top of page

Search Results

393 results found with an empty search

  • Harshith Ghanta

    < Back Harshith Ghanta Research Assistant About Harshith Ghanta is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy at the University of Canberra. He is currently pursuing a Master of Information Technology and Systems, specialising in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning. Originally from India, Harshith holds a Bachelor’s degree in Computer Science and Engineering and is a former national medalist in roller skating. He is passionate about community engagement and volunteers actively on campus. Harshith also founded the UC International Club to foster cultural exchange and inclusivity among students. He enjoys exploring diverse perspectives and approaching challenges with creativity and openness.

  • Mapping and Measuring Deliberation: Towards a New Deliberative Quality

    < Back Mapping and Measuring Deliberation: Towards a New Deliberative Quality André Bächtiger and John Parkinson 2019 , Oxford University Press Summary Deliberative democracy has challenged two widely-accepted nostrums about democratic politics: that people lack the capacities for effective self-government; and that democratic procedures are arbitrary and do not reflect popular will; indeed, that the idea of popular will is itself illusory. On the contrary, deliberative democrats have shown that people are capable of being sophisticated, creative problem solvers, given the right opportunities in the right kinds of democratic institutions. But deliberative empirical research has its own problems. In this book two leading deliberative scholars review decades of that research and reveal three important issues. First, the concept 'deliberation' has been inflated so much as to lose empirical bite; second, deliberation has been equated with entire processes of which it is just one feature; and third, such processes are confused with democracy in a deliberative mode more generally. In other words, studies frequently apply micro-level tools and concepts to make macro- and meso-level judgements, and vice versa. Instead, Bächtiger and Parkinson argue that deliberation must be understood as contingent, performative and distributed. They argue that deliberation needs to be disentangled from other communicative modes; that appropriate tools need to be deployed at the right level of analysis; and that scholars need to be clear about whether they are making additive judgements or summative ones. They then apply that understanding to set out a new agenda and new empirical tools for deliberative empirical scholarship at the micro, meso, and macro levels. Read more Previous Next

  • Janosch Pfeffer

    < Back Janosch Pfeffer Associate About Janosch Pfeffer's work concerns Earth System Governance and the intersection of environmental governance and the systemic perspective in deliberative democracy. He is also affiliated to the Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies (IASS) in Potsdam.

  • Disrupting deliberation: The relationship between protest and deliberative systems

    < Back Disrupting deliberation: The relationship between protest and deliberative systems William Smith, Chinese University of Hong Kong Tue 24 March 2015 11:00am - 12:00pm Fishbowl, Building 24, University of Canberra Abstract The influential defence of a deliberative systems approach offered by Mansbridge et al claims that disruptive protest can be an important corrective to systemic malfunctions. Their discussion culminates in a call for further research into the pros and cons of disruptive protest for deliberative systems. This presentation offers some preliminary responses to this call for further research. The core theme is that analysis of the relationship between protest and deliberative systems should depart from an assumption that informs the view of Mansbridge et al. This assumption is that protest is generally a non-deliberative form of conduct that should be evaluated in terms of its impact on a malfunctioning system. The presentation gestures toward a more nuanced position, which is guided by two central ideas. The first is that disruptive protest can be categorized as deliberative, partially-deliberative, or non-deliberative, depending on its aims and conduct. The second is that disruptive protest can have different deliberative impacts depending upon whether the relevant context is (a) the absence of a deliberative system, (b) the presence of a malfunctioning system, or (c) the emergence of a fully functioning system. The resulting conceptual framework is illustrated through briefly considering the relationship between innovative forms of digital disruption and deliberative systems About the speaker William Smith is assistant professor in the Department of Government and Public Administration at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. His research is in the field of contemporary political theory, with a particular focus on issues related to deliberative democracy, civil disobedience and international political thought. He is author of Civil Disobedience and Deliberative Democracy (London: Routledge, 2013) and has published in a wide range of international journals, including The Journal of Political Philosophy, Political Studies, and Politics and Society. Previous Next

  • Boosting the legitimacy of global climate governance: How can meta-deliberation help?

