Search Results

< Back COMPROMISED DEMOCRACY: CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN THE AGE OF FINANCE CAPITALISM Hendrik Wagenaar, King's College London Tue 12 March 2019 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract Civic enterprises (CEs) contain many innovative features that promise more effective public services, a more equitable society and a richer, more participatory form of democracy. Yet, despite these proven benefits, CEs rarely scale up or are consolidated within larger government structures. I explain this forced localism by arguing that in their organizational and financial set-up CEs and similar citizen initiatives are incompatible with the requirements of finance capitalism. Over the last forty years finance capitalism has imposed an all-encompassing governance and governmentality upon societies worldwide. Finance governance consists of a loosely coupled ensemble of formal laws, state institutions, private banks, giant transnational corporations, hybrid entities such as central banks, rating agencies, transnational organizations and informal professional associations, bound together by the goal of maximising profitability and liquidity and minimising inflation and system risk. This system operates to a large extent informally, away from the public eye, and outside structures of democratic control and accountability, often under the pretext of emergency measures. Finance governmentality consists of a pervasive ideology and ethos of entrepreneurship and market conformity that has permeated all aspects of public and private life, and even lodged itself inside the self-image and aspirations of ordinary citizens. Thus, a feasible citizen-centred alternative to finance capitalism has to present a blueprint of political-economic organization that is as integrated, comprehensive and internally coherent as finance capitalism. My argument is that the Commons constitute such an alternative. I will discuss the nature of commons and show how commons and commoning can potentially create a viable alternative form of political-economic organization at local, regional and national/global levels. About the speaker Hendrik Wagenaar was professor at the Department of Urban Studies and Planning at the University of Sheffield. He is currently senior advisor to the Policy Institute at King’s College London and adjunct professor at the University of Canberra. He publishes in the areas of participatory democracy, interpretive policy analysis, deliberative policy analysis, prostitution policy and practice theory. He is author of Meaning in Action: Interpretation and Dialogue in Policy Analysis (M.E. Sharpe, 2011), and editor of the seminal Deliberative Policy Analysis (Cambridge, 2003, with M. Hajer) In the area of prostitution research he published Designing Prostitution Policy: Intention and Reality in Regulating the Sex Trade (with Helga Amesberger and Sietske Altink, Policy Press, 2017) and Assessing Prostitution Policies in Europe (with S. Jahnsen, Routledge, 2017). Previous Next

< Back Exploring injustice and the common good in local-scale biosafety deliberations in Costa Rica Sergio Guillen, Australian National University Tue 5 August 2014 11:00am - 12:00pm Fishbowl, Building 24, University of Canberra Abstract I present the rationale and methodology for a study of two elements involved in local-level public deliberation about genetically modified crops in Costa Rica. The first of these elements concerns injustice frames, an aspect of issue framing that entails a sense of outrage towards particular institutions or individuals on whom significant blame is laid for the grievances that spark collective action (Gamson, 1992; Johnston & Noakes, 2005). The second element relates to common-good orientation, which constitutes a central normative ideal of deliberative democracy, through which participants search for “a point of commonality to serve as the foundation for legitimate norms” (Chambers, 1996, p. 103). Both of these aspects continue to fuel important debates in the theoretical and empirical study of deliberative democracy. With regard to injustice frames, these are regarded, from a social movement perspective, as essential for driving collective action, which in turn nurtures discursive contestation in the public sphere, something highly valued by critical deliberative democrats (Dryzek, 2000; Rostboll, 2008). However, from a perspective of ideal deliberation, frames are related to aspects of symbolic manipulation that can distort the public will (Niemeyer, 2011) and hinder the type of reciprocal and reflexive exchange desirable in deliberation, by inducing a dismissal or committed opposition to the perspectives of others (Calvert & Warren, forthcoming). As for common good orientation, there has been a strong debate regarding its implications for the role and admissibility of self-interest in deliberation (Mansbridge, et al., 2010; Steiner, 2012). Moreover, a tension exists between both elements, since a greater prevalence of injustice frames can generate greater reluctance to explore a shared understanding of the public good with those blamed for the injustice. I argue that an interpretative approach can help understand how a widespread grassroots movement opposing the cultivation of genetically modified crops in Costa Rica has incorporated injustice frames into its approach to claim spaces in local environmental governance, and how the use of these frames has affected the orientation towards generalizable interests in public deliberations in community organizing settings and in municipal hearings. I present the strengths and limitations of the approach and connect it to a broader research project to explore the effects on deliberative quality of grassroots environmental collective action in Costa Rica. About the speaker Sergio Guillen is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Crawford School of Public Policy at the Australian National University, and a visiting Ph.D. student at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. Between 2008 and 2013 he worked as Senior Specialist in Social Dialogue at the Foundation for Peace and Democracy (FUNPADEM) and as trans-boundary water governance consultant for the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) in Costa Rica and Central America. He holds a B.Eng. in Mechanical Engineering from Carleton University (Canada), a Graduate Certificate in Natural Resources and Organization Management from the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor (United States), and an M.A. in Environmental Security and Peace from the UN-affiliated University for Peace (Costa Rica) 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

