Search Results

Jonathan Pickering and Pierrick Chalaye < Back Research report: Towards a coherent energy transition: expanding renewable energy and reducing inequalities in Australia Investigator(s): Jonathan Pickering and Pierrick Chalaye In this report, Jonathan Pickering and Pierrick Chalaye explore the synergies and tensions between the expansion of renewable energy and efforts to reduce inequalities in Australia . Read and download the report here: Energy transition report (Dec 2023)

< 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 Cracking the whip: The deliberative costs of strict party discipline Udit Bhatia, University of Oxford Tue 26 September 2017 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract This paper explores how strict party discipline over legislators can harm a legislative assembly’s deliberative capacity. I begin by showing different ways in which control over legislators can be exercised, and why some warrant more attention than others. Next, I discuss three ways in which such control stifles the discursive autonomy of legislators. In the third section, I outline two ways in which deliberation in the context of legislatures can be understood: the classical and distributed approach. The fourth section argues that the stifling of discursive autonomy of legislators imposes costs on deliberation in parliament, whether this is viewed in the classical or the distributed sense. In the fifth section, I outline different approaches we might adopt to party discipline in order to minimise its deliberative costs. About the speaker Udit Bhatia is a doctoral candidate and lecturer (Lady Margaret Hall) at the University of Oxford. His research interests lie at the intersections of democratic theory, political representation and social epistemology. He is currently examining the exclusion of persons from democratic citizenship on the basis of epistemic inferiority. Previous Next

< Back Sara Drury Associate About Sara Drury’s research and practice focus on the intersections of rhetoric and deliberative democracy, with particular attention to argumentation and political judgment. She is Associate Professor and Chair of Rhetoric at Wabash College and serves as Director of Wabash Democracy and Public Discourse.

< Back Vicky Darling Adjunct Professor About Vicky Darling specialises in community engagement and civic participation, strategic planning and governance advice. She also has expertise in change management, workplace culture and research and policy design.

< Back John Parkinson Adjunct Professor About John Parkinson is Professor of Social and Political Philosophy at Maastricht University. He is one of the originators of the deliberative systems approach. His current work is on communicative norms and practices in the digital public sphere.

< Back Hate speech, criminal incitement, and freedom of expression Jeffrey Howard, University College London Tue 9 August 2016 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract One of the most powerful arguments against hate speech is that it is dangerous: it risks inspiring listeners to engage in violence and discrimination against the people the speech smears. Even so, many believe that hate speech should not be banned, since doing so would violate the right to freedom of expression. On this view, banning hate speech disrespect listeners’ autonomy, treating them like children who cannot be trusted to make up their own minds. It compromises democratic deliberation by restricting the marketplace of ideas. And it impinges upon the free development and exercise of citizens’ rational capacities. In this talk I will argue against this popular view, contending that bans on hate speech do not affront our commitment to freedom of speech. My argument begins with an observation: virtually no one thinks that direct incitement to criminal wrongdoing, such as exhorting someone to commit a murder, is protected by the right to freedom of speech. But why not? I argue that this asymmetric treatment of direct criminal incitement, on the one hand, and dangerous hate speech, on the other hand, cannot be sustained. I review a variety of differences between the two forms of dangerous expression, arguing that they are morally insignificant. Once we appreciate the moral concerns that rightly move us to ban criminal incitement—without believing that we violate free speech in doing so—we will see that dangerous hate speech may permissibly be banned, too. About the speaker Jeff Howard is Lecturer in Political Theory and Normative Methods in the School of Public Policy at University College London. Previous Next

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

< Back Frank Fischer Associate About Frank Fischer is professor of politics and global affairs at Rutgers University (USA), teaching public policy and planning. He is also a Senior Faculty Fellow at the University of Kassel (Germany) where he teaches global public policy, U.S. foreign policy, and comparative and global environmental politics.

< Back Ferdinand Sanchez Research Assistant About Ferdinand Sanchez II is a research assistant at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. He recently completed his bachelor's degree in Sociology at the University of the Philippines Diliman in 2022.

Selen A. Ercan, Ricardo F. Mendonca, Umut Ozguc < Back Protests and Political Engagement Investigator(s): Selen A. Ercan, Ricardo F. Mendonca, Umut Ozguc Funded, by Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil, the Project Team includes Selen A. Ercan, Ricardo F. Mendonca and Umut Ozguc Project Description One particularly important event of the beginning of the 21st century has been undoubtedly the cycle of protests crossing frontiers throughout the globe. From Iceland to Hong Kong, and including Tunisia, Egypt, Spain, Greece, the USA, Turkey and Brazil, the recent protest movements were widely noticed due to their size, their transnational dimension and organizational logic. This project aims to study these protest movements with a particular focus on the way they were organized and carried out in Turkey and Brazil in 2013. By drawing on various streams of contemporary democratic theory, the project will investigate: i) the deliberative capacity of these protests; ii) the interplay between conflict and consensus both in theory and practice ; iii) the role of social media and online engagement in the context of recent protests; iv) the symbolic disputes triggered by these protests and the discursive repertoires mobilized in protest performances; v) the type of collective and ‘connective’ action protests generate and their implications in terms of the constitution of political communities.

