Search Results

< Back The newDemocracy Foundation: How might institutional collaboration be cultivated? Lyn Carson, newDemocracy Foundation Tue 20 March 2018 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract The newDemocracy Foundation (nDF) has ten years of experience with the practice of mini publics. The energy for change, employing deliberative methods, is clearly increasing. As a research foundation, nDF occasionally commissions external research as well as performing critical analysis and critical reflection in-house. nDF’s latest focus has been on critical thinking and unconscious biases amongst randomly-selected participants—specifically, how to enhance critical capacities of participants and to improve awareness of unexamined biases within both participants and experts. Carson will provide descriptions of current and potential projects (local and global) and discuss gaps in knowledge and potentially-fruitful future research. About the speaker Lyn Carson is a former professor in applied politics at the University of Sydney Business School, currently an honorary professor with the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney, adjunct professor with the University of Western Sydney, and associate of the Centre for Deliberative Democracy & Global Governance at the University of Canberra. ‘Carson’ also currently serves as newDemocracy’s research director. She has written handbooks on community engagement and many articles and book chapters on public participation, including a book, with Brian Martin, Random Selection in Politics (1999) and co-edited The Australian Citizens’ Parliament & The Future of Deliberative Democracy (2013). Previous Next

< Back MINI-PUBLICS AND THE LEGITIMACY DILEMMA: BALANCING THE TENSION BETWEEN DELIBERATION AND PARTICIPATION IN DELIBERATIVE THEORY ABSTRACT This paper explores the so-called legitimacy dilemmas as it arises in deliberative theory. The dilemma is that the higher the number of people participating in deliberation, the lower the quality of deliberation is likely to be, but the outcome might be more legitimate. The more restricted deliberation is, the higher its quality, but the outcome might lack legitimacy. Mini-publics have been proposed as one way out of this dilemma, however, there have been recent criticisms that mini-publics are not an adequate solution because they are not suitably representative of ordinary citizens; nor are they accountable to them. Drawing on analogous debates in the procedural justice literature on the difference between descriptive legitimacy and normative legitimacy, and the ways they converge, I offer an alternative way out of the legitimacy dilemma. I suggest that the perception by ordinary voters that mini-publics are legitimate is both a necessary and sufficient condition for normative legitimacy. BIO Sarah Sorial is a Professor of Law at the Macquarie Law School. Her research specialisation is primarily at the intersection of political philosophy and law. She is particularly interested in how philosophical concepts can be utilised to address various and persistent legal dilemmas, including dilemmas about the limits of speech, the importance of democratic deliberation, and the place of rights in liberal democracies. She has published widely on topics to do with free speech, deliberation, responsibility and punishment, in a range of journals including Law and Philosophy, Journal of Applied Philosophy, Criminal Law and Philosophy, Journal of Social Philosophy, Metaphilosophy, Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy, Journal of Medicine and Philosophy. Previous Next

< Back Refugee politics in the Middle East and the Governance of Syria's mass displacement Tamirace Fakhoury, Lebanese American University Tue 21 August 2018 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract Syria’s neighbourhood currently hosts almost 6 million forcibly displaced from Syria. In this context, supranational actors have provided assistance to both refugee and host communities so as to help Syria’s neighbours cope with the refugee quandary. This seminar will review the overarching policy legacies characterizing refugee governance in the Middle East. It will then explore how state actors namely Lebanon and Jordan and key supranational institutional bodies such as the European Union (EU) and the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) have collaborated but also clashed on the refugee issue, generating ‘governance dilemmas’. The conclusion will show the implications of these dilemmas for the global refugee regime and for the power dynamics in the transregional Mediterranean system. About the speaker Dr. Tamirace Fakhoury is an associate professor in Political Sciences and International Affairs in the Department of Social Sciences, and the associate director of the Institute of Social Justice and Conflict Resolution (ISJCR) . She has furthermore taught at the summer sessions at the University of California in Berkeley between 2012 and 2016. In Fall 2018, Fakhoury will be a visiting fellow at the Käte Hamburger Kolleg/ Centre for Global Cooperation Research where she will be carrying out a project on the European Union’s role in the multi-governance of displacement. Her core research and publication areas are: power sharing in divided societies, migration dynamics and governance, Arab states’ coping mechanisms with forced migration, and the role of immigrant communities and diasporas in political transitions. She is member of the core coordination team of the Global Migration Policy Associates in Geneva. Previous Next