< Back Dakila Yee PhD Student About Dakila Kim Yee is currently a PhD student at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance, Faculty of Business Government and Law at the University of Canberra, Australia. He has a decade of teaching and research experience in the academic setting in the Philippines and has managed research projects in the Philippines funded by national and international funding agencies. His previous research explored various themes such as the urban political ecology of disaster reconstruction in the Philippines after typhoon Haiyan, critical environmental conservation studies and state-civil society relationship on environmental issues in the Philippines. His research has been published in the following journals: Philippine Studies: Historical and Ethnographic Viewpoints, Journal of Sociology, Critical Asian Studies and Peace Review . Beyond his academic experience, Dakila has been engaged in the practice of participatory and deliberative democracy. He has served as facilitator for different extension programs with local communities and non-government organizations and has recently been a part of two citizen assemblies conducted in the Philippines. Dissertation My tentative title for the dissertation is entitled “Discourse of Sustainability Transitions under Populist Regime” Looking at the case of sustainability transitions in the Philippines under the populist regime of Rodrigo Duterte, I look at discourse regarding sustainability transitions initiatives undertaken across several key sectors – climate change, transportation and energy. I also look at how such discourses is transmitted across the public sphere and how different societal actors negotiate and contest this discourse. PhD Supervisors Jonathan Pickering (Primary Supervisor) John Dryzek (Secondary Supervisor) Adele Webb (Secondary Supervisor)

< Back Mediating the national conversation: Journalism and the Child Abuse Royal Commission 2013-17 Tue 12 May 2020 Kerry McCallum, University of Canberra 11:00am - 12:00pm Virtual seminar Seminar recording is available on our YouTube channel. Abstract Royal Commissions represent an opportunity for national-level reflection, truth-seeking and public discussion. While at times politically motivated, they often become a touchstone of national debate, a mediated ‘critical conversation’. Media and journalism play a central role in this process, but to date there has been little academic research on the role of media in commissions of inquiry. This presentation introduces the Breaking Silences project that is investigating the role of media, journalism and social media activism in the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse (2013-17). I will explore the interplay between the Child Abuse Royal Commission’s media-related practices, news media reporting, and survivor groups digital media use in pursuing justice and redress for the victims of child sexual abuse through the inquiry process. Drawing on a critical listening framework I ask: whose voices were heard in the Royal Commission process, which institutions got the most attention, and whose voices were overshadowed in the mediation of the inquiry? About the speaker Kerry McCallum is Professor of Communication and Media Studies, and Director of the News & Media Research Centre at the University of Canberra. Her research in Political Communication focuses on the relationships between a changing media and Australian social policy. Kerry has been the recipient of four Australian Research Council grants and is currently lead CI on the Breaking Silences: Media and the Child Abuse Royal Commission (DP190101282) project. She is author (with L. Waller) of The Dynamics of News and Indigenous Policy in Australia, Intellect, 2017). 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

PhD Completions Andrea Felicetti Former PhD Student View Profile Penelope Marshall Former PhD student View Profile Kei Nishiyama Former PhD student View Profile Alex Lo Former PhD Student View Profile Pierrick Chalaye Former PhD student View Profile Katherine Curchin Former PhD student View Profile Michael Rollens Former PhD student View Profile Louise Clery Former PhD student View Profile Jonathan Kuyper Former PhD student View Profile Nardine Alnemr Former PhD student View Profile Melissa Lovell Former PhD student View Profile John Boswell Former PhD student View Profile 1 2 1 ... 1 2 ... 2

