Search Results

< Back Alexander Geisler Associate About Alexander Geisler's research interests are in the fields of deliberative democracy, political behaviour, the theory and practice of democratic innovations, and social cognition.

< Back Mending Democracy: Democratic Repair in Disconnected Times Carolyn M. Hendriks, Selen A. Ercan, and John Boswell 2020 , Oxford University Press Summary The fabric of democracy is threadbare in many contemporary societies. Connections that are vital to the functioning and integrity of our democratic systems are wearing thin. Citizens are increasingly disconnected — from their elected representatives, from one another in the public sphere, and from complex processes of public policy. In such disconnected times, how can we strengthen and renew our democracies? This book develops the idea of democratic mending as a way of advancing a more connective approach to democratic reform. It is informed by three rich empirical cases of connectivity in practice, as well as cutting-edge debates in deliberative democracy. The empirical cases uncover empowering and transformative modes of political engagement that are vital for democratic renewal. The diverse actors in this book are not withdrawing, resisting or seeking autonomy from conventional institutions of representative democracy but actively experimenting with ways to improve and engage with them. Through their everyday practices of democratic mending they undertake crucial systemic repair work and strengthen the integrity of our democratic fabric in ways that are yet to be fully acknowledged by scholars and practitioners of democratic reform. Read more Previous Next

< Back The Ethics of Multiple Citizenship Ana Tanasoca 2018 , Cambridge University Press Summary Citizenship is no longer an exclusive relationship. Many people today are citizens of multiple countries, whether by birth, naturalization, or even through monetary means, with schemes fast-tracking citizenship applications from foreigners making large investments in the state. Moral problems surround each of those ways of acquiring a second citizenship, while retaining one's original citizenship. Multiple citizenship can also have morally problematic consequences for the coherence of collective decisions, for the constitution of the demos, and for global inequality. The phenomenon of multiple citizenship and its ramifications remains understudied, despite its magnitude and political importance. In this innovative book, Ana Tanasoca explores these issues and shows how they could be avoided by unbundling the rights that currently come with citizenship and allocating them separately. It will appeal to scholars and students of normative political theory, citizenship, global justice, and migration in political science, law, and sociology. Read more Previous Next

< Back Democratic Theorizing Hans Asenbaum, University of Canberra Tue 13 April 2021 8:00pm-9:00pm Virtual seminar Seminar recording is available on our YouTube channel. Abstract Over centuries, democratic theory has developed emancipatory ideals of inclusion, empowerment, and transparency. These ideals, however, have hardly been applied to the process of theorizing itself. Democratic theory is a product of the ivory tower. The Democratic Theorizing Project sets out to confront this problem. Democratic theorizing – opposed to established approaches to theorizing democracy – conceptualizes theory production as a participatory space. It applies the values of democratic innovations to theorizing. Democratic theorizing includes affected people, empowers those on the margins, and facilitates transparency. The proposed approach attempts to realize these ideals by building on three sources: grounded normative theory, which develops theory in an ongoing conversation with the data; participatory research, which invites participants as research collaborators; and new materialism, which flattens the hierarchies between researchers, participants, and data. The resulting approach of democratic theorizing draws on an ongoing theorizing project in collaboration with the Black Lives Matter movement. About the speaker Hans Asenbaum is a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. His research interests include identity and inclusion in new participatory spaces, digital politics, and theories of deliberative, participatory and radical democracy. His work has been published in the American Political Science Review, New Media & Society, Communication Theory, Politics & Gender, the European Journal of Social Theory, and Political Studies. Hans is Co-convener of the Participatory and Deliberative Democracy Specialist Group of the Political Studies Association in the UK. Previous Next

< Back Problems with liberal proceduralism in normative democratic theory Quinlan Bowman, University of Canberra Tue 2 May 2017 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract Reflection on lived experience seems to indicate that when we reason intelligently about how to craft a “democratic” process, we recognize the need to reason about procedures, virtues, and cultural practices in conjunction. And this would seem to suggest that the role of normative democratic theory should partly be to help democracy’s participants to engage in such reasoning. Yet, a close consideration of the prominent normative democratic theories of Robert Dahl, Joshua Cohen, and Jürgen Habermas reveals that none of these theorists has explicitly depicted the role of normative democratic theory in this way. Part of the explanation for this concerns the kind of “liberal proceduralism” that characterizes their respective theories. A related concern is that in each case it is either unclear how, if at all, the author views his theory as having emerged out of empirical inquiry or how he expects it to guide further such inquiry (or both). Correspondingly, none of these authors presents the “proper” status and function of normative democratic theory in the way that I believe we should: as emerging out of reflection on lived experience with the values of treating persons as free and as equal and as guiding further inquiry into the procedures, virtues, and cultural practices that, in some particular context, are most apt to promote the realization of those values. About the speaker I joined the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance as a Postdoctoral Fellow in 2016, after completing my PhD in Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley. Currently, I am working on a book project, based on my PhD dissertation, entitled “Deliberative Democracy as Reflexive Social Inquiry.” The project juxtaposes selected aspects of the literature on deliberative democracy with ideas drawn from pragmatist approaches to ethics and social inquiry. Broadly speaking, pragmatists theorize by explicitly drawing on the resources provided to us by our actual practices and by reflecting on the consequences they have for actual lives. I deploy pragmatist ideas to develop a normative theory of the democratic process, meant as a contribution to a public philosophy for citizen participation in democratic governance under conditions of significant cultural diversity. The theory is developed through what I refer to as “anthropological-interpretive inquiry” into lived experiences with “treatment as free and equal in joint or collective decision-making.” The theory is basically a deliberative one; yet, my pragmatist orientation makes me critical of certain depictions of deliberative democracy. While at the Centre, I will also be collaborating with John Dryzek on his Australian Research Council Fellowship project, Deliberative Worlds: Democracy, Justice and a Changing Earth System. In particular, we will be collaborating on the topic of “deliberative cultures.” Cognitive science suggests that deliberation manifests a universal human competence to reason collectively. Yet, the character of deliberation varies considerably across space and time. Cross-cultural studies of political deliberation thus promise to provide new insight into the various forms that deliberative practices can take and the various circumstances in which they can flourish. A third project, jointly undertaken with Mark Bevir at the University of California, Berkeley, is entitled “Innovations in Democratic Governance.” The book project, based on a previously published book chapter by the same name, explores how direct citizen participation can feature throughout the varied stages of the public policy cascade. It discusses a range of democratic innovations for public participation. Drawing on case studies from all over the world, the project investigates how public participation can operate at multiple geographical scales – ranging from the neighborhood level all the way up to the transnational – and illustrates how participation at different levels might be linked up. The discussion explores ways that citizens might craft their own rules for participation; monitor those rules and the policies they help generate; and cooperatively implement their own local policies. It also investigates ways in which the role of experts and officials might be transformed into one of largely supporting and facilitating public participation. Previous Next

< Back Elisabeth Alber Associate About Elisabeth Alber has taught and widely published on federalism and democracy, institutional innovation and participatory democracy, comparative federalism and regionalism, intergovernmental relations and policy-making in federal and regional States. She is a senior researcher at the Institute for Comparative Federalism at Eurac Research.

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

< Back Julien VryDagh Associate About Julien Vrydagh researches the policy impact of mini-publics in Belgium. He conducts case studies to trace the policy influence of mini-publics, and compares Belgian mini-publics with a fuzzy set Qualitative Comparative Analysis in order to understand the conditions under which they succeed or not in exerting an influence.