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

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 Micaela Wolf Honours Student About Micaela is an Honours Student at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. She is dedicated to understanding and strengthening democratic resilience in an era of political polarisation. Her research focuses on the interplay between media, democracy, and extremist ideologies in contemporary Australia. She examines the role of alternative media reporting in amplifying exclusionary politics and ideologies while exploring the importance of media literacy in upholding democratic values against manipulated information. Before commencing her Honours, Micaela completed a Bachelor of Politics and International Relations with a Specialist Major in International Relations and National Security at the University of Canberra. This background, combined with her diverse professional experience across NGO campaigning, renewable energy advocacy, and business development, gives Micaela a unique perspective on the challenges facing modern democracies. Micaela’s research interests stem from her commitment to healthy democracy and positive social change. She is especially interested in the delicate balance between upholding free speech and addressing the challenges of extremist rhetoric in democratic societies. Ultimately, Micaela seeks to help rebuild trust in democratic institutions and inspire better public dialogue. Honours Supervisor Jordan McSwiney

Julia Jennstål and Simon Niemeyer < Back The Deliberative Citizen: Who deliberates, when, why and how? Investigator(s): Julia Jennstål and Simon Niemeyer Funded by the Swedish Research Council ( $1,000.000) , the Project Team includes: Julia Jennstål, Chief Investigator Simon Niemeyer, Chief Investigator Project Description The aim of this project is to systematically address foundational questions regarding the possibilities for improving deliberation in civil society by developing an understanding of the citizen and the factors — psychological, situational, personal, structural, etc. — that lead them to engage in political deliberation. Project Outputs Niemeyer, S. J. ((Forthcoming. Conditional Acceptance)). Deliberation and Ecological Democracy: From Citizen to Global System. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning (Special Issue on Ecological Democracy). Niemeyer, S. J. (Forthcoming, Sched 2019). Knowledge and the deliberative stance in democratic systems: Harnessing scepticism of the self in governing global environmental change In J. Glückler, G. Herrigel, & M. Handke (Eds.), Knowledge for Governance (Vol. Knowledge and Space). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. Jennstål, J. (2019). "Deliberation and Integrative Complexity: Assessing the Development of Deliberative Norms in Minipublics." Swiss Political Science Review 25(1): 64–83. Niemeyer, S. J., & Jennstål, J. (2018). Scaling Up Deliberative Effects: Applying Lessons of Mini-Publics. In A. Bächtiger, J. S. Dryzek, M. E. Warren, & J. J. Mansbridge (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy (pp. 329–347). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jennstål, J. (2018). "Deliberative Participation and Personality: The Effect of Traits, Situations and Motivation." European Political Science Review 10(3): 417-440. Niemeyer, S. J. (2017). Rebuilding Trust in Political Discourse: What deliberative democracy can tell us about how to deal with a changing world . Labor Club: ACT Labor Party. Niemeyer, S. J., & Jennstål, J. (2017). Knowledge and Socratic humility in deliberative systems: Harnessing scepticism of the self in governing global change . Paper presented at the 15th Interdisciplinary Symposium on Knowledge and Space: Knowledge for Governance, Studio Villa Bosch, Heidelberg. Niemeyer, S. J., & Jennstål, J. (2016). The Deliberative Democratic Inclusion of Future Generations. In A. Gosseries & I. González Ricoy (Eds.), Institutions for Future Generations . Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jennstål, J. (2016). Deliberative Participation and Personality: The Effect of Traits, Situations and Motivation (1/2016). Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance Working Paper Series, University of Canberra Niemeyer, S. J., Curato, N., & Bächtiger, A. (2016). Assessing the deliberative capacity of democratic polities and the factors that contribute to it . Paper presented at the ECPR Joimt Sessions, Pisa.