< Back Systemic representation: The democratic legitimacy of self-appointed representatives Jonathan Kuyper, Stockholm University Tue 15 July 2014 11:00am – 12:00pm Fishbowl, Building 24, University of Canberra Abstract Deliberative democracy has taken a systemic turn. Underlying this research agenda is the core idea that democratic deliberation is, and should be, dispersed throughout an interconnected system. Because no single institution can perfectly uphold deliberative ideals, we should take a holistic view and seek to understand how a variety of sites operate in conjunction with one another. In this article I probe how different types of representatives fit within a deliberative system. The core argument is that representatives can act democratically in very different ways depending upon their role within a wider system. I employ this argument to evaluate the democratic legitimacy of 'self-appointed representatives’. Drawing upon Dryzek's notion of deliberative capacity, I argue that self-appointed representatives should be assessed by whether they have a role in the empowered space within a system or rather act as part of the transmission belt from the public space. About the speaker Jonathan Kuyper is a postdoctoral researcher at Stockholm University working on the Transaccess research project (headed by Professor Jonas Tallberg). He completed his PhD at the Australian National University in 2012, during which time he was a visiting student at the European University Institute and Princeton University. His work has been published or is forthcoming in Global Constitutionalism, Journal of Public Deliberation, European Journal of International Relations, Ethics and Global Politics and other outlets. Previous Next

Postdoctoral Research Fellow < Back Jensen Sass Postdoctoral Research Fellow About Jensen works at the intersection of normative political theory and the empirical study of corporations, technology, and the public sphere. He is also interested in corporate power and democratic politics, in particular the regulation of new technologies that promise to transform previously settled norms and institutions.

Faculty Affiliate < Back Jonathan Pickering Faculty Affiliate About Jonathan Pickering's research focuses on democracy and justice in global environmental governance, with an emphasis on climate change and biodiversity. He is an Assistant Professor in the School of Politics, Economics and Society at the University of Canberra, where he teaches International Relations.

Faculty Affiliate < Back Jean-Paul Gagnon Faculty Affiliate About Jean-Paul Gagnon is a democratic theorist specializing in democracy's linguistic artifacts and the theory of non-human democracy. He edits the Berghahn (Oxford/New York) journal Democratic Theory and the Palgrave Macmillan book series on The Theories, Concepts, and Practices of Democracy. He is director of the nascent Foundation For the Philosophy of Democracy.

< Back Meeting great expectations through democratic innovations? Studying the effect of citizen involvement on democratic legitimacy Sofie Marien, University of Amsterdam / University of Leuven Tue 14 March 2017 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract As a result of rising expectations, democratic political systems are confronted with a citizenry that fiercely questions the democratic legitimacy of their political system. Widespread distrust in political actors and institutions and the increasing popularity of populist and anti-establishment candidates and parties are just a few of the indications of this societal challenge. Interestingly, this discontent is by no means paralleled by eroding support for democratic principles as this support is stronger than ever before. Therefore, this discontent has frequently been interpreted as a demand for democratic innovations. In particular, the involvement of citizens in political decision-making processes through deliberative processes is often proposed as a potential solution to meet citizens’ expectations and to address this democratic legitimacy deficit. In this talk I will focus on a recent study that investigates the potential of citizen involvement in political decision-making processes through a deliberative democratic instrument to foster losers’ consent with unfavourable political decisions. About the speaker Sofie Marien is an Assistant Professor at the University of Amsterdam and the University of Leuven. She has a B.S. in Political Science and a P.h.D. in Social Sciences from the University of Leuven (Belgium). She was a visiting scholar at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania in the Spring of 2016 and 2017. She is president of the Belgian Political Science Association VPW. Her substantive research interests include political trust, political engagement, deliberative democracy and political communication with a regional focus on Europe. To investigate these topics, she draws on cross-national surveys, panel surveys and experimental methods. Her studies appeared in journals such as Political Research Quarterly and European Journal of Political Research. Previous Next

Latest News - Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance < Back Call for Workshop Papers: Future-proofing the public sphere, QUT Mar 2024 3 Oct 2023 Important update: Application deadline extended to 3 November! Join us for a research workshop at QUT in 21-22 March 2024, exploring the future of the public sphere, in Australia and beyond. Designed for Australian-based ECRs and HDRs, the workshop is co-hosted by the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance (University of Canberra) and the Digital Media Research Centre (QUT) and funded by the Australian Political Studies Association (APSA). Abstract and short CV to be submitted by 27 October. For enquiries, please contact: Adele Webb ( Adele.Webb@canberra.edu.au ) Katharina Esau ( Katharina.Esau@qut.edu.au )

The Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance (CDDGG) is the world-leading centre for scholarly and applied research in deliberative governance. Our fields of expertise are diverse, but we advance a common research agenda that examines how deliberation – inclusive, reasonable, and reflective communication – can empower people to shape political decisions that affect their lives. Research Repository of Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance Research Projects Deepening citizen engagement We are developing innovative ways of connecting the voices of ordinary citizens to political decision-making through participatory and deliberative approaches to citizen engagement. Button Building democratic resilience We investigate the role of public deliberation in highly polarised and post-crisis contexts, working closely with governments, organisations, and communities to build democratic resilience. Button Advancing theory and methods We provide intellectual leadership in advancing theoretical debates and methodological innovations in deliberative democracy. Button Innovating global governance We are advocating for meaningful global citizen deliberation on urgent and emerging global issues – from climate change to genome editing. Button Democratising environmental governance We are rethinking how human institutions, practices, and principles can develop a productive relationship with the Earth system. Button Our Research News News New Report Unpacks Risks to the Integrity of Deliberative Mini-Publics Welcoming our new PhD and honours students to the Centre [Event Invitation] Book Launch: Democracy versus Diablo in the USA and Australia New Report Unpacks Risks to the Integrity of Deliberative Mini-Publics 1/3 People Learn more about our staff members, PhD students, faculty affiliates and our adjunct professors. View More Our researchers Our Digital Content Digital Content We have a growing offering of videos and podcasts to celebrate the work of our colleagues around the world in areas that speak to our Centre’s research. New books on Democracy Our New Books on Democracy series features interviews with leading scholars about their published works. Read More The CDDGG 10th Anniversary Series In celebration of the Centre's 10th anniversary at the University of Canberra, we are organising a seminar series that is open to all, addressing 10 of the most pressing questions facing deliberate democracy today. Read More Seminar Series The Centre holds weekly seminars on important topics with leading scholars from Australia and around the world. Read More Our Working Paper Series Working Paper Series Our Working Papers make preliminary findings of research on deliberative democracy publicly available in advance of publication in academic journals and books. View More Collaborations Industry Partners We work with government, international organisations, NGOs, and the creative industry to translate deliberative theory into practice. View More Academic Partners We uphold research excellence by collaborating with an international network of academic partners in diverse disciplines and countries. View More Community Partners We ground our work on democracy by engaging with community partners in Canberra and around Australia. View More Our Collaborations Our Archives Archives Seminars Projects Publications News Contact Us Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance Ann Harding Conference Centre (Building 24) University Drive South, University of Canberra, ACT 2617, Australia Email Address: delibdem@canberra.edu.au

Former PhD student < Back Kei Nishiyama Former PhD student About Kei Nishiyama studies deliberative democracy with a specific focus on the role of children and young people. Kei worked at the University of Canberra and the Australian National University and will join the Doshisha University, Japan, from April 2020.

< Back Carolyn Hendriks Associate and Former PhD Student About Carolyn Hendriks' work examines democratic aspects of contemporary governance, particularly with respect to participation, deliberation, inclusion and representation. She has taught and published widely on democratic innovation, public deliberation, policy evaluation, network governance and environmental politics and is an Associate Professor at the Crawford School of Public Policy at the Australian National University.

< Back DELIBERATIVE DEMOCRACY AND DIGITAL PLATFORMS:JOHN GASTIL IN CONVERSATION WITH NARDINE ALNEMR This is the final seminar in our Media, Digital Communication, and Deliberative Democracy series. About this event Digital platforms provide new potentials and challenges to deliberative democracy. In his recent works, Professor John Gastil argues that we need to advance the potential of online deliberation by seeking commitment from political actors and increasing their responsiveness to citizens. Join us in this conversation to explore questions about using digital platforms in deliberative democracy, changes in deliberative thinking about the potential of online deliberation, and some of the persistent challenges such as inclusion. John Gastil (PhD, University of Wisconsin-Madison) is a Distinguished Professor in the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences and Political Science at the Pennsylvania State University, where he is senior scholar at the McCourtney Institute for Democracy. Gastil’s research focuses on the theory and practice of deliberative democracy. The National Science Foundation has supported his research on the Oregon Citizens’ Initiative Review, the Australian Citizens’ Parliament, and American juries. His most recent books are Hope for Democracy (Oxford, 2020) with Katherine R. Knobloch, Legislature by Lot (Verso, 2019) with Erik Olin Wright, and two novels published in 2020, including the near-future sci-fi Gray Matters about the interplay of Alzheimer's, American politics, and artificial intelligence. Seminar series convenors Hans Asenbaum and Sahana Sehgal . Please register via Eventbrite . Previous Next