< Back Deliberative andragogy: The role of education in deliberative democracy Timothy J. Shaffer, Kansas State University Tue 21 July 2020 11:00am - 12:00pm Virtual seminar Seminar recording is available on our YouTube channel. Abstract As we think about public discussion shaping political decisions, the role of education plays a part in shaping how people come to think about complex issues and the place of deliberative democratic engagement in public forums, mini-publics, and the like. Today, there is a growing literature exploring deliberative pedagogy—teaching and learning for democratic engagement in formal and non-formal settings such as universities, schools, and community-based settings. While the language does not necessarily denote these distinctions, there is a philosophical difference between pedagogy and andragogy—the education of children and the education of adults—as it influences and shapes the way in which we think about education in democratic practice in multiple settings. This talk will make an argument for why we should think about deliberative andragogy as an impactful way to think about the role of education and why we should consider how this conceptual approach to civic learning offers an important perspective on expertise and lay knowledge in deliberative democracy. About the speaker As an interdisciplinary scholar and practitioner of deliberative democracy, civic education, and group communication, Dr. Timothy J. Shaffer focuses on the advancement of democratic practices by focusing on the role of civic professionals in institutional settings such as higher education, local government, and non-governmental organizations in relationship with diverse communities. Dr. Shaffer is the editor of Deliberative Pedagogy: Teaching and Learning for Democratic Engagement (Michigan State University Press, 2017), Jumping into Civic Life: Stories of Public Work from Extension Professionals (Kettering Foundation Press, 2018), Agri-Culture and Future of Farming: An Interactivity Foundation Discussion Guidebook (Interactivity Foundation, 2018), A Crisis of Civility? Political Discourse and Its Discontents (Routledge, 2019), and Creating Space for Democracy: A Primer on Dialogue and Deliberation in Higher Education (Stylus, 2019). He has published dozens of articles and book chapters in academic publications; presents and engages diverse public audiences through radio, TV, and print; and offers workshops and training to professionals in universities, non-profit organizations, government agencies, and with legislative bodies. Dr. Shaffer currently serves an associate professor in the Department of Communication Studies and as director of the Institute for Civic Discourse and Democracy at Kansas State University. He is also principal research specialist with the National Institute for Civil Discourse at the University of Arizona. Connected to these efforts, Shaffer serves as the associate editor of the Journal of Deliberative Democracy and as a country expert on deliberative democracy in the United States with the Varieties of Democracy project based at the University of Gothenburg. His research centers on the advancement of democratic practices through deliberative politics and civic engagement in higher education and other institutional and community settings. He received his B.A. in Theology and Philosophy from St. Bonaventure University, Master’s in Theology and Master’s in Public Administration from the University of Dayton, and his Ph.D. in Education (Adult and Extension Education, City and Regional Planning, and Community-Based Natural Resource Management) from Cornell University. Previous Next

< Back Deliberative ecologies: Viewing deliberative systems as complex systems Jonathan Pickering, University of Canberra Tue 12 June 2018 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract The ‘systemic turn’ in deliberative democratic theory has yielded valuable insights on how individual sites of deliberation – from parliamentary debates to citizens’ juries and community meetings – interact as parts of a broader deliberative system. This body of work invokes selected ideas from transdisciplinary research on systems, such as the notion that a system as a whole may have characteristics that cannot be reduced to those of its parts. However, there is much more in the broader repertoire of systems/complexity theory that could shed light on how deliberative systems operate and how they could be improved. In this paper I identify several features of complex systems that are relevant for understanding deliberative systems, including feedback loops and non-linear dynamics. I then show how two nascent concepts in research on deliberative systems – ‘deliberative ecologies’ (Mansbridge et al 2012) and ‘deliberative networks’ (Knops 2016) – could be elaborated through a complex systems lens. About the speaker Jonathan joined the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance in 2015. He is a Postdoctoral Fellow working with Professor John Dryzek on his Australian Research Council Laureate Fellowship project, ‘Deliberative Worlds: Democracy, Justice and a Changing Earth System’. He completed his PhD in philosophy at the Australian National University, based in the Centre for Moral, Social and Political Theory and graduating in 2014. His thesis explored opportunities for reaching a fair agreement between developing and developed countries in global climate change negotiations. Before joining the University of Canberra he taught climate and environmental policy at the Crawford School of Public Policy at ANU, and has been a Visiting Fellow at the Development Policy Centre at ANU since 2014. Jonathan’s research interests include the ethical and political dimensions of global climate change policy, global environmental governance, development policy and ethics, and global justice. He has a Masters' degree in development studies from the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), and undergraduate degrees in arts and law from the University of Sydney. Previously he worked as a policy and program manager with the Australian Government's international development assistance program (AusAID, 2003-09). Previous Next