< Back The norm-diffusing potential of minipublic Lala Muradova, University of Leuven Tue 4 February 2020 12:10pm - 1:10pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract Deliberative minipublics are argued to be good for circulating ideas to the wider public sphere. Yet, so far, such accounts have not looked at the potential for mini publics to contribute to democratic systems by diffusing deliberative norms to a wider society. In this paper I build on the norm diffusion theory and diffusion of innovations scholarship, and argue that deliberative minipublics can enhance broader public deliberation, by acting as a conduit for the transmission of crucial deliberative norms to the public at large. In this task, I liken the role of minipublics to that of international organizations (IO) which have been central in diffusing the norms related, inter alia, to human rights, gender equality, war ethics, across and within states. Next, I suggest mechanisms by which minipublics can exercise influence on norm formation in the public. I conclude by suggesting new avenues for future theoretical and empirical research on the norm-diffusing function of minipublics. About the speaker Lala Muradova is a PhD Candidate at the Democratic Innovations & Legitimacy Group, University of Leuven. Her primary research interests lie at the intersection of political psychology and deliberative democracy. In her PhD project, she uses experimental research designs combined with observation of real-world deliberative practices, to study the cognitive and affective processes underlying political reasoning in deliberative and non-deliberative settings. Prof. Sofie Marien is the advisor of this PhD project. In 2019, she was awarded the Best Paper of the Democratic Innovations Section at the 2019 General Conference of the European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR). Previous Next

< Back Olivia Mendoza PhD Candidate About Olivia Mendoza is a migrant Filipina PhD candidate at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance in Canberra, Australia, on unceded Ngunnawal land. She studies emotions and deliberation from a critical feminist and decolonial lens. Before moving to Australia, she was an Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the Department of History and Philosophy, University of the Philippines Baguio. I taught courses on Development Ethics, Moral Philosophy, and Ancient and Medieval Philosophy among others. For her work, she was awarded the One UP Faculty Grant in Philosophy for Outstanding Teaching and Public Service, the UP International Publication Award, and Mateo Tupaz Grant. She is an active member of Women Doing Philosophy (WDP), a global feminist organization that aims to create and claim spaces that promote the scholarly, professional, and personal flourishing of Filipina philosophers. Dissertation Olivia's PhD thesis imagines a structure-oriented account of emancipatory democratic politics that stresses the importance of emotions and their role in relations of domination. It engages with the emotions and inequality literature in feminist and deliberative democratic theory and practice. PhD Supervisors Hans Asenbaum (primary supervisor) Adele Webb (secondary supervisor) John Dryzek (secondary supervisor) Scholarship and Prizes Deliberative Democracy PhD Scholarship (2023-2027), Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance, University of Canberra. One UP Faculty Grant Award in Philosophy (Ethics) for Outstanding Teaching and Public Service in the University of the Philippines Baguio, College of Social Sciences, University of the Philippines Baguio (2022-2024). Mateo Tupaz Grant (2019-2022), University of the Philippines Baguio. Research Project: Reviewing Emotion Theories in light of Filipino Emotions. Key Publications Olivia S. Mendoza. 2024. “Emotions and Filipino Resilience” In Llanera, Tracy (ed). Resilience: The Brown Babe’s Burden. Routledge Book Series on the Post- CoViD World: Academics, Politics and Society. Liz Jackson, Nuraan Davids, Winston C. Thompson, Jessica Lussier, Nicholas C. Burbules, Kal Alston, Stephen Chatelier, Krissah Marga B. Taganas, Olivia S. Mendoza, Jason Lin Cong, Addyson Frattura & Anonymous and P. Taylor Webb. 2022. "Feeling like a philosopher of education: A collective response to Jackson’s ‘The smiling philosopher’." Educational Philosophy and Theory , DOI: 10.1080/00131857.2022.2063719. Conference Presentations Olivia S. Mendoza, “Emotional and Hermeneutic Labour: Feminist Philosophy Meets Deliberative Democracy." 11th Swiss Summer School in Democracy Studies and 7th Deliberative Democracy Summer School. University of Zurich, Switzerland. 2025. Olivia S. Mendoza. “Emotional Labour: A Feminist Agenda for Deliberative Democracy." Reimagining Democratic Politics in the Contemporary Symposium. Centre for Democratic Futures, University of Southampton, UK. 2025. Teaching Development Ethics (SDS 271, Master’s Course in Social and Development Studies), 2022 History of the Social Sciences (Soc Sci 100), 2021-2022 Ethics (Philo 171, for Philosophy Students), 2019-2022 Ethics and Moral Reasoning (Ethics 1, General Education Course), 2019-2022 Ancient Philosophy (Philosophy110) and Medieval Philosophy (Philosophy 111), 2014-2022. Public Service Member, Women Doing Philosophy. 2020-present.

< 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.

Former PhD student < Back Jane Alver Former PhD student About Jane Alver's work investigates the ways feminist civil society actors in the Pacific region respond to the shrinking opportunities for inclusion, and the type of alliances they build to consolidate and amplify their voice in the region.

Former PhD student < Back John Parkinson Former PhD student About John is a Professor of Social and Political Philosophy at Maastricht University and holds the post of Adjunct Professor at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance.

< Back John Parkinson Associate and Former PhD Student About John is a Professor of Social and Political Philosophy at Maastricht University and holds the post of Adjunct Professor at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance.