Search Results

< Back Deliberative Global Governance John S. Dryzek, Quinlan Bowman, Jonathan Kuyper, Jonathan Pickering, Jensen Sass, and Hayley Stevenson 2019 , Cambridge University Press Summary Global institutions are afflicted by severe democratic deficits, while many of the major problems facing the world remain intractable. Against this backdrop, we develop a deliberative approach that puts effective, inclusive, and transformative communication at the heart of global governance. Multilateral negotiations, international organizations and regimes, governance networks, and scientific assessments can be rendered more deliberative and democratic. More thoroughgoing transformations could involve citizens' assemblies, nested forums, transnational mini-publics, crowdsourcing, and a global dissent channel. The deliberative role of global civil society is vital. We show how different institutional and civil society elements can be linked to good effect in a global deliberative system. The capacity of deliberative institutions to revise their own structures and processes means that deliberative global governance is not just a framework but also a reconstructive learning process. A deliberative approach can advance democratic legitimacy and yield progress on global problems such as climate change, violent conflict and poverty. Read more Previous Next

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 Research 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. View more 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. View more Advancing theory and methods We provide intellectual leadership in advancing theoretical debates and methodological innovations in deliberative democracy. View more Innovating global governance We are advocating for meaningful global citizen deliberation on urgent and emerging global issues – from climate change to genome editing. View more Democratising environmental governance We are rethinking how human institutions, practices, and principles can develop a productive relationship with the Earth system. View more Our Research Our Working Paper Series Makes preliminary findings of research on deliberative democracy publicly available in advance of publication in journals and books. 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 Archives Archives Seminars Projects Publications News Contact Us Centre for Deliberative Democracy Ann Harding Conference Centre (Building 24) University Drive South, University of Canberra, ACT 2617, Australia Email Address: delibdem@canberra.edu.au

< Back The potential of deliberative democracy in like-minded settings Kimmo Grönlund, Åbo Akademi University Tue 14 February 2017 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract When groups consisting of like-minded participants discuss among themselves, their views tend to become more extreme. This phenomenon is known as group polarization. Cass Sunstein (2002, 2009) calls this discussion in like-minded groups ‘enclave deliberation’. Enclave deliberation has become increasingly common, especially in online communities, where it is easy to find like-minded contexts. In the long run, the tendency to discuss in enclaves may threaten democracy, since cross-cutting deliberation with different viewpoints and interests is needed in order to find common solutions for political conflicts. Finnish population-based experiments confirm that like-minded groups tend to become more extreme when they discuss freely. However, when like-minded groups discuss under specific deliberative norms, they do not become more extreme. This finding is relevant to both deliberative theory and policy-making. If the increased polarization tendencies in western democracies can be alleviated with certain rules (especially online), a less hostile, depolarized public sphere could be achieved. About the speaker Kimmo Grönlund is Professor of Political Science and Director of Research of the Social Science Research Institute at Åbo Akademi University in Finland. He is Convenor (together with André Bächtiger) of the Standing Group on Democratic Innovations at the ECPR and Director of the Finnish National Election Study Previous Next