< Back Towards a new deliberative quality: from unitary and idealized to pluralistic and re-politicized visions of deliberative democracy André Bächtiger, University of Stuttgart Tue 19 February 2019 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract Many researchers and practitioners have understood (and understand) deliberation as a fixed and unitary construct that quasi-automatically supports and strengthens democracy. Yet, empirical research shows that the classic deliberative core can collide with democratic goods. Moreover, deliberative scholars have long focused on “ideal” institutions, such as deliberative mini-publics or institutional settings in politics that promote classic deliberative ideals. But “ideal” institutions in politics reduce deliberation to a rare event; and a focus on deliberative mini-publics means focusing on events that rarely lead to consequential outcomes in the polity and may even undermine democratic legitimacy. In our new book Mapping and Measuring Deliberation, John Parkinson and I understand deliberation as contingent, dependent on different contexts and goals. Moreover, our new approach also understands deliberation as performative and distributed. On this basis, we re-politicise deliberation. Not only is it necessary to broaden the analytical lens and study deliberative action in all kinds of sites of a democratic system, we must also adapt our deliberative ideals to the variegated contexts and goals of deliberation. Finally, we must also grapple with the ´Goldilocks´ question that there may be too much deliberation, requiring us to think of balancing moments between deliberative and democratic ideals. About the speaker André Bächtiger holds the Chair of Political Theory at the Department of Social Sciences at the University of Stuttgart. His research focuses on the challenges of mapping and measuring deliberation and political communication as well as understanding the preconditions and outcomes of high-quality deliberation in the contexts of both representative institutions and mini-publics. His research has been published by Cambridge University Press and in the British Journal of political Science, European Journal of Political Research, the Journal of Political Philosophy, the Journal of Conflict Resolution, European Political Science Review, Political Studies, and Acta Politica. He is co-editor of the forthcoming Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy (co-edited with John Dryzek, Jane Mansbridge, and Mark Warren). Previous Next

< Back Owning the Street: The everyday life of property Amelia Thorpe, UNSW Law Tue 18 May 2021 11:15am - 12:15pm Building 24, University of Canberra / Virtual Seminar Seminar recording is available on our YouTube channel. Abstract Drawing on a recently-published monograph, Owning the Street: The Everyday Life of Property (MIT Press, 2020), this paper examines everyday experiences of and feelings about property and belonging in contemporary cities. It is grounded in an empirical study of PARK(ing) Day, an annual event that reclaims street space from cars. A highly recognizable example of DIY urbanism, PARK(ing) Day has attracted considerable media attention, but not close scholarly examination. Focusing on the event's trajectories in San Francisco, Sydney, and Montréal, Owning the Street addresses this gap, making use of extensive fieldwork to explore these tiny, temporary, and yet often transformative urban interventions. PARK(ing) Day is based on a creative interpretation of the property producible by paying a parking meter. Paying a meter, the event's organizers explained, amounts to taking out a lease on the space; while most “lessees” use that property to store a car, the space could be put to other uses—engaging politics (a free health clinic for migrant workers, a same sex wedding, a protest against fossil fuels) and play (a dance floor, giant Jenga, a pocket park). Through this novel rereading of everyday regulation, PARK(ing) Day provides an example of the connection between belief and action—a connection at the heart of the book’s argument. Owning the Street examines ways in which local, personal, and materially grounded understandings about belonging, ownership, and agency intersect with law to shape the city. The analysis offers insights into the ways in which citizens can shape the governance of urban space, particularly in contested environments. About the speaker Amelia Thorpe is Associate Professor in Law at the University of New South Wales. Previous Next