    < Back Boosting the legitimacy of global climate governance: How can meta-deliberation help? Jonathan Pickering, University of Canberra Tue 13 September 2016 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract Many commentators have voiced concerns about the legitimacy of the multilateral climate change regime due to its limited progress in slowing greenhouse gas pollution as well as its cumbersome decision-making processes. Recent accounts of deliberative democracy argue that, in order to be legitimate, deliberative systems must cultivate a capacity for “meta-deliberation”, namely critical reflection about the nature, scope and structure of the deliberative system itself. Stevenson and Dryzek (2014) conclude that the climate regime lacks sufficient capacity for meta-deliberation. Yet, the concept of meta-deliberation requires further theoretical elaboration, and more in-depth empirical analysis is needed on the conditions under which meta-deliberation could work in practice. In this paper I outline an account of meta-deliberation and compare it with related concepts such as reflexivity and meta-governance. I argue that one important function of meta-deliberation is to deliberate about the extent to which decision-making processes are centralised or decentralised (“polycentric”). I then apply this analytical framework to a case study of meta-deliberation about one prominent aspect of the global climate regime in which decision-making arrangements are significantly fragmented: funding to assist developing countries’ efforts to address climate change. I present preliminary results of a case study of the Standing Committee on Finance, which was established under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 2010 to improve coherence and coordination in the delivery of climate finance. Drawing on documentary analysis and observation of a recent Forum held by the Committee in the Philippines, the case study assesses the Committee’s potential to engage in meta-deliberation about how decision-making on climate finance should be distributed across multilateral, national and sub-national institutions. 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

  • Genevieve Johnson

    < Back Genevieve Johnson Associate About Genevieve Fuji Johnson studies and teaches democratic theory, feminist political thought, interpretive approaches to policy analysis, and a range of current public policy issues. She is a Professor of Political Science at Simon Fraser University, in Burnaby, Canada.

  • Dakila Yee

    < 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)

  • Industry Partners | delibdem

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

  • Elite stalemate in a deeply divided polity: Could a citizens' assembly make legitimate decisions instead?

    < Back Elite stalemate in a deeply divided polity: Could a citizens' assembly make legitimate decisions instead? James Pow, Queen's University Belfast Tue 14 November 2017 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract As a deeply divided polity, it comes as no surprise that plenty of political issues in Northern Ireland provoke intense disagreement. However, in a consociational system of government political parties from opposing ethno-national blocs are required to share political power and reach compromise. What happens when power-sharing at the elite-level does not work? What happens if destabilising gridlock threatens the legitimacy of an already fragile political system? This study examines a range of conventional elite-led and citizen-led responses to such a political crisis. Specifically, it compares conventional crisis resolution mechanisms, such as an immediate election, against a more radical alternative: the establishment of a citizens’ assembly of randomly selected citizens. In a survey experiment, we present respondents with a personally unfavourable policy decision on the sensitive subject of Irish language policy, manipulating the venue of the decision. We are interested in the direct effect of decision venue on decision acceptance, as well as the potential moderating effects of ethno-national ideology. These results will be of direct relevance to institutional design in deeply divided societies, specifically on the question of whether or not citizen-led initiatives could be used to strengthen the legitimacy of fragile political systems. About the speaker Jamie is a PhD student based in the Mitchell Institute for Global Peace, Security and Justice at Queen’s University Belfast. Under the supervision of Professors John Garry and Rhiannon Turner, Jamie’s interdisciplinary research experimentally examines how a citizens’ assembly could potentially strengthen the quality of democracy in post-conflict Northern Ireland. Drawing on literature from both political science and political psychology, Jamie’s central research question addresses the extent to which, and the conditions under which, people would recognise a citizens’ assembly as a procedurally legitimate decision-making body. Prior to pursuing doctoral study at Queen’s, Jamie completed a Masters degree in Political Science at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver. Previous Next

  • Ricardo Mendonca

    < Back Ricardo Mendonca Associate About Ricardo Mendonça studies democratic theory, contentious politics and political communication and is an Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science, Federal University of Minas Gerais.

  • Ian O'Flynn

    < Back Ian O'Flynn Associate About Ian O'Flynn's main research interest is in exploring the implications of deliberative democracy for questions of social and political integration in multicultural and multinational societies. is Senior Lecturer in Political Theory in the School of Geography, Politics and Sociology, Newcastle University, UK.

  • Catherine Clutton

    < Back Catherine Clutton Associate About Cathy Clutton has over thirty years’ experience of public administration within Australian Government departments. She has developed and managed programs that provided financial and management support for community organisations, developed evidence-based clinical practice and public health guidelines and policy, and provided support for health and medical research in Australia.