< Back DECOLONIZING DELIBERATIVE DEMOCRACY Deliberative democracy advances an emancipatory project but to unfold its full potential, it needs to face colonial traces within. About this event Deliberative democracy advances an emancipatory project of inclusion, equality, and freedom. Yet these ideals have been produced in a particular economic and cultural context. Emerging out of the humanist Enlightenment tradition and inspired by linguistic and critical theories, deliberative democracy is deeply rooted in Western academia. This also means that despite its emancipatory impetus, it emerged in a context marked by colonial thinking. In this presentation, Mendonça and Asenbaum argue that if deliberative democracy is to unfold its full democratic potential, it needs to face the colonial traces it may carry within it. The presentation proposes six moves towards decolonizing deliberative democracy. In order not to remain in the a purely negative, deconstructive impetus of decolonization, we also want to sketch a positive, reconstructive way forward. Hence, the first three moves we are proposing are deconstructive and aim at deepening critical reflection while the other three moves mark a concrete starting point for a decolonial reconstruction of deliberative democracy: (1) the acknowledgement of the violence often hidden by the narrative of modernity, (2) the recognition of the epistemic asymmetries within the knowledge production of deliberative democracy, (3) the reflection on the colonial drive observable in current approaches to democratic innovations, (4) centring on social injustices cutting across democracies, (5) looking to the Global South in an actual dialogue, (6) including marginalized groups and people outside academia into the theorizing process. Ricardo Fabrino Mendonça is an Associate Professor at the Political Science Department, Federal University of Minas Gerais (Brazil). He is the coordinator of MARGEM (Research Group on Democracy and Justice) and is the Director of International Cooperation of the Brazilian National Institute for Digital Democracy and of the Brazilian Political Science Association. He is also a CNPq (National Council for Scientific and Technological Development) Researcher. Ricardo Mendonça works with democratic theory, critical theory, contentious politics, and political communication. He has recently published in Policy Studies, Constellations, Political Studies, Critical Policy Studies, Policy & Society, Democratic Theory, and several Brazilian journals. He is one of the editors of Deliberative Systems in Theory and Practice (with S. Elstub and S. Ercan, Routledge, 2018), Introdução à Teoria Democrática (with E. Cunha, Editora UFMG, 2018), Deliberação on-line no Brasil (with R. Sampaio and S. Barros, EDUFBA, 2016) and Democracia Digital: Publicidade, instituic?o?es e confronto poli?tico (with M. Pereira and F. Filgueiras, Editora UFMG, 2016). Hans Asenbaum is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. He holds a PhD from the Centre for the Study of Democracy at the University of Westminster in London and is a co-convener of the Participatory and Deliberative Democracy specialist group of the Political Studies Association (PSA). His research interests include identity and inclusion in new participatory spaces, digital politics, and theories of radical democracy. Hans’ work has been published in the American Political Science Review, Political Studies, New Media & Society, and Politics & Gender. Seminar series convenors Hans Asenbaum and Sahana Sehgal . Please register via Eventbrite . Previous Next

< Back Why am I engaged? Walden Bello, State University of New York in Binghamton Tue 26 November 2019 11:00am – 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract Reflecting on his trajectory as an academic and an activist, the speaker will trace his personal evolution as an activist/academic, focusing on the key junctures in this process, and discuss the tension between theory and action, the relationship between methodology and the process of uncovering the real dynamics of power, and the often tragic Orwellian tension between being an intellectual and being a member of a political organization. About the speaker Walden Bello is a Professor of Sociology at the State University of New York in Binghamton. He is the author of more than 20 books including Deglobalization: Ideas for a New World Economy, Capitalism's Last Stand: Deglobalization in the Age of Austerity, and, most recently, Counterrevolutions: The Global Rise of the Far Right and Paper Dragons: China and the Next Crash. The International Studies Association named him the Most Outstanding Public Scholar in 2008. Previous Next

Former PhD student < Back Pierrick Chalaye Former PhD student About Pierrick Chalaye's work focuses on global and comparative environmental politics, cross-cultural approaches to decision-making and participatory and deliberative democratic theories and practices. H is now a research associate with the Centre.

