simon Niemeyer, John Dryzek, Robert Goodin, Andrè Bächtiger, Maija Setålå, Julia Jennstål, Nicole Curato < Back Deliberative Democracy in the Public Sphere: Achieving Deliberative Outcomes in Mass Publics Project Team: Simon Niemeyer, John Dryzek, Robert Goodin, Andrè Bächtiger, Maija Setålå, Julia Jennstål, Nicole Curato Funded through Discovery Project (DP120103976) ($340,357), the Project Team includes: Simon Niemeyer, Chief Investigator John Dryzek, Chief Investigator Robert Goodin, Chief Investigator Andrè Bächtiger, Partner Investigator Maija Setålå, Partner Investigator Julia Jennstål, Partner Investigator Nicole Curato, Postdoctoral Research Fellow Project Description This project investigates the mechanisms and settings that facilitate the same deliberative outcomes achieved in small group deliberation among the wider population.

Simon Niemeyer, John S. Dryzek, Nicole Curato, Andrè Bächtiger and Mark E. Warren < Back A Metastudy of Public Deliberation: Updating Theory and Practice Project Team: Simon Niemeyer, John S. Dryzek, Nicole Curato, Andrè Bächtiger and Mark E. Warren Funded through a Discovery Project (DP180103014) ($526,411), the Project Team includes: · Simon Niemeyer, Chief Investigator · John S. Dryzek, Chief Investigator · Nicole Curato, Chief Investigator · Andrè Bächtiger, Partner Investigator · Marina Lindell, Partner Investigator · Mark E. Warren, Partner Investigator · Hannah Barrowman, Postdoctoral Research Fellow · Francesco Veri, Postdoctoral Research Fellow · Nardine Alnemr, PhD student Project Description The project combines a meta-study and comparative case study to develop a leading edge understanding of political deliberation by analysing and synthesising results from available studies of deliberation. It aims to reconcile conflicting findings and provide the first comprehensive, theoretically-grounded account of defensible claims about political deliberation. The project will compile the source material and findings in a publicly-available database to facilitate standardisation and enhancement of future research in the field. It will seek to settle important questions that remain among deliberative democrats and, more practically, facilitate avenues for democratic reform in an area where the need for renewal is increasingly pressing.

John Dryzek, Selen Ercan and Lucy J. Parry < Back Participedia Project Team: John Dryzek, Selen Ercan and Lucy J. Parry Funded through the Social Science and Humanities Research Council, the Project Team includes: John Dryzek Selen Ercan Lucy J. Parry. Project Description In recent years, there has been a rapid development of participatory and democratic innovations around the world, with new channels of citizen engagement in politics often falling outside the realm of electoral representation and legislature. Participedia is an online, user-generated collaborative project documenting this growing compendium of participatory politics. It aims to map innovative processes as they develop in almost every country, and provide researchers and practitioners with accessible information, tools and good practice. The Australian contingent of this project builds on the existing Australian catalogue and will provide robust, systematic and practical information on the variety of democratic innovations from all over Australia. The project aims to 1) comprehensively catalogue current and past participatory Australian political processes and 2) explore emergent themes and lessons from Australian cases 3) develop a future research agenda for learning across cases to provide systematic and practical advice for researchers and practitioners worldwide. These objectives feed into Participedia’s primary aims of mapping democratic innovations, explaining and assessing their contribution to democracy and most importantly, transferring this knowledge back into practice.