Search Results

< Back Stephen Elstub Associate About Stephen Elstub's research interests include the theory and practice of democracy, democratic innovation, public opinion, political communication, civil society and citizen participation, viewed through the lens deliberative democracy.

Latest News - Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance < Back New Report Unpacks Risks to the Integrity of Deliberative Mini-Publics 17 Feb 2025 On 11 February 2025, close to 100 academics, practitioners, and policymakers joined the launch of Deliberative Integrity: Risks and Responses in Mini-Public Governance , authored by Dr Lucy J. Parry and Professor Nicole Curato (University of Canberra). The report highlights risks facing deliberative mini-publics (DMPs) and offers strategies to safeguard their integrity. Moderated by Professor Oliver Escobar (University of Edinburgh), the launch featured insights from the authors and expert discussants, including Tessa Dunlop (European Commission), Damien du Preez (Stellenbosch University), and Marjan H. Ehsassi (Federation for Innovation in Democracy – North America). The Report is based on three years of academic research, featuring interviews with over sixty members of the deliberative democracy’s community of practice from around the world. The project was funded by the Australian Research Council’s Special Research Initiative. Five Integrity Risks The report identifies five major risks that challenge the integrity of DMPs including economic pressures, control and constraint of commissioning authorities, the orthodoxy of design where "process is prioritized over people," poor governance structures, and ambiguous integration and impact to the wider political system. Responses to these risks, according to research respondents, are already taking place within the design and implementation of DMPs, within community of practice, and within the broader political systems, although more can be done to mitigate them. “Many people are acutely aware of and anticipate risks to deliberative integrity and try to address them, and that there is already a proactive and collaborative community of practice," said Lucy Parry, one of the report’s authors. “Our aim here has been to help provide a foundation upon which further collaborations can be built,” she added. A Call for Action The authors stress the importance of “honest and reflexive conversations” to uphold deliberative integrity and cautioned that failure to address these risks could reduce DMPs to “another form of citizen engagement instrumentalised for political or commercial gain”. With a growing appetite for institutionalizing participatory governance, the report urges policymakers, academics, and practitioners to adopt stronger safeguards and rethink DMPs' role within the political system. For more details, the full report is available via the University of Canberra . Access the presentation slides and event transcript, here (1) presentation slides and (2) transcript .

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

< Back PROSPECTS OF DELIBERATIVE POWER-SHARING IN AUSTRALIAN CITY COUNCILS? A NEW GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK FOR CO-CREATION Despite the increase of empirical studies on institutionalised public deliberation in OECD countries, where Australia is one of the leading countries, institutionalised local co-creation task committees remain unexplored beyond Northern Europe (OECD 2020). The concept of power-sharing in the context of deliberation and co-creation is also relatively understudied. For this research project, I examine the prospects of deliberative power-sharing in city councils in Australia. I explore the concept of deliberative power-sharing by adapting and applying the Danish local co-creation task committee model, the Gentofte Model, to the democratic, political and institutional context of city councils in Australia (Sørensen & Torfing 2019). The Gentofte Model has been identified as a suitable power-sharing framework between democratically elected councillors and citizens to increase public trust, political legitimacy and bipartisanship because citizens impact public policy directly through distributed political decision-making power (De Jong, Neulen and Jansma 2019). My research project will use action research as the methodology. Specifically, a participatory action research approach will be used to co-develop and implement an institutionalised local co-creation task committee in an Australian city council. My lived-experience with deliberative power-sharing in co-creation from a Danish city council will be a part of the participatory action research process of developing new knowledge and transformative change with Australian mayors, councillors, local government CEOs and citizens (Bartels et al. 2020). The outcomes of my research project aim to contribute to the field of deliberative and participatory governance because the Danish local co-creation task committee model offers a new and deliberative approach to power-sharing between councillors and citizens which has not been explored beyond the North European countries. Seminar series convenors Hans Asenbaum and Sahana Sehgal . Previous Next