< Back Deliberative democracy and federal constitutional design and building in Myanmar Baogang He, Deakin University / Dr Michael Breen, University of Melbourne Tue 30 October 2018 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract The recent deliberative democracy literature has addressed many issues on constitutionalism. In particular, John Dryzek’s seminal work on deliberative democracy in divided society and James Fishkin’s deliberative polling on constitutional matters offer a new fresh approach and thinking. This paper aims to engage and advance the current theorizing on deliberative democracy and constitutionalism through a case study of deliberative forums on federal constitutionalism in Myanmar. Myanmar is in an important phase of its democratic transition as it tackles the form of federalism most suited to its conditions and aspirations. Since the 1947 Panglong conference, demands by the ethnic nationalities for ‘genuine federalism’, which have been a primary factor behind conflict, have remained unmet and continue to foment unrest and mistrust. The opportunity for substantive federal reform, and associated peace-building, is present and being progressed at the national level, through Union Peace Dialogues, involving elite level representatives from the military, ethnic armed groups and political parties. However, these forums suffer from problems of democratic legitimacy, significant delay, and polarisation. As one supplement to this process, and in order to demonstrate the value of a deliberative, rather than majoritarian, approach to reform, the presenters organised four deliberative forums based on the deliberative polling methodology. Two deliberations involved mostly members of political parties, ethnic armed groups and civil society organisations, while the other two involved mostly laypersons selected by civil society organisation. Designing the deliberative forums in this way helps to address competing recommendations for deliberation in constitution-making and on identity-based issues – namely those that regard such deliberation as best occurring among laypeople, who are more likely to change to their minds but have limited understanding of technical issues, and those who suggest elite-based forums. We found that in each case participants did change their minds, sometimes against expectations, but to a different degree. Technical matters, like the division of powers, were more pertinent to the elite, while issues like whether or not there should be federalism saw more substantial changes among laypeople. Further, involving political parties and ethnic armed groups established a semi-detached link to the official constitutional change process, in this case the Union Peace Dialogues (21st Century Panglong), and the potential to contribute to the establishment of a more deliberative system. About the speakers Baogang He is Alfred Deakin Professor and Chair in International Relations since 2005, at Deakin University, Australia. Graduated with a PhD in Political Science from Australian National University in 1994, Professor He has become widely known for his work in Chinese democratisation and politics, in particular the deliberative politics in China. Professor He has published 7 single-authored books and 63 international refereed journal articles. His publications are found in top journals including British Journal of Political Science, Journal of Peace Research, Political Theory, and Perspectives on Politics. In addition, he published 3 books, 15 book chapters and 63 journal papers in Chinese. Professor He has also held several honorary appointments and research fellowships at renowned universities including Stanford University, University of Cambridge, Columbia University, Leiden and Sussex University. Michael Breen is a McKenzie Postdoctoral Fellow in the School of Social and Political Sciences at the University of Melbourne. Prior to that Michael worked at Deakin University, after completing his PhD at Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. Michael's research focuses on federalism in Asia, and the management of ethnic diversity. He is the author of 'The Road to Federalism in Nepal, Myanmar and Sri Lanka: Finding the Middle Ground' (2018, Routledge) and has participated in Nepal's constitution-making process that established it as a federal democratic republic. Michael's research also explores the role of deliberative democracy and the use of deliberative polling in constitution-making and conflict management. Prior to academia, Michael was a policy maker, negotiator and project manager in various government departments in Australia and international organisations including the United Nations Development Programme. His professional background is in Indigenous rights and native title, political inclusion and environmental conservation. Previous Next

Centre for Deliberative Democracy < Back Deliberative Engagement in Action Masterclass Series Investigator(s): 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

Industry Partners We work with government, international organisations, NGOs, and the creative industry to translate deliberative theory into practice. Democracy R&D Our Centre is proud to be part of Democracy R&D–a global consortium of advocates, scholars, and practitioners of deliberative democracy. Our Centre is represented by Nick Vlahos, Nardine Alnemrand and Nicole Curato in their activities. Connecting to Parliament A collaboration between Centre for Deliberative democracy and Global Governance and the Institute for Democratic Engagement and Accountability.

< Back Andre Bachtiger Associate About André Bächtiger's research focuses on deliberation and political communication, and understanding the preconditions and outcomes of high-quality deliberation in the contexts of representative institutions and mini-publics. He is Professor of Political Theory and Empirical Democracy Research at the University of Stuttgart.

Nicole Curato < Back Global Assembly on the Climate and Ecological Crisis Investigator(s): Nicole Curato We are the institutional lead for research and evaluation of the world’s first global assembly on the climate and ecological crisis. Mohammad Abdul-Hwas, Wendy Conway-Lamb and Nicole Curato are part of this pioneering research team.  2021 Report