< Back Democracy inside: Participatory innovation in unlikely places Albert W. Dzur, Bowling Green State University Tue 1 July 2014 11:00am – 12:00pm Fishbowl, Building 24, University of Canberra Abstract This talk will present a brief overview of research on democratic professionals across the United States who have created power-sharing arrangements in organizations, institutions, and workplaces that are typically hierarchical and non-participatory. Democratic professionals emphasize talk and deliberation but, crucially, they also foster physical proximity between formerly separated individuals, encourage co-ownership of problems previously seen as beyond lay people’s ability or realm of responsibility, and seek out opportunities for collaborative work. Unconventional activists, they are not promoting change via formal political institutions; instead, they are renovating and reconstructing their domains practice-by-practice and are making new kinds of education, justice, and government as a result. Drawing on a friendly critique of major trends in contemporary democratic theory, this talk will focus on the implications of this research for thinking about democratic change, citizen agency, and institutions as fields of action. About the Speaker Albert W. Dzur is Professor of Political Science and Philosophy at Bowling Green State University. He is the author of Punishment, Participatory Democracy, and the Jury (Oxford, 2012), Democratic Professionalism: Citizen Participation and the Reconstruction of Professional Ethics, Identity, and Practice (Penn State, 2008), and articles on democratic theory and citizen participation in journals such as Constellations, Criminal Law and Philosophy, Law and Society Review, Political Theory, and Punishment and Society. Working with the Kettering Foundation on his current book project, Democracy Inside: Participatory Innovation in Unlikely Places, he has interviewed democratic innovators in education, criminal justice, and city government about how they open their institutions to deliberation and participation and sustain such norms and practices amid counter-democratic pressures. Project interviews regularly appear in his “Trench Democracy” series for the Boston Review and “Conversations on Participatory Democracy” for the Good Society journal. Previous Next

Latest News - Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance < Back The CDDGG 10-Year Anniversary Seminar Series 31 Jan 2024 In 2024 the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance, at the University of Canberra, turns 10 years old. In celebration, we are organising a seminar series that is open to all, addressing 10 of the most pressing questions facing deliberate democracy today. Each month we will host a one-hour hybrid seminar featuring two short talks by world-leading scholars and practitioners, followed by a moderated discussion. Events will be filmed and posted on our YouTube channel for wider dissemination. Please keep checking our upcoming events page for the details and registration of each month’s seminar.

< Back Bob Goodin Associate About Bob Goodin has taught Government at the University of Essex, and worked as research professor of Philosophy and Social & Political Theory at Australian National University. He is now jointly Professor of Government at the University of Essex and Distinguished Professor of Social & Political Theory and Philosophy at Australian National University.

< Back Inclusion and state capacity in authoritarian regimes Eda Keremoglu-Waibler, University of Stuttgart Tue 4 October 2016 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract Authoritarian regimes have gained renewed scholarly attention in recent years. This is due not only to the persisting number of such regimes, but also to the variation in authoritarian performance. While some authoritarian regimes provide high standards of living for their citizens, others fail to deliver basic public goods. Performance, however, is considered to be a crucial factor conducive to regime persistence. Previous research predominantly assesses formal institutions and broad regime types to account for the variation in performance. However, the role of more fine-grained institutions for citizens’ welfare has been largely neglected. This presentation aims to address this gap by arguing that institutions enforcing both the inclusion of societal interests and state capacity are conducive to policy performance. While the inclusion of public interests is advanced by consultative decision-making, its impact on performance is contingent on favourable conditions for policy enforcement. In order to evaluate this proposition, I present preliminary results of a cross-sectional analysis which investigates the joint impact of consultation and bureaucratic strength on infant mortality rates as a key measure of social performance. The findings are supportive of the assumption: The interaction of consultation and bureaucratic strength is systematically linked to higher performance. When state capacity is high, consultative decision-making does matter for the welfare of citizens. About the speaker Ms Eda Keremoglu-Waibler is an associate at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. She holds a MA in Political Science and is a PhD candidate under the supervision of Prof André Bächtiger at the Institute of Social Sciences at the University of Stuttgart. Her PhD research examines the role of inclusionary and deliberative institutions in nondemocratic regimes. Taking a quantitative approach, she particularly focuses on their impact on policy, the provision of public goods and regime stability. In Stuttgart, she lectures on authoritarian regimes as well as (political) cultural studies and public opinion research. Previous Next

< Back Lala Muradova Associate About Lala Muradova uses experimental research designs combined with observation of real-world deliberative practices to study the cognitive and affective processes underlying democratic deliberation and to understand how individuals participate in deliberative processes. In 2019, Lala received the European Consortium for Political Research’s Best Paper Prize in the Democratic Innovations stream.