Search Results

< 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 Anonymity and democracy: Absence as presence in the public sphere Hans Asenbaum, University of Westminster Tue 28 February 2017 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract While anonymity is central to liberal democracies, it has so far not been conceptually grounded in democratic theory and is often simply equated to privacy. To overcome this omission, a complex understanding of anonymity in the context of communicative democracy is developed. Anonymity is investigated in the literature on different modes of political participation: voting, campaign funding, textual discussions, and masked protesting. Through the observation of anonymity in these various participatory modes, anonymity is defined as highly context dependent identity performance based on the negation of certain aspects of the public coherent persona. The core of anonymity is thus constituted by two contradictory elements: identity creation through identity negation. This core contradiction results in three sets of both democratic and anti-democratic freedoms afforded by anonymity: (1) inclusion and exclusion, (2) subversion and submission, (3) honesty and deception. Contrary to its common interpretation, anonymity does not connote privacy, which constitutes a space separates from the public sphere. The three sets of contradictory freedoms of anonymity are all freedoms of expression and thus inherently communicative. Anonymity is thus situated at the interface between privacy and publicity; it enables absence as presence in the public sphere. About the speaker Hans Asenbaum started his PhD and teaching as external lecturer at the University of Vienna. Since 2013 he is involved in online teaching at the University of Hagen (Germany). Today he pursues his PhD project about the role of social identities and the potential of anonymity for democratic innovations on the internet at the Centre for the Study of Democracy at the University of Westminster with the Politics and International Relations Studentship. Previous Next

Former PhD Student < Back Andrea Felicetti Former PhD Student About Andrea Felicetti's current research analyses engagement in social movements and civil society from a deliberative democratic perspective. He is also working on public deliberation, deliberative theory and the historical investigation of participatory processes.

Postdoctoral Research Fellow < Back Nick Vlahos Postdoctoral Research Fellow About Nick Vlahos is working on participatory and deliberative democracy; particularly how public decision-making can mitigate inequality. He is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance.

< Back Catherine Settle Associate About Catherine’s doctoral research into the citizen’s experience of epistemic practices when deliberative mini-publics are applied in Australian health policy settings focused her attention on the benefits of closing the gap between the theory and practice of deliberative democracy.

Former PhD student < Back Penelope Marshall Former PhD student About Penelope completed her dissertation entitled ‘Playing for Sheep Stations: A Discourse Analysis of Wild Dog Management and Control in New South Wales, Australia’ in 2013 at the Australian National University.

< Back From elected to connected: Designing for recursive representation Nick Vlahos, Selen Ercan, Nardine Alnemr and John Dryzek (University of Canberra), Andrew Leigh (MP) Tue 4 May 2021 11:00am - 12:00pm Virtual seminar Seminar recording is available on our YouTube channel. Abstract Recent thinking on improving the deliberative qualities of elected representation can be captured under the broad heading of what Jane Mansbridge terms recursive representation, which seeks ongoing interaction between representatives and their constituents. This paper explores the possibilities of facilitating such interaction by establishing a series of deliberative townhalls where the constituents meet their elected representatives and discuss the issues of common concern. Empirically, the paper draws on a recent experiment in ‘directly representative democracy’ in Australia, which involved designing two deliberative town halls with a Federal Member of the Parliament to discuss a controversial issue (mitochondrial donation) ahead of a parliamentary debate on this issue. Drawing on the interviews with the participants of these town halls, we argue that recursive representation works well in directly representative democracy to the degree three criteria of deliberative capacity are met: authenticity, inclusion and consequentiality. The paper unpacks the meaning of each criteria from the perspective of town hall participants and discusses their relevance for the theory and practice of recursive representation. About the speakers Nick Vlahos is a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance. Selen Ercan is an Associate Professor of Politics at the Institute’s Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance. Nardine Alnemr is a PhD candidate at the entre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance. John Dryzek is Australian Research Council Laureate Fellow and Centenary Professor in the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis. Andrew Leigh is a Member of the Australian House of Representatives. Previous Next