André Bächtiger, Nicole Curato, John Dryzek, Selen A. Ercan, Eda Keremoglu-Waibler, Simon Niemeyer and Kei Nishiyama < Back Understanding and Evaluating Deliberative Systems Investigator(s): André Bächtiger, Nicole Curato, John Dryzek, Selen A. Ercan, Eda Keremoglu-Waibler, Simon Niemeyer and Kei Nishiyama Funded by DAAD/German Academic Exchange Service and Universities Australia, the Project Team includes: André Bächtiger Nicole Curato John Dryzek Selen A. Ercan Eda Keremoglu-Waibler Simon Niemeyer Kei Nishiyama In recent years, deliberative democratic theory turned away from a focus on deliberation within small-scale forums, towards a focus on systems embracing multiple sites of deliberation and decision-making. The shift towards a systems approach enabled scholars to move beyond the limitations of focusing on mini-publics and other democratic innovations and instead think about the various ways in which deliberative activity is dispersed in various spaces of political action. The deliberative systems approach opens up a new way of thinking about deliberation, but also raises questions with respect to its practical application and empirical investigation. This project builds upon the existing joint projects of the project partners in this field and seeks to refine the methodological tools to empirically examine and compare the 'deliberative systems' in different political systems and across different policy areas. This project aims to: 1) develop a conceptual framework for assessing the deliberative democratic quality of contemporary political systems; 2) develop a mixed method for the analysis of deliberative systems (by combining the insights gained from qualitative and quantitative methods of analysing deliberation); 3) offer empirical application of these methods in the context of individual research projects of the project partners.

Nicole Curato < Back Beyond Demagogues and Deplorables: Transforming populist rhetoric for participatory futures Investigator(s): Nicole Curato Funded through Toyota Foundation Research Grant Program 2017 ($20,270), the Project Team includes: Nicole Curato, Chief Investigator Bianca Ysabelle Franco, Research Associate Septrin John Calamba, Research Associate Project Description There are many reasons to think of populism as the opposite of reasonable discussion. Populism appeals to base instincts, sacrificing intellectual rigour in favour of quick solutions. Its polarising speech style creates information silos which inflames prejudices instead of promoting understanding. This project challenges the dichotomy between populism and reasonable discussion. It investigates how the rhetoric of populism can be transformed to meaningful political conversations. The vision is to find practical ways in which societies can be hospitable to inclusive, reflective, and other-regarding discussions amidst deep divisions. Attention is focused on the case of the Philippines under the regime of President Rodrigo Duterte, but the lessons can be applied to various contexts where populist rhetoric has gained traction. The strategy is simple. A series of deliberative forums will be convened where citizens can reflect on the character of political talk in the Philippines and propose possibilities for enhancing political discussions today. Findings from this citizen-driven forum will be used to forge conversations with government, media, and other stakeholders. Overall, the project aims to make an evidence-based contribution to the future of participatory communication in populist times.

< Back Democratizing Global Justice: Deliberating Global Goals Dryzek, J.S. and Tanasoca, A. 2021 , Cambridge University Press Summary The tensions between democracy and justice have long preoccupied political theorists. Institutions that are procedurally democratic do not necessarily make substantively just decisions. Democratizing Global Justice shows that democracy and justice can be mutually reinforcing in global governance - a domain where both are conspicuously lacking - and indeed that global justice requires global democratization. This novel reconceptualization of the problematic relationship between global democracy and global justice emphasises the role of inclusive deliberative processes. These processes can empower the agents necessary to determine what justice should mean and how it should be implemented in any given context. Key agents include citizens and the global poor; and not just the states but also international organizations and advocacy groups active in global governance. The argument is informed by and applied to the decision process leading to adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals, and climate governance inasmuch as it takes on questions of climate justice. Read more Previous Next

< Back Introducing non-human democracy Jean-Paul Gagnon, University of Canberra Tue 6 December 2016 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract An examination of more than 1200 descriptions of democracy makes one thing abundantly clear—democracy is a human affair. Yet, there is a disturbance in this declaration and it comes from biology. For there is an immense body of scientific literature on how non-humans make decisions to solve collective action problems. And the language used in these studies is strikingly familiar: it is the language of democracy. If we use concepts that are inherent to the logic of democracy to make sense of non-human group behavior, does that not mean non-humans are practicing democracy too? Despite the popularity in other disciplines of inter-species thinking, it is ignored in democracy research. Why is that? Why can we not conceive of democracy as anything other than uniquely human? In answering these questions, this paper introduces non-human democracy and argues that its theory has three functions: non-humans (1) can inspire us to rethink aspects of democracy, (2) instruct us in specific practices of it, and (3) help us draw new analogies to better understand it. About the speaker Jean-Paul Gagnon is assistant professor of politics at the University of Canberra. His books include Evolutionary Basic Democracy (2013), Democratic Theorists in Conversation (2014), and Young People, Citizenship, and Political Participation: Combating Civic Deficit? (2017, with Mark Chou, Catherine Hartung, and Lesley J Pruitt). Previous Next