< Back A polychrome approach to social movements and public deliberation Sergio Guillén, Australian National University Tue 17 October 2017 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract Within deliberative democrats, the perspective on social movements (SM) has shifted with the ongoing evolution of the field. This has included diverse conceptions such as drivers of discursive contestation, problematic partisans, or complex elements in the deliberative system. In each of those cases, deliberative democracy scholarship has adopted a specific lens that highlights a particular role of social movements in relation to other actors in the deliberative landscape. This emphasis on specific roles allows certain features of SM to be studied in greater depth, but it can also obscure some dimensions that may be relevant for understanding their overall engagement with public deliberation. In my own interpretative study of SM engagement with public deliberation in the highly polarised debate over GMOs in Costa Rica, I sought to develop a more situated grasp of how SM activists enact and construct meaning around their engagement with the diverse spaces of public deliberation. My empirical findings have revealed three distinct orientations within the movement, each of which reflects a converging stream of activist concerns and aspirations in the pursuit of the broader movement goals. While the dominant orientation of partisan resistance corresponds roughly with many of the elements addressed in the scholarship on protest in deliberative systems, the other two orientations trans-partisan inquiry and generative empowerment offer novel elements to the understanding of SM from a deliberative democracy perspective. In this seminar I will discuss the empirical findings of my study concerning the practises through which each orientation of the movement engages with the spaces for public deliberation, and the distinctive claims made through these practises about the content of public discussions, the standing of social actors, the standards of public reasoning, and the sites for public deliberation. I will then outline how these diverse perspectives align in the context of the movement’s collective pursuits and their effects on generating both networked strengths and internal tensions. I will conclude with a discussion of the contributions that a more situated and polychrome exploration of social movements can make to the theory and practice of public deliberation in polarised and diffuse settings. About the speaker Sergio Guillén, is a Ph.D. Candidate at the Crawford School of Public Policy of the Australian National University, and an associated Ph.D. student of the Center for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance in Canberra, Australia. His doctoral research studies the engagement of Central American social movements, such as environmental, indigenous and campesino organizations, with the formal and informal sites of public participation and contention in the deliberative system. Before initiating his doctoral studies, he held the position of Senior Specialist in Social Dialogue at the Foundation for Peace and Democracy (FUNPADEM) in Costa Rica. He has worked for 15 years as a certified mediator and dialogue facilitator in public interest conflict resolution in Latin America. Prior to this, he worked internationally on issues of energy poverty and small-scale clean energy development. He holds a degree in Engineering, from Carleton University, a Master of Arts in Environmental Security and Peace from the University for Peace, and a Graduate Certificate in Natural Resources and Organization Management from the University of Michigan. Previous Next

< Back Public Sphere Deliberation (PSD) Index: Analyzing public deliberation through aggregated data Esha Madhavan, University of Sydney Tue 18 April 2017 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract The Public Sphere Deliberation (PSD) Index analyses speech text through content analysis and delivers aggregated scores useful for evaluating discussions in forums formed for citizen deliberation. The PSD Index approaches public deliberation through the application of the public sphere concept. A framework of normative conditions or criteria of public sphere has been developed through reviewing the works of some notable public sphere deliberation theorists and this was used to arrive at the two main components of the model. Each of these components consists of 21 and 14 indicators. The final score for each forum is derived through weighted additive aggregation standardized to 100-points scale. PSDI‘s strength lies in the design of the comprehensive instrument for content analysis (the indicator questions), yielding a highly replicable design. A multilevel analysis model has also been designed in order to adequately elaborate and engage the outcome of the research methods with the underlying theory. The PSD Index has been applied to measure the democratic potential of public sphere deliberation of forums formed for citizen deliberation during an important law making event in India called the ‘The Lokpal (Ombudsman)Bill’ as part of the ‘India against corruption’ movement during 2011. PSD Index could be the tool to evaluate the processes of deliberative democracy in terms of (i) maintaining of democratic safeguards during deliberative projects, (ii) enhancing the efficiency of the deliberative process along with validating its transparency and legitimacy values and (iii) the extent to which a process of deliberative decision making has been inclusive and decentralized. About the speaker Esha Madhavan investigates the public sphere potential of Internet in the context of India’s democratic politics. As a visiting fellow at the Sydney Democracy Network, University of Sydney, she is conducting research that focuses on the growing significance of citizen deliberation with shifting attention towards self-governance and civic problem solving, scrutiny of arbitrary power beyond the scope of elections, and institutional innovations within monitory democracy. Previous Next

John S. Dryzek < Back Genome Editing: Formulating an Australian Community Response Investigator(s): John S. Dryzek

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 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

< Back Lucy J. Parry Senior Research Associate About Lucy J. Parry is a Research Associate at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance. She is currently the project manager of Monitoring Deliberative Integrity in Australia and a collaborator on the Australian citizens’ jury on genome editing . Prior to her current role she was a Research Associate with Participedia and has documented hundreds of cases and methods of democratic innovation around the world on their crowd-sourced, open access database. Her research interests include deliberative systems, deliberative mini-publics and democratic innovations, and animal ethics. Uniting these areas is a commitment to bring deliberative theory and practice together, along with her methodological expertise in Q Methodology. She has authored a number of publications and presented her research at international conferences in Australia, Austria and the U.K. Her current research explores the impacts and integrity of deliberative mini-publics. Key Publications Jean-Paul Gagnon, Paul Emiljanowicz, Lucy J. Parry, Bomikazi Zeka, Nick Vlahos, Angela Tan-Kantor, Alex Prior, Adrian Bua, and John Hawkins (2022) TaxTrack’: Introducing a Democratic Innovation for Taxation. Australasian Parliamentary Review. Parry, L.J., Asenbaum, H. & Ercan, S.E. (2021). Democracy in flux: a systemic view on the impact of COVID-19. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 15(2): 197-205. https://doi.org/10.1108/TG-09-2020-0269 Parry, L.J. & Ercan, S.A. (2020). Using Participedia to study the impacts of mini-publics. Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance Working Paper 2020/02 . Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance. Parry, L.J., Alver, J. & Thompson, N. (2019). Democratic Innovation in Australasia. In Elstub, S. & Escobar, O. (2019). Handbook of Democratic Innovation and Governance. Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786433862 Parry, L.J. (2019). Discourses on foxhunting in the public sphere: a Q methodological study. British Politics. 14, 290-310. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41293-018-0089-5 Parry, L.J. (2017). Don’t put all your speech-acts in one basket: situating animal activism in the deliberative system. Environmental Values, 26(4), 437-455. https://doi.org/10.3197/096327117X14976900137340 Full list of publications available in GoogleScholar . Teaching Tutor, Language Center, Webster Vienna Private University. 2017-2021. Tutor, Public Policy and Administration, Faculty of Business, Government and Law, University of Canberra. 2017. Graduate Teaching Assistant, History of Western Political Thought, Department of Politics, University of Sheffield. 2014-2016. Administration Co-editor of the Journal of Deliberative Democracy, 2023-present. Editor of the Deliberative Democracy Digest, 2023-present. Co-editor, BroadAgenda, 50/50 by 2030 Foundation, 2017. Public Engagement Parry, L.J., Asenbaum, H., and Ercan, S. A. (2021) Recipes for democratic participation during the pandemic: from anti-lockdown protest to a participatory system. Agora . 15 March. Parry, L.J. (2017) #MeToo and Me: the transformative power in numbers, BroadAgenda , 20 October. Curato, N. and Parry, L.J. (2017) Deliberative Democracy must rise to the threat of populist rhetoric. The Conversation . 7 June.

< 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 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

Community Partners We ground our work on democracy by engaging with community partners in Canberra and around Australia. Canberra Alliance for Participatory Democracy (Def community) We are collaborating with the Canberra Alliance for Participatory Democracy to explore ways to deepen democratic participation in the ACT. We regularly host brainstorming meetings and learning sessions with our international visitors to facilitate exchange of ideas

The CDDGG 10th Anniversary Conversation Series 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 conversation series that is open to all, addressing 10 of the most pressing questions facing deliberative democracy today. Each month we will host a one-hour hybrid conversation 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 conversation. Next event 10 Big Questions 20 February 2024 11:00 am HYBRID How can deliberative democracy listen to nonhumans? Prof Danielle Celermajer, University of Sydney, Australia Frederic Hanusch, Justus Liebig University, Germany Watch Recording Moderated by Dr Hans Asenbaum 12 March 2024 11:15 am HYBRID Can deliberative democracy take root in settler colonial states? Dr Justin McCaul, Australian National University, Australia Dr Emily Beausoleil, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand Watch Recording Moderated by Dr Adele Webb 9 April 2024 11:00 am ONLINE Are mini-publics enough to promote deliberative democracy? Prof Simone Chambers, University of California Irvine, United States Prof Hélène Landemore, Yale University, United States Watch Recording Moderated by Prof John Dryzek 14 May 2024 6:00 pm ONLINE Does deliberative democracy stand a chance in neoliberal times? Prof John Dryzek, University of Canberra, Australia Prof Oliver Escobar, University of Edinburgh Watch Recording Moderated by Prof Nicole Curato 18 June 2024 6:00 pm ONLINE Are everyday citizens competent deliberators? Prof Simon Niemeyer, University of Canberra Prof Daniel Kübler, University of Zurich Watch Recording Moderated by Dr Lucy J Parry 2 July 2024 11:00 am HYBRID How should deliberative democracy respond to extremism? Dr Jordan McSwiney, University of Canberra Prof John Gastil, Pennsylvania State University Watch Recording Moderated by Prof Selen Ercan 6 August 2024 10:00 am ONLINE How can deliberative democracy challenge macho populism? Dr Hans Asenbaum, University of Canberra Dr Maria Esperanza Casullo, Universidad Nacional de Río Negro Watch Recording Moderated by Dr Jordan McSwiney 24 September 2024 6:00 pm ONLINE How can we build a global deliberative democracy? Nicole Curato, University of Canberra William Smith, Chinese University of Hong Kong Watch Recording Moderated by Wendy Conway-Lamb 8 October 2024 6:00 pm ONLINE What can deliberative democracy learn from social movements? Nicole Doerr, University of Copenhagen Claire Mellier, Iswe Foundation Watch Recording Moderated by Madeleine Egan 19 November 2024 6:00 pm HYBRID How deliberative is Australian Democracy? Selen Ercan, University of Canberra, Adele Webb, University of Canberra Andrea Carson, La Trobe University Ariadne Vromen, Australian National University Watch Recording Moderated by Ariadne Vromen Recordings The CDDGG 10th Anniversary Conversation ... Play Video Play Video 01:12:37 How deliberative is Australian democracy? Australian politics is becoming increasingly toxic. The ability to hold constructive discussions or to respectfully disagree on key political debates seems out of reach. While many democracies are embracing a surge in public deliberation, Australian political institutions seem hesitant to adopt innovations that could broaden and deepen democratic conversations. How can we improve the quality of political discourse in Australia and create space for diverse and marginalised voices? You are invited to watch this timely discussion featuring Selen Ercan (University of Canberra), Adele Webb (University of Canberra), and Andrea Carson (La Trobe University). The panel will unpack the reasons behind the state of deliberation in Australia and explore new ways of living together based on justice and mutual respect. The discussion will be moderated by Ariadne Vromen (ANU). Speakers Ariadne Vromen holds the Sir John Bunting Chair of Public Administration at ANU’s Crawford School of Public Policy. She is also Deputy Dean (Research) at the Australia and New Zealand School of Government. Selen Ercan is a Professor and Director at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance, University of Canberra. Adele Webb is a Research Fellow in Democracy and Citizen Engagement at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance, University of Canberra. Andrea Carson is a Professor of Political Communication in the Department of Politics, Media and Philosophy at La Trobe University. Andrea is a political scientist and journalism scholar. This event is part of the University of Canberra's Research Festival 2024 and hosted by the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance. Play Video Play Video 36:19 What can deliberative democracy learn from social movements? Around the world, social movements are prompting deliberative democracy's community of practice to reflect on their theories of change. What principles and taken-for-granted assumptions underpin the so-called 'deliberative wave' in OECD countries? Can deliberative mini-publics commissioned by public authorities spark systemic change, or do they reinforce existing power structures? How can social movements' communicative practices that involve narrative, visual, and artistic forms of expression transform deliberative thinking? What can deliberative democracy learn from social movements? You are invited to watch this conversation on this timely topic featuring Dr. Nicole Doerr (University of Copenhagen) and Claire Mellier (Iswe Foundation). This seminar was chaired by Madeleine Egan. This event is part 9 of a 10-part seminar series on 10 Big Questions on Deliberative Democracy convened by Dr Adele Webb. Speakers Nicole Doerr is an Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Copenhagen. Her work is on deliberative democracy and visual practices, deliberation and critical practices of intersectional translation and migrants' and minorities' contributions to deliberative democratic practice and theory. Claire Mellier is the Knowledge and Practice Lead at Iswe Foundation. She co-initiated and organised the world's first Global Citizens' Assembly for COP26. Moderator Madeleine Egan is a PhD candidate at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. Play Video Play Video 34:42 How can we build a global deliberative democracy? How can we build a global deliberative democracy? Attempting to build a global deliberative democracy before we’ve succeeded in building a national or even local deliberative democracy may seem premature, but the scale of the collective challenges facing humanity makes the question unavoidable. In this conversation, Nicole Curato and William Smith will chart plausible political strategies to build deliberative democracy within and beyond formal institutions of global governance. This event is part 8 of a 10-part seminar series on 10 Big Questions on Deliberative Democracy convened by Dr Adele Webb. About the speakers Nicole Curato is Professor of Political Sociology at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. She is the founder of the Global Citizens' Assembly Network and is leading the research on the world's first global citizens' assembly on the climate and ecological crisis. William Smith is a political theorist with interest and expertise in contemporary democratic theory and contentious politics. He has written extensively about deliberative democracy, exploring its relevance to topics such as civil disobedience, police reform, and transnational and global politics. In relation to the latter, he is currently exploring the limits and potential of ‘mini-publics’ as a means of enhancing the deliberative democratic credentials of transnational and global governance. Moderator Wendy Conway-Lamb is a PhD student at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance, University of Canberra. She explores how those most affected by climate impacts at local levels can be more meaningfully included in global adaptation governance, with an empirical focus on Vietnam’s Mekong Delta. Seminar Convener: Adele Webb Online floor manager: Ferdinand Sanchez All Centre seminars are recorded. To access the recording of our seminar series and other events, visit our YouTube channel. Play Video Play Video 34:51 How can deliberative democracy challenge macho populism? Can deliberative democracy challenge macho populism? Can deliberative democracy challenge macho populism? For Hans Asenbaum, the field of deliberative democracy may have come a long way in recognising female marginalisation, but it has so far neglected cisgender, heterosexual, masculinities. Only when deliberative democracy recognises such hegemonic identities can it challenge the heterosexist domination underpinning macho populism. María Esperanza Casullo has a different take. For her, deliberative democracy can challenge macho populism by upholding the value of the most basic of human activities: talking. Macho populism seeks to define the simple act of talking as unproductive, decadent, in sum, feminine. It has a clear preference for supposedly masculine performances of aggression. Therefore, the act of deliberation itself has the potential to become the grounds for resistance. This event is part 7 of a 10-part seminar series on 10 Big Questions on Deliberative Democracy convened by Dr Adele Webb🌟 This seminar was chaired by Dr Jordan McSwiney. Speakers: Hans Asenbaum is a Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. María Esperanza Casullo is an Associate Professor at the National University of Rio Negro and a researcher at CONICET in Argentina. Jordan McSwiney is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. Load More