< Back New water for water dispute resolution: Tribal water disputes in Arizona and refugee host communities in Lebanon and Jordan Rhett Larson, Arizona State University Tue 10 July 2018 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract Water scarcity often leads to water disputes. New water supplies—such as bulk water imports, desalination, cloud seeding, or increased stream flows from improved forest management—can mitigate water scarcity and thus help avoid, resolve, or mitigate water disputes. However, new water supplies can also aggravate water disputes if not developed in concert with legal reforms. This Article evaluates the role of new water in two cases of water disputes in arid regions and proposes legal reforms to promote new water a means of water dispute resolution. The first case is the adjudication of water rights in the Gila River basin in Arizona, including the long-standing water dispute between the Hope Tribe and the Navajo Nation. The second case involved disputes over water resources in refugee host communities in Lebanon and Jordan. In each case, development of new water faces legal obstacles and environmental concerns that must be overcome if those augmented supplies are to help address ongoing water disputes. About the speaker Rhett Larson is a Morrison Fellow in Water Law and associate professor in the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law. He is also a faculty fellow in the Center for Law and Global Affairs, and the Center for Law, Science, and Innovation. He is a senior research fellow with the Kyl Center for Water Policy at ASU's Morrison Institute for Public Policy. Professor Larson’s research and teaching interests are in property law, administrative law, and environmental and natural resource law, in particular, domestic and international water law and policy. Professor Larson’s research focuses on the impact of technological innovation on water rights regimes, in particularly transboundary waters, and on the sustainability implications of a human right to water. He works on dispute resolution and improved processes in water rights adjudications in Arizona and the Colorado River Basin with the Kyl Center for Water Policy. Professor Larson was a visiting professor and Fulbright Scholar at the Pontifical Catholic University of Ecuador, and works in the Middle East on water security issues. Professor Larson also practiced environmental and natural resource law with law firms in Arizona, focusing on water rights, water quality, and real estate transactions. Previous Next

< Back How to get away with murder? The everyday politics of justification in illiberal times Nicole Curato, University of Canberra Tue 16 October 2018 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract This presentation enquires into the everyday politics of justification that legitimize President Rodrigo Duterte’s bloody war on drugs in the Philippines. Since the President took office in 2016, over 22,000 unsolved killings were documented that may be related to the antidrug campaign. Despite these figures, the drug war, as well as President Duterte continue to enjoy broad support from the public based on the latest polling data. What accounts for this phenomenon? Using in-depth interviews with families left behind by victims of summary executions, community leaders, public officials, and inmates jailed because of drug-related charges, this presentation unpacks the everyday logics of justification that provide discursive power to a controversial policy. It argues that denialism, complicity and deservingness are three logics that structure the ways in which reasons are articulated, negotiated, ignored, and silenced in the public sphere. The presentation concludes by reflecting on the politics of reason-giving during what is described to be illiberal times in one of Asia’s oldest democracies. It also re-examines the virtues of deliberative democracy in dark times. This seminar is co-presented by the Australian National University’s Philippines Project. Previous Next