< Back Francesco Veri Associate About Francesco Veri is a Senior Researcher at the Centre for Democracy Studies at the University of Zurich , a Postdoctoral fellow at the Department of Political Science and International Relations at the University of Geneva and a Research Associate at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra.

< Back Adele Webb Research Fellow About Dr Adele Webb is Research Fellow in Democracy and Citizen Engagement at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance. Working at the intersection of political sociology, political theory and empirical political science, Adele 's research considers how citizens think about democracy, and how historical experiences and subjectivities affect people's engagement with democratic processes. Her current work develops theoretical and empirical contributions on the causes and consequences of political ambivalence. She has also published on Philippine politics, Populism, and Post-Colonial Theory. Her first monograph, Chasing Freedom: The Philippines’ Long Journey to Democratic Ambivalence , was published in 2022 by Liverpool University Press and Ateneo de Manila University Press. At the Centre, Adele leads the flagship 'Connecting to Parliament' initiative, which seeks to connect more Australians to democratic processes through facilitating deliberative engagements with elected officials. She is current convenor of the Co-design and Deliberative Engagement unit in the Master of Public Policy. She maintains an active profile in public engagement and has a track record of disseminating her research findings through high impact media commentary. After completing her PhD at the University of Sydney in 2019, Adele held positions at Heidelberg University, Griffith University and Queensland University of Technology. Previously, Adele worked for almost a decade in the International Development sector, including six years as Executive Director of Sydney-based NGO Jubilee Australia. She maintains an interest in activism around global justice, has consulted for the UNESCAP and Griffith Asia Institute, and currently sits on the Research Committee of Jubilee Australia Research Centre. Key Publications Webb, A (2022). Chasing Freedom: The Philippines’ Long Journey to Democratic Ambivalence . Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. Webb, A and Curato, N. (2019). Populism in the Philippines, in Populism Around the World: A Comparative Perspective, D. Stockemer (ed.). Cham: Springer Nature, pp39-65. Webb, A (2018). In Praise of Democratic Ambivalence. Democratic Theory, 5(2), pp17-36. Webb, A (2017). Why Are the Middle Class Misbehaving? Exploring Democratic Ambivalence and Authoritarian Nostalgia. Philippine Sociological Review, Vol. 65 Special Issue, pp77-102. Full list of publications available here . Public Engagement The P.I Podcast. ‘Democracy in the Middle – On Democratic Ambivalence and the Middle Class – An interview with Adele Webb’. 19 November 2022. Coral Bell School, Department of Political and Social Change, ANU: ‘Chasing Freedom: The Philippines’ Long Journey to Democratic Ambivalence’. 28 September 2022. Australian High Commission, Singapore: ‘Regional Reflections on the Russia-Ukraine Conflict: diplomacy, conflict and the future of Southeast Asia’, Policy Forum – Australian Institute for International Affairs, 20 June 2022. ABC TV News. “How Ferdinand ‘Bongbong’ Marcos is leading the Philippines’ Presidential election”, 10 May 2022. The Interpreter, Lowy Institute. “What a Marcos Jr presidency in the Philippines means for geopolitics”, 13 May 2022. The Interpreter, Lowy Institute. “How the Marcos family could rule again in the Philippines”, 18 March 2022. Australian Catholic University: ‘Have we seen peak democracy?’, Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences Forum, 25 March 2022. New Books Network: New Books in Southeast Asian Studies. ‘Chasing Freedom: The Philippines’ Long Journey to Democratic Ambivalence – An interview with Adele Webb’, 1 March 2022.