< Back The people's duty Shmulik Nili, Australian National University Tue 1 August 2017 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract What is the moral way to respond to the domestic and international aspects of pervasive corruption, when disrupting such corruption might pose serious threats to political and economic stability? What is the moral way to respond to other abuses of public office – and other abuses of public coffers - in the face of such threats? How, more generally, should we deal with disturbing social, economic, and political practices given fears about destabilizing effects of reform? This book offers new answers to such political problems, by constructing two new normative frameworks associated with the people, as the collective agent in whose name modern political power is exercised. I contend, first, that there is distinctive normative value to thinking about the people in a liberal democracy as an agent with integrity that can be threatened, paralleling the integrity of an individual person. Specifically, I argue in favor of seeing the core project of a liberal legal system – realizing equal rights - as an identity-grounding project of the sovereign people, and thus as essential to the people’s integrity. Second, I pursue an analogous move with regard to the people’s property. I present a philosophical account of public property revolving around the proprietary claims that are intertwined in the sovereign people’s moral power to create property rights through the legal system. After developing these integrity and property frameworks, I elaborate their distinctive implications for a range of concrete policy problems around the world. I argue that ideas regarding the people’s integrity and property illuminate corruption scandals that threaten to topple the entire political class (as is currently the case in Brazil). These ideas also cast the practices of executive immunity and presidential pardons as violations of the law’s egalitarian commitments (thus challenging, for instance, the French and American constitutions). Examining Israel’s unstable politics, I further show how attention to the people’s integrity and property can advance our thinking about deeply divided societies. Finally, delving into policy problems surrounding odious debt, I demonstrate how ideas concerning the people’s integrity and property can guide our thinking about the international aspects of entrenched corruption. About the speaker I am a post-doctoral research fellow at the Australian National University's Research School of the Social Sciences (School of Philosophy). Starting in September 2017, I will be an assistant professor of political science at Northwestern University. I received my PhD in political science from Yale University (2016). My main research focuses on the moral assessment of global politics. This focus is informed by social science, by the history of political thought, and by a methodological emphasis on the practical task of political philosophy. My secondary research interests include meeting points between analytical and continental philosophy, as well as conflict and identity in my native Israel. Previous Next