< Back NATIVE TITLE AS A DELIBERATIVE SPACE FOR INDIGENOUS SELF-DETERMINATION About this event In 1992, the High Court of Australia delivered its historic Mabo v Queensland (No 2) decision, declaring Australian law could now recognise the pre-colonial rights (‘native title’) of Indigenous people to their traditional lands under their own laws. However, under Australian settler-colonial law, native title is constructed as a domestic property right and not as a set of political, cultural or sovereign rights’. Consequently, Indigenous peoples claims to self-determination has attained a prominent place in contemporary political and public debates on Indigenous-state relations in Australia. With Australia continuing to reject Indigenous self-determination, Aboriginal people must engage pragmatically and innovatively with state policies and institutions. In this presentation McCaul discusses examples of democratic innovation within Australia’s native title system as practiced by Aboriginal people focusing on comprehensive settlement agreements between Indigenous groups and the state; participatory governance in relation to the environmental management of Indigenous lands; and efforts to re-build Indigenous nationhood and traditional institutions of governance. McCaul argues native title has created space for public deliberation on self-determination and efforts to decolonise relations, governance, and policymaking between Indigenous polities and the settler colonial state. Justin McCaul is a descendent of the Mbarbarum Traditional Owners of far north Queensland. He joined ANU College of Law as an Associate Lecturer/PhD Candidate in February 2019. He has many years of experience working in native title and Indigenous policy in Australia for several non-government organisations including Oxfam Australia. He also worked in Cambodia on rural development and biodiversity conservation projects with Indigenous groups in northeast Cambodia. Before joining ANU he worked at the National Native Title Council researching the challenges Indigenous organisations face utilising their native title rights. His PhD uses deliberative democracy theory to discuss how Indigenous groups use their native title rights to assert self-determination claims and engage in public policy. Seminar series convenors Hans Asenbaum and Sahana Sehgal . Please register via Eventbrite . Previous Next

< Back Deliberative Systems in Theory and Practice Edited By Stephen Elstub, Selen A. Ercan, and Ricardo Fabrino Mendonça 2018 , Routledge Summary Deliberative democracy is an approach to democracy that requires collective decision-making to be preceded by reasoned, inclusive, and respectful debate for it to be legitimate. It has become an increasingly dominant approach to democracy over the last few decades. In recent years, there has been a particular focus on ‘deliberative systems.’ A systemic approach to deliberative democracy opens up a new way of thinking about public deliberation in both theory and practice. It suggests understanding deliberation as a communicative activity that occurs in a diversity of spaces, and emphasizes the need for interconnection between these spaces. It offers promising solutions to some of the long-standing theoretical issues in the deliberative democracy literature such as legitimation, inclusion, representation, as well as the interaction and interconnection between public opinion formation and decision-making sites more generally. The deliberative systems approach also offers a new way of conceptualizing and studying the practice of deliberation in contemporary democracies. Despite its conceptual and practical appeal, the concept of deliberative systems also entails potential problems and raises several important questions. These include the relationship with the parts and the whole of the deliberative system, the prospects of its institutionalization, and various difficulties related to its empirical analysis. The deliberative systems approach therefore requires greater theoretical critical scrutiny, and empirical investigation. This book contributes to this endeavour by bringing together cutting edge research on the theory and practice of deliberative systems. It will identify the key challenges against the concept to enhance understanding of both its prospects and problems promoting its refinement accordingly. The chapters originally published as a special issue in Critical Policy Studies. Read more Previous Next

New Books on Democracy Play Video Play Video 33:42 Book Drop Series S4E1: Deliberative Democracy for Diabolical Times Play Video Play Video 30:16 Book Launch: Complementary Democracy: The Art of Deliberative Listening, Matt Qvortrup Play Video Play Video 12:31 Book Drop Series S3E3: Deliberative Global Governance Play Video Play Video 06:36 Book Drop Series S3E1: The Legitimacy of Citizen-led Deliberative Democracy Play Video Play Video 13:20 Book Drop Series S3E1: Anthropocene Encounters Play Video Play Video 11:27 Book Drop Series S2E5: Meaning and Action: Play Video Play Video 08:19 Book Drop S1E4: Ethics of Multiple Citizenship Play Video Play Video 10:00 Book Drop S1E6: Global Environmental Politics: Problems, Policy and Practice Play Video Play Video 12:10 Book Drop S1E5: Deliberative Systems in Theory and Practice Play Video Play Video 16:31 Book Drop S1E3: The Politics of the Anthropocene Play Video Play Video 15:41 Book Drop S1E2: Mapping and Measuring Deliberation Play Video Play Video 13:05 Book Drop S1E1: Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy

< Back Assessing the reflexive capacity of international organisations: Can inclusivity translate into progressive policy change? Hayley Stevenson, University of Sheffield Tue 22 July 2014 11:00am - 12:00pm Fishbowl, Building 24, University of Canberra Abstract Recent research confirms a trend of inclusion in global governance: international organizations are ‘opening up’ to civil society. This trend may be cautiously welcomed by scholars and activists concerned with the ‘democratic deficit’ of global governance, as well as ‘epistemic democrats’ influenced by the Aristotelian principle that ‘many heads are better than one’. Yet, we still have a limited understanding of the potential for diverse participation to contribute to policy change in IOs. The nature and scope of ‘reflexive capacity’ at multiple levels of IO agency is largely unclear. Understanding the ways in which heterogeneous perspectives and diverse normative critiques are received, interpreted, and processed is essential to ensure that inclusion is not reduced to the shallow accommodation of civil society. This paper presents a study into the potential for transforming inclusivity into progressive institutional change. Focusing on emerging innovation in environmental policy, the project aims to (a) identify the different discourses that currently exist about the environment-economy nexus; (b) determine how IOs deal with discursive heterogeneity in the process of developing new sustainability strategies; and (c) determine how the means of presenting diverse ideas and delivering critique affects how it is received, interpreted, and processed by IOs. About the speaker Hayley Stevenson is Senior Lecturer in International Relations at the University of Sheffield (UK), and an ESRC Future Research Leader (2013-2016). Her principal research interests include: global environmental politics and climate change, constructivist theory of International Relations, global civil society, legitimacy in international relations, and deliberative global governance. She is the author of Institutionalizing Unsustainability: The Paradox of Global Climate Governance (University of California Press, 2013); and Democratizing Global Climate Governance (with John S. Dryzek, Cambridge University Press 2014). Previous Next

< Back Deliberative policy analysis: What are its conditions of possibility? Hendrik Wagenaar, University of Sheffield Tue 11 April 2017 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract In the Introduction to our book Deliberative Policy Analysis Maarten Hajer and I posed the question: What kind of policy analysis might be relevant to understanding governance in the emerging network society. Our answer was: a policy analysis that is interpretive, practice-oriented, and deliberative. Although I do not claim that DPA has become a school or a household term, the different elements we listed have separately all made great strides in policy analysis in the past 15 years. Interpretive policy analysis has its own journal, conferences and sections in academic organizations; practice theory in policy analysis has taken off and diversified, and deliberation as a policy-analytic approach can be found in ideals of action research and co-producing research with stakeholders. But is DPA possible as an integrated package? To obtain an answer to this question I want to discuss a case of failed DPA: my three-year international comparative study of prostitution policy in the Netherlands and Austria. We tried to apply the full package. Over a period of four years, the study was developed and executed in close cooperation with local policy makers, had a strong interpretive component, zoomed in on administrative practices, yet it ended – at least on the Dutch side – in conflict and acrimony. I would like to use the seminar to explore what went wrong and if we can identify the conditions for successful DPA in real-word policy settings. About the speaker Hendrik Wagenaar is professor at the Department of Urban Studies and Planning at the University of Sheffield. He is also Associate Director of the Crick Centre for Understanding Politics at that university. He publishes in the areas of participatory democracy, prostitution policy, interpretive policy analysis and practice theory. He is author of Meaning in Action: Interpretation and Dialogue in Policy Analysis (M.E. Sharpe, 2011), and co-editor of Practices of Freedom: Decentered Governance, Conflict and Democratic Participation (Cambridge University Press, 2014) He is member of the core group, and one of the chairs of Working Group 1 (Policy and Politics) of the COST Action: ‘Comparing European Prostitution Policies’. His book Designing Prostitution Policy: Intention and Reality in Regulating the Sex Trade (with Helga Amesberger and Sietske Altink) will be published by Policy Press in April 2017. Previous Next

< Back Dannica Fleuss Associate About Dannica Fleuss' research deals with conceptualizations of democratic legitimacy, philosophy of science and deliberative democracy. She is also a postdoctoral research fellow and lecturer in political theory at Helmut Schmidt University (Hamburg).

Latest News - Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance < Back [Event Invitation] Book Launch: Democracy versus Diablo in the USA and Australia 14 June 2024 You are invited to a participatory book launch for André Bächtiger and John S. Dryzek, Deliberative Democracy for Diabolical Times: Confronting Populism, Extremism, Denial, and Authoritarianism. You will hear from one of the book’s authors (John Dryzek) as well as special guests Professor John Gastil from Pennsylvania State University and Associate Professor Caroline Fischer of the News and Media Research Centre at the University of Canberra. You will get an opportunity to discuss their points and deliberate your own ideas about the challenges facing democracy in Australia and the USA, and how best to confront them. There will also be a chance to meet and talk more informally. This book launch will be moderated by Keith Greaves from MosaicLab. About the speakers John Dryzek is Distinguished Professor and former Australian Research Council Laureate Fellow in the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. John Gastil is Distinguished Professor in the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences, Department of Political Science, and School of Public Policy at the Pennsylvania State University. Caroline Fisher is Associate Professor of Communication in the News and Media Research Centre at the University of Canberra and co-author of the annual Digital News Report: Australia. Keith Greaves is the co-founder of MosaicLab, a team of facilitators and engagement practitioners specialising in high influence and deliberative engagement.

< Back Emily Foley Postdoctoral Research Fellow About Emily Foley researches social democratic and centre-left parties, focusing on party politics, political organisation, and participation in Australia. Her work also explores immigration policy-making and labour rights, with an interest in the intersection of democratic governance and social justice. Emily is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. She is currently working on the Australian Research Council-funded Discovery Project Democratic Resilience: The Public Sphere and Extremist Attacks (2021–25). She is also a co-convener of the Australian Political Studies Association Political Organisation and Participation (POP) caucus.

< Back Nivek Thompson Associate About Nivek Thompson's research focuses on the impact of democratic innovations on the attitudes of political elites to the role of citizens in our democracy. She also runs the boutique consultancy, Deliberately Engaging, which recruits mini-publics to support deliberative processes and enhance democratic decision-making.

Latest News - Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance < Back Tackling far-right extremism: Post-Doctoral Research Fellow, Jordan McSwiney, gets among the experts 17 May 2023 Congratulations to our Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Jordan McSwiney. Jordan has been accepted into the Younger Fellow Visiting Program at the Centre for Research on Extremism (C-REX), located at the University of Oslo. Launched in 2016, C-REX is a cross-disciplinary centre for the study of right-wing extremism, hate crime and political violence. Jordan will join leading scholars in this highly topical subject and will present his work on far-right violent extremism and political parties during his fellowship. Asked what he is most looking forward to during the fellowship, Jordan said that he is keen to learn more about the aftermath of the July 2011 attacks and its impact on Norwegian society. His residency at the centre may also provide insights into the indicators of democratic resilience for other communities around the world and will be a great opportunity to build ties that could strengthen our centre’s own Democratic Resilience Project.

Postdoctoral Research Fellow < Back Quinlan Bowman Postdoctoral Research Fellow About Quinlan Bowman is Postdoctoral Fellow at the Centre for Liberal Arts and Social Sciences and the Public Policy and Global Affairs Programme at Nanyang Technological University (Singapore).

< Back Power in high-stake deliberative settings: Analytical insights from linguistics Simona Zimmermann, University of Stuttgart Tue 28 November 2017 The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract What role does power have in real-world mini-publics with real-life consequences? This question has hardly been studied. Yet, experiences from high-stake settings of deliberation that have consequences for participants’ everyday lives - for example in respect to their reputation and relations in the local polity - are highly relevant for integrating deliberative mini-publics in everyday-political life. Based on this reflection, the presented research project seeks to understand the meaning and role of power in the relational network among participants in citizen assemblies of a local small-scale participatory budget institution in Berlin’s district Treptow-Köpenick (Germany). These assemblies discuss and decide over the distribution of a fixed budget among neighbourhood projects which is a competence rarely ceded to citizens by German authorities. For analysis, assemblies are videotaped and studied ethnomethodologically based on a relational approach. The presentation will focus on the contributions linguistics can make to the analysis of power relations in deliberative settings. About the speaker Simona Zimmermann is a PhD candidate in political sciences at the University of Stuttgart (Prof. André Bächtiger). She holds a Master degree in Empirical Social and Political Analysis of the University of Stuttgart and a Diploma and Master from the Institut d’Etudes Politiques (SciencesPo) Bordeaux. Her research interests include deliberative forms of citizen participation and politics in urban planning. She aims at working inter- and transdisciplinary in order to develop solutions for societal challenges. In her PhD project Simona analyses relations of power in deliberative mini publics under a network perspective by qualitative methods of inquiry. Case study is a local participatory budget in Berlin Treptow-Köpenick (Germany). Before obtaining a scholarship from the national talent program (Friedrich-Ebert Foundation), Simona worked in an interdisciplinary research group on sustainable urban mobility (Institute of Urban Design, University of Stuttgart). Here, she occasionally teaches concepts and methods of the social sciences to students in urban planning and architecture. Previous Next

< Back Mara Hernandez Associate About Mara Hernandez pioneered the design and facilitation of multi-stakeholder dialogue and consensus-based coalition building in Mexico, on issues of public policy such as environmental management, human rights and public security.