< Back Simon Niemeyer Professor About Simon Niemeyer is co-founder of the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance. Simon’s research covers the broad field of deliberative democracy, with a focus on the use of empirical research to inform its theoretical foundations and understand how they translate into practical democratic innovations. So far, Simon has contributed to the development of several pathbreaking concepts in the field, such as metaconsensus and discursive representation (both with John Dryzek) as well as developing innovative methods for the analysis of deliberation. His more recent work has involved conceptualising, measuring, and analysing deliberative reasoning. This work, which ties together previous work on measuring deliberative transformation and theorising of deliberative metaconsensus, has implications for minipublic design, as well broader implications for the understanding the ethics of epistemology, the nature and role of deliberative capacity, distributed reasoning in deliberative systems and mechanisms for supporting deliberative reasoning. Much of his work has focussed on deliberative democracy and environmental issues, including climate change, but also covers a broad range of topics including technological development, medical ethics, energy futures, immigration, and parliamentary reform. Niemeyer completed his PhD at the Australian National University in 2002, which followed undergraduate studies in ecology, economics, and environmental policy (Griffith University). Since graduating, he has acted as chief investigator on 18 research projects, including nine Australian Research Council Awards and an ARC Future Fellowship. As well as ANU and University of Canberra, he has held research positions at the Uppsala University, University of Birmingham, Cambridge University and CSIRO. He has also held visiting positions and numerous universities including University of Oxford (Nuffield College), Åbo Akademi, University of British Columbia, University of Bern and University of Northern Arizona. Key Publications Niemeyer, S. J. and F. Veri (Forthcoming). Deliberative Reasoning Index. Research Methods in Deliberative Democracy . S. A. Ercan, H. Asenbaum, N. Curato and R.F. Mendonca. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Niemeyer, S. J. and J. Jennstål (2018). From Minipublics to Deliberative Democracy: Scaling Up Deliberativeness and Subverting Political Manipulation. Handbook of Deliberative Democracy . A. Bächtiger, J. S. Dryzek, M. E. Warren and J. J. Mansbridge. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Niemeyer, S. J. (2011). The Emancipatory Effect of Deliberation: Empirical Lessons from Mini-Publics . Politics & Society 39(1): 103–140. Dryzek, J. S. and S. J. Niemeyer (2008). Discursive Representation . American Political Science Review 102(4): 481–494 Dryzek, J. S., & Niemeyer, S. J. (2006). Reconciling Pluralism and Consensus as Political Ideals . American Journal of Political Science , 50(3): 634–649. Full list of publications available in GoogleScholar . Research Grants Co-investigator (with PerOla Öberg). “Expert government agencies’ contribution to public deliberation: balancing the need for expertise with political equality”, Riksbanken (Sweden), SEK5,700,000 , 2021-2023 Chief Investigator (with Nicole Curato, Selen Ercan, John Dryzek and Nick Vlahos). Monitoring Deliberative Integrity in Australia. Australian Research Council Special Research Initiative. AU$202,156. 2021-2023 Chief Investigator (with John Dryzek, Dianne Nicol, Nicole Curato, Antoine Vergner). “Global Citizen Deliberation: Analysing a Deliberative Documentary for a Citizens Assembly on Genome Editing”. ARC Linkage, $450,000, 2020-2023. Chief Investigator (with Dianne Nicol, Nicole Curato, John Dryzek). “Genome editing: formulating an Australian community response”. Australian Department of Industry, Innovation and Science, Medical Research Future Fund —Genomics Health Futures Mission, $432,015. 2020-2022. Lead Investigator (with CIs Nicole Curato, John Dryzek, Andre Bachtiger. “A Metastudy of micropolitical deliberation”, ARC Discovery Project, $526,411. 