Academic Partners We uphold research excellence by collaborating with an international network of academic partners in diverse disciplines and countries. Earth System Governance John Dryzek and Jonathan Pickering are involved in the Earth System Governance project, the world’s largest network of social scientists working on global environmental governance. John and Jonathan were authors on the project’s new ten-year Science and Implementation Plan. John completed his term as a longstanding member of the project’s Scientific Steering Committee, and Jonathan joined the new Committee. Jonathan continued to co-convene the project’s working group on ecological democracy and co-edited a special issue of the Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning based on the group’s work. European Consortium for Political Research’s Standing Group on Democratic Innovation The Centre maintains an active presence in the activities of the European Consortium for Political Research’s Standing Group on Democratic Innovations. Together with our associates André Bächtiger (University of Stuttgart), Kimmo Grönlund (Åbo Akademi), Sofie Marien (KU Leuven), and Jane Suiter (Dublin City University), our Associate Professor Nicole Curato serves as the co-chair of the Standing Group’s Steering Committee. The standing group coordinates activities related to the study of democratic innovations in Europe, with the aim of fostering an epistemic community of scholars working towards understanding how democratic innovations can improve our politics. Global Citizens’ Assembly Consortium The consortium to organise a deliberative global citizens’ assembly on genome editing continues to gather momentum. Our partners include Missions Publiques (France and Germany), Involve (UK), Genepool Productions (Melbourne), and the University of Tasmania Centre for Law and Genetics. Partners involved in developing national deliberative processes on the same issue include researchers at Welcome Genome Campus (UK), Keele University (UK), Deakin University, Federal University of Minas Gerais (Brazil), Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, KU Leuven (Belgium), University of Cape Town (South Africa), Arizona State University (USA), University of British Columbia (Canada). Our Centre is also one of the founding partners of the Global Citizens’ Assembly in connection with the 26th Conference of the Parties of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Institute for Democratic Engagement and Accountability (IDEA) at The Ohio State University Our Connecting to Parliament project is made possible by our new collaboration with IDEA. Through Professor Michael Neblo and his team of researchers, our Centre was able to design and implement the Australian version of Connecting to Congress which aims to create authentic and actionable engagement between representatives and their constituents International Ethics Research Group   John Dryzek, Jonathan Pickering and Ana Tanasoca are members of the International Ethics Research Group convened by the University of New South Wales Canberra. The group meets regularly to discuss work-in-progress papers. Presentations by Centre members have included a paper by Jonathan on 'Ethical mapmaking: the epistemic and democratic value of normative theory in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessments'. The National Science and Technology Institute for Digital Democracy The Centre collaborates with the Brazilian National Science and Technology Institute for Digital Democracy, which is multi-institutional and multidisciplinary network of research groups and laboratories from all over the world focusing on the use of digital tools to enhance democracy. We continue our joint research activities with through our associate Ricardo Fabrino Mendonça from the Federal University of Minas Gerais. Participedia Our Centre partners with the global research project, Participedia. Selen Ercan and Lucy Parry are members of the Participedia team. Lucy Parry has been providing systematic and practical information on democratic innovations across Australia. Participedia is a collaborative effort to identify, document, and learn from the hundreds of thousands of new channels of citizen involvement occurring in governments, communities, and organizations throughout the world. Participedia's crowdsourcing platform gives everyone the ability to share knowledge and information about these processes. The resulting catalogue provides the information necessary for scholars, practitioners, and members of the public to understand the development of citizen engagement and its contribution to democracy and governance. Participedia is made possible by a Partnership Grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). The project was founded by principal investigator Professor Mark Warren of the University of British Columbia and co-investigator Professor Archon Fung of Harvard University’s Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation. Political Studies Association UK A strong connection to the PSA Participatory and Deliberative Democracy Specialist Group (PDD) has been established this year, as Hans Asenbaum, a long standing PDD co-convenor joined the Centre. With 350 members, PDD is a vibrant network of scholars of deliberative democracy. The connection to PDD allows the Centre to deepen its contacts and collaborative projects with leading scholars in the UK. The PDD convenor team has put all its effort into supporting and engaging the scholarly community in these challenging times. Among the highlights were a six-part summer webinar series that showcased the current work of PDD members and a picture contest for Early Career Researchers Great Barrier Reef Futures Citizens’ Jury Funded by James Cook University (Claudia Benham, Simon Niemeyer and Hannah Barrowman) Moral Disagreements: Philosophical and Practical Implications Funded by the Australian Catholic University (Richard Rowland, Selen Ercan, David Killoren, and Lucy J Parry). Protests and Political Engagement Funded by the Federal University of Minas Gerais Grant. (Selen A. Ercan, Ricardo F. Mendonca, Umut Ozguc). Connecting to Parliament A collaboration between Centre for Deliberative democracy and Global Governance and the Institute for Democratic Engagement and Accountability.