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

Working Paper Series The Centre for Deliberative Democracy working paper series makes preliminary findings of research on deliberative democracy publicly available in advance of publication in journals and books. The series aims to present new research that makes original, high-quality contributions to the theory and practice of deliberative democracy informed by recent literature in the field. The working paper series is edited by Simon Niemeyer. Contributions to the series are welcomed from staff members, associates and visitors of the Centre. To propose a paper for inclusion in the series, please contact: Simon Niemeyer Professor simon.niemeyer@canberra.edu.au 2024/1 Hans Asenbaum, Nicole Curato, Bonny Ibhawoh, Genevieve Fuji Johnson, Justin McCaul and Ricardo F. Mendonça "Can Deliberative Democracy be Decolonized? A Debate" 2023/2 Lucy Parry "Integrity Challenges in Deliberative Mini-Publics" 2023/1 Mathias Poulsen "Playful Democratic Assemblages" 2022/2 Marie-Isabel Theuwis & Rosa Kindt "Through the Looking Glass" 2022/1 Nick Vlahos "Democratic Restructuring and the Triaging Functions of an Urban Deliberative System". 2021/4 Simon Niemeyer, Francesco Veri, John S. Dryzek and Andre Bachtiger "How Deliberation Happens: Enabling and Activating Deliberative Reasoning". (Published in APSR) 2021/3 John Rountree and Nicole Curato "Citizens' Assemblies and the Public Sphere". 2021/2 Antonin Lacelle Webster "The Political Problem of Hope and its Deliberative Manifestation". 2021/1 Pierrick Chalaye "The Discursive Sources of Environmental Progress and its Limits: Biodiversity Politics in France". 2020/3 Kei Nishiyama, Wendy Russell and Pierrick Chalaye "The Interplay of Facilitative Technique and Design to Increase Inclusiveness." 2020/2 Parry, Lucy J. and Ercan, Selen A. "Using Participedia to study the impacts of mini-publics.” 2019/6 Christoph Niessen and Min Reuchamps "Designing a permanent deliberative citizens' assembly." 2019/5 David M. Farrell, Nicole Curato, John S. Dryzek, Brigitte Geißel, Kimmo Grönlund, Sofie Marien, Simon Niemeyer, Jean-Benoit Pilet, Alan Renwick, Jonathan Rose, Maija Setälä, and Jane Suiter. "Deliberative Mini-Publics: Core Design Features." 2019/4 Niemeyer, Simon. "Intersubjective Reasoning in Political Deliberation: A Theory and Method for Assessing Deliberative Transformation at Small and Large Scale." 2019/3 Pickering, Jonathan. "Deliberative Ecologies: Engaging Complexity Theory to Understand How Deliberative Systems Emerge and Change." 2019/2 Alver, Jane. "Developing a Regional Voice Through a Feminist Forum: The Case of the Pacific Feminist Forum." 2019/1 Curato, Nicole. "From Authoritarian Enclave to Deliberative Space: Governance Logics in Post-Disaster Reconstruction." (Published in Disasters) 2017/3 Asenbaum, Hans. "Revisiting E-Topia: Theoretical Approaches and Empirical Findings on Online Anonymity." 2017/2 Bhatia, Udit. "Cracking the Whip: The Deliberative Costs of Strict Party Discipline." (Published in CRISPP) 2017/1 Nishiyama, Kei. "Enabling Children's Deliberation Schools as a Mediating Space in Deliberative Systems." (Published in Journal of Youth Studies) 2016/2 Dryzek, John S. and Pickering, Jonathan. "Deliberation as a Catalyst for Reflexive Environmental Governance." (Published in Ecological Economics) 2016/1 Jennstål, Julia. "Deliberative Participation and Personality: The Effect of Traits, Situations and Motivation." 2015/1 Pickering, Jonathan. "Top-down proposals for sharing the global climate policy effort fairly: lost in translation in a bottom-up world?" (Published in Routledge) 2014/2 Curato, Nicole and Ong, Jonathan. "Inclusion as Deliberative Agency: The Selective Representation of Poor Women in Reproductive Health Debates." 2014/1 Jennstål, Julia and Simon Niemeyer. "The Deliberative Citizen: The Role of Personality and Context in Deliberative Behaviour." Load More Older Working Paper Series 2014/4 Smith, William. "Disrupting Deliberation: The Impact of Political Protest on Deliberative Systems.", University of Canberra, Canberra. Access > 2014/3 Parry, Lucy. "Q Study in Waiting.", University of Canberra, Canberra. (Published in British Politics) Access > 2013/1 Niemeyer, Simon, Andrea Felicetti & Olga Di Ruggero. "Provisional Report - Analysis of the Citizens’ Initiative Review.", The Australian National University, Canberra. Access > 2012/2 Batalha, Luisa, Simon Niemeyer, Nicole Curato, John Dryzek & John Gastil. "Group dynamics and deliberative processes: Cognitive and Affective aspects.", The Australian National University, Canberra. Access > 2012/1 Niemeyer, Simon. "Building the Foundations of Deliberative Democracy: The Deliberative Person.", The Australian National University, Canberra. Access > 2011/5 Stevenson, Hayley. "Democratising the Governance of Climate Technologies.", The Australian National University, Canberra. Access > 2011/4 Niemeyer, Simon, Kersty Hobson, Jacqui Russell, Imagen Ord-Evans, John Boswell & Elaine dos Santos. "Participant Recommendations and Report: Climate Change and the Public Sphere Project.", The Australian National University, Canberra. Access > 2011/3 Goodin, Robert. "Democratising International Law.", The Australian National University, Canberra. Access > 2011/2 Stephenson, Hayley and John Dryzek. "Democratising climate governance through discursive engagement.", The Australian National University, Canberra. Access > 2011/1 Stevenson, Hayley. "Representing "The Peoples"?.", The Australian National University, Canberra. Access > Load More