Latest News - Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance < Back Democratic Transformations: A conversation on systemic change 12 Jan 2024 6 February 2024 Juliet Room, Verity Lane Market, Sydney Building, 50 Northbourne Avenue, Canberra ACT Reception: 5:30 pm Panel discussion: 6:00 – 7:15 pm Democracies’ responses to environmental crises, health emergencies, and racial violence have been unsatisfactory, to say the least. Hyper-partisan politics have taken over our representative democracies, rendering our democratic institutions vulnerable to political deadlocks and cheap political point-scoring. While there are many reasons to lose trust in our democracy, there are also many reasons to fight for it. You are invited to join a conversation on how we can transform Australia’s democracy and chart pathways for systemic change. Our discussion will kick off with three international speakers who will share lessons from democratic innovations that have taken off all over the world and demonstrate how randomly selected citizen bodies, decolonising and anti-racist action, and listening to nature and nonhumans can transform democracies today. This will be followed by an open discussion, where audiences can propose their own ideas for democratic transformation. Speakers Hans Asenbaum is the author of The Politics of Becoming: Anonymity and Democracy in the Digital Age. He is senior research fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy & Global Governance at the University of Canberra. Yves Sintomer is the author of The Government of Chance Sortition and Democracy from Athens to the Present. He is a Professor of Political Science at the Institut Universitaire de France. Melissa Williams is the founding director of the University of Toronto’s Centre for Ethics. She is the author and editor of numerous books, including Voice, Trust, and Memory: Marginalized Groups and the Failings of Liberal Representation. This event launches the new blog series on Democratic Transformations led by the Centre for Deliberative Democracy & Global Governance and the European Consortium for Political Research. Read the blog here . Registration is a must — secure your spot now through this link .

< Back PROMOTING DEMOCRACY IN THE DIGITAL PUBLIC SPHERE Democratic debate has undergone a structural transformation due to the rise of the Internet, social media and online communities. About this event Democratic debate has undergone a structural transformation due to the rise of the Internet, social media and online communities. Scholars of political communication have sought to diagnose the threat these changes pose, but empirical evidence often makes it unclear exactly what response should be made to concerning practices. In this paper we argue that debates around the regulation of the public sphere can benefit from engaging more directly with democratic theory. Drawing on Jürgen Habermas’s “coffeehouse model,” we establish theoretical markers for desirable practice online and consider the conditions under which these ideals can be advanced. Focusing on the significance of both digital design and user behaviour, we suggest initiatives that can promote favoured democratic ideals, arguing for a more proactive as opposed to reactive response to trends online. Dr Kate Dommett is Senior Lecturer at the University of Sheffield. Her research focuses on digital campaigning, political advertising, data and democracy. Dr Dommett recently served as Special Advisor to the House of Lords Committee on Democracy and Digital Technology. She was awarded the 2020 Richard Rose Prize by the Political Studies Association for an early-career scholar who has made a distinctive contribution to British politics. Her Book, The Reimagined Party was published in 2020. Seminar series convenors Hans Asenbaum and Sahana Sehgal . Please register via Eventbrite . Previous Next

Former PhD student < Back Bora Kanra Former PhD student About Bora was the lead investigator of the ARC Discovery Project ‘Communication Across Difference in a Democracy: Australian Muslims and the Mainstream.’ He completed his PhD at the ANU, under the supervision of John Dryzek, about deliberative democracy in divided societies, focusing particularly on the case of Turkey.

< Back John Dore Associate About John Dore is the Lead Water Specialist for Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), based in Bangkok, working primarily across East Asia and South Asia. John’s academic interests in deliberative water governance complement his day-to-day engagement in international water diplomacy.

< Back Learning to value nature? International organizations and the promotion of ecosystem services Hayley Stevenson, Universidad Torcuato Di Tella Tue 11 December 2018 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract The idea of valuing nature has become a core element of contemporary sustainable development and green economy agendas. This has been enabled by the widespread acceptance of the ‘ecosystems services’ concept, which tries to capture the value of the environment for human wellbeing. As the ecosystem services concept is embedded in development planning and economic policy-making, it is important to understand the opportunities it creates for environmental conservation and social development, and its inherent tensions and limitations. This requires a degree of reflexivity in policy-making to ensure that policies are informed by the historical lessons of ecosystem services experiments, the diverse knowledge of contemporary stakeholders, and self-critical awareness of uncertainty and multiple ontological perspectives. An international research team led by Hayley Stevenson and James Meadowcroft is studying the emergence and political uptake of this concept at international and national levels. In this presentation Hayley will share some initial findings about how nature valuation has been integrated into the work of international environmental and development agencies, and the patterns of reflexivity we observe. These findings also cast doubt on the political future of the ecosystem services concept. About the speaker Hayley Stevenson is Associate Professor in International Relations at the Universidad Torcuato Di Tella (Argentina), and Reader in Politics at the University of Sheffield (UK). She is the author of Institutionalizing Unsustainability, Democratizing Global Climate Governance (with John S. Dryzek), and Global Environmental Politics: Problems, Policy, and Practice. She is currently leading an international project with James Meadowcroft, “Ecosystem Services: Valuing Nature for Sustainable Development and a Green Economy”. Previous Next