  • PhD Completions | delibdem

    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

  • When deliberative democracy travels to China: An example of cultural exceptionalism

    < Back When deliberative democracy travels to China: An example of cultural exceptionalism Li-chia Lo, University of Melbourne Tue 7 February 2017 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract As Edward Said elaborates in his Travelling Theory, theory is like human beings who travel from its birthplace to other foreign places. This is where the meaning of theory begins to transform, and Said’s work points to a new direction of investigating the transcultural transformation of knowledge when theory is disseminated in our globalised world. By following this line of thinking, the development of deliberative democracy in China offers an excellent example to review how the actual contexts transform the meaning and implication of deliberative democracy. Engaging with the issue of translation and its related contexts, the development of deliberative democracy in China is deeply connected with its culture, institution, and socio-political traditions. Also, the background of introducing deliberative democracy to China is also tightly bridged with the studies of democratization. The double movements between the local contexts and the universal trend of democratization form the basic theme of deliberative democracy in China. Deliberative democracy in China is therefore, struggled between universalism and exceptionalism. By making use of Giorgio Agamben’s concepts of example and exception, I will go into details about why and how the development of deliberative democracy in China is heading toward a cultural exceptionalism rather than embracing the universalism prescribed in the normative goal of deliberative democracy. About the speaker Li-chia Lo is a Ph.D. candidate in the School of Social and Political Sciences at the University of Melbourne. His doctoral thesis is about deliberative democracy and participatory budgeting in China. He is particularly interested in formations of related knowledge and local experiments in Chinese cities. Previous Next

  • Jane Alver

    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.

  • Emanuela Savini

    < Back Emanuela Savini Practice Lead & Lecturer About Emanuela is a researcher and professional who is highly committed to strengthening citizen-led action and exploring ways citizens have more influence over public policy decision-making. Her PhD research explored how government organisations adapt and operationalise deliberative engagement practices and she is keenly interested in ways to build capacity for democratic innovations in public management. In her practice, Emanuela is the Director of The Public Value Studio, an organisation that was established to support increased civic participation and community-led initiatives. She facilitates programs such as the Democracy Lab and is currently the Chair of the International Association for Public Participation Australasia (IAP2A) Research Working Group. Emanuela’s practice is founded on a deep belief that elevating the expertise of communities is fundamental to bringing about the change we want to see in our cities, and society more broadly. Industry Experience Director, The Public Value Studio, 2019 - current Chair, Research Working Group and Australasian representative on the Diversity Equity and Inclusion Taskforce, International Association for Public Participation (IAP2), 2019 - current Merri-bek City Council, 2008-2018 Key Publications Savini, E., & Grant, B. (2020). Legislating deliberative engagement: Is local government in Victoria willing and able?. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 79(4), 514530. Academic Fellowships Industry Fellow, Institute Public Policy and Governance, University of Technology Sydney, 2019-2023 Academic Conferences 2024 Deliberative Democracy Summer School International Public Policy Association 2023 Australian Political Science Conference (Panel) 2022 International Research Society for Public Management Conference Australian Political Science Conference Political Organisations and Participation (POP) Workshop 2021 International Research Society for Public Management Conference Interpretive Policy Analysis Conference Australian Political Science Conference 2019 International Public Policy Association Conference Academic Teaching Experience Lecturer - Public Participation in Decision Making (Masters) UTS, 2020 Lecturer – Organisational Theory (Masters) UTS, 2020-21

  • John Boswell

    Former PhD student < Back John Boswell Former PhD student About John Boswell is an Associate Professor of Politics at the University of Southampton. His work looks at issues related to deliberative governance, and has included investigations around democratic deliberation and obesity. His work with the Centre includes a co-authored book with Selen Ercan and Carolyn Hendriks entitled Connected Democracy.

  • Simone Chambers

    < Back Simone Chambers Associate About Simone Chambers has written and published on such topics as deliberative democracy, public reason, the public sphere, secularism, rhetoric, civility and the work of Jürgen Habermas and John Rawls. She is a Professor of Political Science at the University of California at Irvine.

  • Andrew Knops

    < Back Andrew Knops Associate About Andrew Knops' interests lie broadly in political sociology, especially the theory and practice of democracy, although he also teaches research methods. He is a lecturer in Sociology at the University of Birmingham.

  • Adele Webb

    < 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.

The Centre for Deliberative Democracy acknowledges the Ngunnawal people, traditional custodians of the lands where Bruce campus is situated. We wish to acknowledge and respect their continuing culture and the contribution they make to the life of Canberra and the region. We also acknowledge all other First Nations Peoples on whose lands we gather.

© Copyright Centre for Deliberative Democracy

bottom of page