< Back Beyond residual realisms: Four paths for remaking participation with science and democracy Matthew Kearnes, University of New South Wales Tue 12 December 2017 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract In light of the contestation of the purposes and objectives of contemporary techno-political decision-making, and the emergence of a more questioning and ambivalent response to assertions of authoritative expertise, attempts to generate socially resilient political settlements across an array of policy domains have increasingly called upon the logics of ‘democratic participation’. In this context, contemporary scientific and environmental policy is increasingly characterised by institutional commitments to fostering public engagement and participation with science, together with greater transparency in the deployment of scientific expertise in decision-making. However, despite notable successes, such developments have often struggled to enhance public trust and build more socially responsive and responsible science and technology. In this paper, we argue a central reason for this is that mainstream approaches to public engagement harbour ‘residual realist’ assumptions about participation and the public. Recent studies in ‘science and technology studies’ (STS) offer an alternative way of seeing participation as co-produced, relational and emergent. In this paper, we build on these approaches by setting out a framework comprising of four interrelating paths and associated criteria for remaking public participation with science and democracy in more experimental, reflexive, anticipatory, and responsible ways. This comprises moves to: forge reflexive participatory practices that attend to their framing, emergence, uncertainties, and effects; ecologise participation through attending to the interrelations between diverse public engagements; catalyse practices of anticipatory reflection to bring about responsible democratic innovations; and reconstitute participation as constitutive of (not separate from) systems of science and democracy. We close by offering some reflections on the ways in which these approaches might be taken up in both analytically and normatively inspired work and scholarship. About the speaker Matthew Kearnes is an Australian Research Council Future Fellow and member of the of Environmental Humanities Group at the School of Humanities and Languages, University of New South Wales. Before arriving at UNSW he held post-doctoral positions at the Department of Geography at the Open University and the Centre for the Study of Environmental Change/Department of Sociology at Lancaster University. Most recently he held a Research Councils UK Fellowship at the Institute of Hazard, Risk and Resilience/Department of Geography, Durham University. Matthew's research is situated between the fields of Science and Technology Studies (STS), human geography and contemporary social theory. His current work is focused on the social and political dimensions of technological and environmental change, including ongoing work on the development of negative emission strategies and soil carbon sequestration. He has published widely on the ways in which the development of novel and emerging technologies is entangled with profound social, ethical and normative questions. Matthew serves on the editorial board Science, Technology and Society (Sage) and on the advisory panel for Science as Culture (Taylor & Francis). For more information about Matthew’s research please visit https://research.unsw.edu.au/people/dr-matthew-benjamin-kearnes and at @mbkearnes Previous Next

< Back Decision makers with a deliberative stance? The hidden world of public deliberation between ministers and their publics Carolyn Hendriks, Australian National University Tue 7 June 2016 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract In this seminar I will discuss a work-in-progress paper that I am currently co-authoring with Associate Professor Jennifer Lees Marshment, University of Auckland. Much of the democratic burden in deliberative democracy rests on effective communication taking place between potentially affected publics and those empowered to make decisions. Yet remarkably little is known about the way contemporary decision makers receive and make collective sense of multiple forms of public input. In our paper we prise open this ‘black box’ by discussing ground breaking empirical findings on how senior political decision makers themselves understand the relationship between public input and their work. An analysis over 50 interviews with former ministers and state secretaries in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand finds that political leaders based at the federal or national level view public input as an integral component of their work. Decision makers place a high premium on personal interactions with the public, such as conversations with individual citizens, or one-one-one exchanges with affected groups. In these informal interactions, decision makers connect with everyday people, hear ‘real world’ stories and learn how issues affect people’s lives. This represents a hidden world of public deliberation taking place between decision makers and their publics that has hitherto been hidden from debates in deliberative democracy. The paper considers what these findings imply for public deliberation, particularly the place of leaders and executive government in contemporary deliberative systems. Please find here the paper. About the speaker Carolyn M. Hendriks is an Associate Professor at the Crawford School of Public Policy at the Australian National University. Her 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, network governance and environmental politics. Carolyn is an appointed member of newDemocracy's Research Committee and sits on the editorial board of several international journals, including the European Journal of Political Research. Previous Next

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)

Former PhD student < Back Katherine Curchin Former PhD student About Katherine is an applied political philosopher with research interests in normative political philosophy, social policy and Indigenous policy in Australia. Katherine completed her PhD in Political Science under the supervision of Prof John Dryzek in 2010. Her doctoral thesis drew upon deliberative democratic theory to explore the ethics of criticising other cultures.

Postdoctoral Research Fellow < Back Beibei Tang Postdoctoral Research Fellow About Trained as a sociologist, Beibei Tan's research focuses on social and political change in reform-era China. She has participated in three interdisciplinary research projects in the fields of sociology, political science and human geography.