< Back Temple Uwalaka Postdoctoral Research Fellow About Dr Temple Uwalaka is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis. Temple is also a Lecturer in Communication at the Faculty of Arts and Design, University of Canberra. His research interests include digital activism, digital journalism, political marketing, and the use of online and mobile media to influence political change. His work has been published in the Journalism Studies, Communication and the Public, Media International Australia, Communication Research and Practice, Journal of Communication Inquiry, Journal of Political Marketing, African Journalism Studies among others. He has taught diploma, undergraduate and postgraduate level units in many areas of communication including Marketing Communication, Strategic Communication, Journalism, and Public Relations. Key Publications Uwalaka, T. (2024). Social media as solidarity vehicle during the 2020# EndSARS Protests in Nigeria. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 59(2), 338-353. Uwalaka, T., Amadi, A. F., Nwala, B., & Wokoro, P. (2023). Online harassment of journalists in Nigeria: audience motivations and solutions. Media International Australia, 1329878X231206840. Uwalaka, T., & Amadi, F. (2023). Beyond “online notice-me”: Analysing online harassment experiences of journalists in Nigeria. Journalism Studies, 24(15), 1937-1956. Uwalaka, T. (2023). ‘Abba Kyari did not die of Coronavirus’: Social media and fake news during a global pandemic in Nigeria. Media International Australia, 188(1), 18-33. Uwalaka, T. (2023). Nigerian Military Strategic Use of Social Media During Online Firestorms: An Appraisal of the NDA Terrorist Attack. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 01968599231151727. Uwalaka, T., & Nwala, B. (2023). Examining the role of social media and mobile social networking applications in socio-political contestations in Nigeria. Communication and the Public , 20570473231168474. Uwalaka, T. (2023). Evaluating Military Use of Social Media for Political Branding during Online Firestorms: An Analysis of the Afghan Troops Withdrawal. Journal of Political Marketing, 1-17. My Google Scholar address link . Teaching Convener, Global Strategic Communication Planning, 2020-present Convener, Strategic and Crisis Communication 2020-present Convener, Media Analysis and Planning