2018-2020. Co-investigator (with Jane Suiter and David Farrel). Analysis of the Irish Citizens’ Assembly on Gender Equality,€45,000, 2020. Co-investigator (with Andre Bächtiger and S. Marien German Research Council. What citizens want from deliberative forms of participation: mapping legitimacy perceptions with an online survey and a preference experiment. (The Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, €150,000. 2020-2022. Lead Investigator (with Julia Jennstål), “The Deliberative Person: How, When and Where to Citizens Deliberate” Swedish Research Council Research Grant, SEK 5,800,000 [Approx AU $1million] 2014-2017. Lead Investigator, ARC Future Fellowship “Deliberative Democracy and Climate Change: Building the Foundations of an Adaptive System”. ARC, AU$629,090. 2013-2016. Lead Investigator (with John Dryzek, David Schlosberg, Kersty Hobson, Robert Goodin, Andre Bachtiger, Maija Setala).ARC Discovery Grant DP120103976 ,“Deliberative Democracy in the Public Sphere: Achieving Deliberative Outcomes in mass publics”. AU$320,357. 2012-2014. Chief Investigator (with David Schlosberg). “ Rethinking Climate Justice in an Age of Adaptation: Capabilities, Loca Variation, and Public Deliberation”. ARC Discovery Grant DP120104797, AU$250,000. 2012-2014. Lead Investigator (with Will Steffen and Kersty Hobson). “Social Adaptation to Climate Change in the Australian Public Sphere: A Comparison of Individual and Group Deliberative Responses to Scenarios of Future Climate Change” ARC Discovery Grant DP0879092AU$378,500, 2008-2010. Chief Investigator (with John Dryzek, Lyn Carson (USyd), Janette HartzKarp (Murdoch), Ian Marsh (USyd) and Luca Belgiorno-Nettis (newDemocracy), “Creating an Analysing a Citizens’ Parliament: Exploring the Public’s Deliberative Capacity”). ARC Linkage Grant LP0882714, AU$709,575, 2008-2010. Chief Investigator (with John Dryzek), “The Micropolitics of Deliberation”. ARC Discovery Grant DP0558573, AU$365,000. 2005-2007. Lead Investigator (with Anna Littleboy), “Societal uptake of alternative energy futures”, CSIRO Energy Flagship Programme AU$400,000. 2004-2005. Chief Investigator (with Judith Petts, Kersty Hobson, Glenn McGregor). “Predicting thresholds of social behavioural responses to rapid climate change”. Economic and Social Research Council (UK). Environment and New Behaviour Opportunities Programme, £32,748. 2003-2004. Lead Investigator (with Mick Common and Russell Blamey). “Citizens’ Juries and Environmental Valuation” AU$150,000, Land and Water Australia. Social and Institutional Research Program. 1999-2002. Recipient. Land and Water Scholar. Industry Scholarship award for Doctoral Studies at the School of Social Sciences, Australian National University. AU$75,000. 1999-2002. PhD Students Nardine Almer (Primary Supervisor) Nicole Moore (Secondary Supervisor) Tatjana Zhdanova (Secondary Supervisor) Andrea Felicetti (Secondary Supervisor) Michael Rollens (Secondary Supervisor) Alex Lo (Secondary Supervisor) Administration Director, Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance, 2021-2022 Member, Excellence in Research committee, University of Canberra, 2021-2022. Associate Dean (Research), Faculty of Business, Government and Law, 2018-2020. Member, University Research Committee, University of Canberra, 2019-2020 Coordinator, ARC Research Proposals, Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis, 2017-2018 Member, College of Arts and Social Sciences eResearch Committee, 2011-2012. Member, College of Arts and Social Sciences IT Strategy Committee, 2009-2010 Steering Group member, ANU Climate Initiative, 2007–2009 President, ANU Postgraduate and Research Student Association, 1999 Member of University Council, The Australian National University, 1999 Steering Committee Member, ECPR Standing Group, Democratic Innovations, 2011- 2015 Public Engagement Curato, Nicole, and Simon J. Niemeyer. (2020). Why we need a global citizens’ assembly on gene editing . The Conversation . Niemeyer, S. and Hausseger, V (2018). There are always going to be problems in trying something new. But try we should . Canberra Times/Sydney Morning Herald . Canberra. Niemeyer, S. J. (2017). Transforming ACT democracy one citizens' jury at a time. The Canberra Times . Niemeyer, Simon J. (2017). Deliberative democracy and citizens juries. Canberra Conversations , 4 May. Niemeyer, S. J. (2010). A novel idea on climate change: ask the people . The Conversation . Niemeyer, S. J. (2010). Helping unlikely sceptics see that climate change is real . The Age .