Publications End of Year Report 2024 Center for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance 2024 , University of Canberra Read more Building Democratic Resilience: Public Sphere Responses to Violent Extremism Selen A. Ercan, Jordan McSwiney, Peter Balint, and John S. Dryzek 2022 , State of NSW, Department of Premier and Cabinet Read more Research Methods in Deliberative Democracy Selen A. Ercan, Hans Asenbaum, Nicole Curato, Ricardo F. Mendonca 2022 , Oxford University Press Read more Democratizing Global Justice: Deliberating Global Goals Dryzek, J.S. and Tanasoca, A. 2021 , Cambridge University Press Read more Deliberative Minipublics: Core Design Features Curato, N., Farrell D., Geißel, B., Grönlund, K., Mockler, P., Renwick, A., Rose, J., Setälä, M. and Suiter, J. 2021 , Bristol Policy Press Read more Mending Democracy: Democratic Repair in Disconnected Times Carolyn M. Hendriks, Selen A. Ercan, and John Boswell 2020 , Oxford University Press Read more The Political Economy of Devolution in Britain from the Postwar Era to Brexit Nick Vlahos 2020 , Palgrave Read more Assessing the poor’s deliberative agency in media-saturated societies Nicole Curato 2020 , Theory and Society. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-020-09421-1 Read more Mapping and Measuring Deliberation: Towards a New Deliberative Quality André Bächtiger and John Parkinson 2019 , Oxford University Press Read more The Politics of the Anthropocene John S. Dryzek, Jonathan Pickering 2019 , Oxford University Press Read more 1 2 1 ... 1 2 ... 2

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

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.

< Back COMPARING DEMOCRATIC INNOVATIONS Matt Ryan, University of Southampton Tue 5 June 2018 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract Systematic comparisons of democratic institutions, devices, and processes provide a unique quality of knowledge that helps us learn how to improve governance in democracies. The research agenda inspired by the deliberative turn in democratic theory has moved in an increasingly empirical direction, with large scale data-collection an ever more prominent feature of research in the subfield of democratic innovations. Nevertheless, systematic comparisons of more than a handful of cases are still rare. Comparing a large number of democratic innovations presents conceptual challenges and sampling and publication biases have often reinforced a scholarly focus on ‘best practices’ at the expense of learning from failure and variation. In this presentation I report the results of systematic comparisons of more than a handful of cases of democratic innovation by systematically cumulating existing research. In particular I highlight different combinations of conditions that explain citizen control of decision-making worldwide. I show that even though comparing a large number of cases presents methodological and conceptual challenges, engagement with the task is a requirement if our explanatory theories are to be improved. About the speaker Dr Matt Ryan is Lecturer in Governance and Public Policy at the University of Southampton. His research focuses on democratic innovation and participation in politics, the policymaking process, and social science research methods. His most recent publications appear in European Journal of Political Research, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, Local Government Studies, Journal of Public Deliberation and PS: Political Science and Politics. Previous Next

John Dryzek < Back Medical Research Future Fund Investigator(s): John Dryzek Funded through Genomic Health Futures Mission Grant (2020-2022) Genome Editing: Formulating an Australian Community Response (AU$420,000), Project Team includes: John Dryzek Project Description

Selen A. Ercan, Jordan McSwiney, Lucy Parry, Nicole Curato, Hans Asenbaum, Adele Webb, Emanuela Savini and Justin McCaul < Back Deliberative Democracy Toolkit (NSW) Investigator(s): Selen A. Ercan, Jordan McSwiney, Lucy Parry, Nicole Curato, Hans Asenbaum, Adele Webb, Emanuela Savini and Justin McCaul Grounded in research and developed in partnership with public servants, the Guidebook outlines six key features of effective deliberative engagement. It brings together research insights, practical methods, and real-life cases to help anyone plan and run effective engagement processes. Download a copy of the Guidebook here: https://researchprofiles.canberra.edu.au/en/publications/guidebook-for-deliberative-engagement-key-features-and-practical- For inquires please contact delibdem@canberra.edu.au

Professor < Back Nicole Curato Professor About Nicole Curato is a Professor of Democratic Governance at the University of Birmingham's School of Government. Previously, she was a professor at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance, where she founded the Deliberative Democracy Summer School, edited the Journal of Deliberative Democracy, and led the development of the MPP unit on Co-Design and Deliberative Engagement. She also founded the Global Citizens' Assembly Network. A recipient of five Australian Research Council grants (DECRA, Future Fellowship, Linkage Project, Discovery Project, Special Research Initiative), she has led groundbreaking research on deliberative democracy in fragile and conflict-affected settings and developed the theory and practice of deliberative integrity. She may be contacted at n.curato@bham.ac.uk .