Search Results

< Back Rhetorics of expertise and local knowledge in citizens' juries on wind farm development Sara Drury, Wabash College Tue 7 May 2019 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract Today’s global political environment increasingly faces issues that spark tensions between expertise and local knowledge. Socio-scientific issues draw attention towards this tension, as they require negotiation across and through multiple modes of evidence. Democratic innovations, such as deliberative citizens’ juries, been proposed as a means of managing these tensions and as a way of creating representative, fairer decision making. But there are questions around participatory processes, the utilization of expertise, and deliberative quality. The 2013-2014 “Citizens’ juries on wind farm development in Scotland” offers an opportunity to examine how different types of evidence impact deliberative quality in participatory public deliberation. Using transcripts from the citizens’ juries on wind farm development, this paper analyzes arguments from expertise and arguments from experiences. Through a critical-interpretative research methodology utilizing theories of argumentation, we demonstrate how arguments relating to scientific evidence prominently functioned as de facto reasoning whereas arguments with economic evidence more prominently interacted with local knowledge, experiences, and engagement. The findings offer implications for deliberative design to improve and promote deliberative quality. About the speaker Sara A. Mehltretter Drury, Ph.D., is Associate Professor and Chair of Rhetoric at Wabash College, a liberal arts college in Indiana, U.S.A. She also serves as Director of Wabash Democracy and Public Discourse, an interdisciplinary initiative that partners with communities to hold dialogue and deliberation events. Drury’s research focuses on the intersections of rhetoric and deliberative democracy, with particular attention to argumentation and political judgment. From 2017-2018, she was a Visiting Research Fellow at the University of Edinburgh’s Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities. Previous Next

< Back Representing the disadvantaged? Conceptions of representation in a citizens' jury in Switzerland Alexander Geisler, University of Geneva Tue 18 February 2020 11:00am - 12:00pm Crackenback, NSW Abstract While referendums and initiatives are part and parcel of Swiss direct democracy, democratic innovations based on random selection remain underexplored. One such example are Citizens’ Juries assessing popular votes and informing fellow voters via a summary statement, as in the Citizens’ Initiative Review (CIR). Fishkin (2018, 2013) has suggested that citizens bring mostly their own interests to the table in larger types of such deliberative gatherings. Challenging this finding, evidence collected from a Swiss pilot CIR in the municipality of Sion involving twenty randomly selected voters’ points to more complex perceptions of whom panelists perceive to represent. The participants reported that they had also represented disadvantaged groups inside and outside their political jurisdiction when discussing an upcoming popular initiative on affordable housing. This suggests that conceptions of representation on part of the panelists in a minipublic and particularly in the CIR may be more complex than previously assumed. Crucially, panelists taking stances of other groups may affect existing shortcomings of inclusion and representation occurring in minipublics of small size. About the speaker Since November 2018, Alexander worked as a PhD candidate at the University of Geneva in the project “A non-populist theory of direct democracy”, funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation under supervision of Professor Nenad Stojanovic. The project involves conducting two CIR-like mini-public pilots in Switzerland. He earned his Master of Arts in Empirical Political and Social Research (2018) at the University of Stuttgart. After graduation, he worked at the Institute of Social Sciences at the University of Stuttgart as a research and teaching assistant. During this period, he was involved in two projects: creating a database to track participatory processes in the municipalities of South-West Germany and managing an online network of universities that engage in research on civic participation. His research interests are in the fields of deliberative democracy, political behaviour, the theory and practice of democratic innovations, and social cognition. Previous Next

< Back Operationalizing democratic listening Mary F (Molly) Scudder, Purdue University Tue 5 November 2019 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract In order to capture the epistemic, ethical, or democratic benefits of deliberation, people must listen to one another. In fact, listening is constitutive of the deliberative act. Therefore, finding ways to evaluate listening is essential to the project of deliberative democracy. In this paper, I consider how to measure the act of listening in small-scale face-to-face deliberative encounters. Specifically, I tackle the observational challenge of measuring the act of listening itself, as opposed to listening outcomes. Prior work measures listening by focusing on narrow constructs like aural recall, or by emphasizing the outcomes we hope listening might bring about, such as responsiveness. I show that each of these measures, in isolation, is inadequate and fails to capture the most democratically meaningful aspects of listening. I go on to explain, however, that these measures can be usefully combined into a lexical scale that captures different degrees of, or steps toward democratic listening. I also propose new measures to include within such an index, including the perception of speakers themselves, whether they feel as if others have listened to them. About the speaker Dr. Mary F (Molly) Scudder is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Purdue University. She received her PhD from the University of Virginia. She specializes in democratic theory, especially practices of citizenship and the conditions of meaningfully democratic deliberation in contexts of deep difference. She has published articles in Polity and Political Studies and is currently wrapping up work on a book investigating how citizen listening can move deliberation in the direction of greater democracy. Previous Next

< Back EROSION OF DEMOCRACY AND DEMOCRATIC RESILIENCE ABSTRACT Research on erosion of democracy has blossomed during the last decade. Much less scholarly attention has been devoted to the issue of democratic resilience. But how can we understand democratic resilience? How can we conceptualize it? What role do institutions, actors and structural factors play? I sketch three potential reactions of resilient democratic regimes to erosion of democracy: to withstand without changes, to adapt through internal changes, and to recover without losing the democratic character of its regime and its core institutions, organizations and procedures.. BIO Wolfgang Merkel is Prof. of Political Science at the Berlin Social Science Center (WZB) and Senior Scholar of the Democracy Institute at Central European University in Budapest. He is i.a. a member of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Science and a Prof. em. At Humboldt University of Berlin. Previous Next

Latest News - Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance < Back Our Senior Research Fellow, Dr Hans Asenbaum, has published his new book 'The Politics of Becoming' 21 Sept 2023 A hearty congratulations to Dr Hans Asenbaum from the Centre for his new (open access) publication with Oxford University Press, The Politics of Becoming – Anonymity and Democracy in the Digital Age . The book focuses on practical solutions to the problems of discrimination and identity confinement in political participation. Throughout the book, Dr Asenbaum hopes to facilitate an interdisciplinary exchange between different academic disciplines and different strands of democratic theory. Dr Asenbaum has been intrigued by questions about participatory and radical democracy for a long time. In particular, the role of our identities and how when come together to do politics, we judge each other on our looks. With a desire to understand and question this, Dr Asenbaum developed a curiosity about the role of anonymity in democracy. He purposefully asks, ‘What happens if we can't tell each other's race, gender, sexuality, class, age etc.?’ He began exploring this question at the University of Westminster during his PhD, under the supervision of Professor Graham Smith . The result of this investigation is his new book: ‘The Politics of Becoming’, which provides an in-depth analysis and theorization of anonymity in democratic participation. When asked about the journey to this point, an elated Dr Asenbaum remarked “my thesis builds the foundation for this book, and it has been a 10-year process from initiation to publication. It has been quite a journey, and I could not be happier about the result and the wonderful people I met on the way and who are all part of this project.” Dr Asenbaum’s book strengthens our research in the areas of citizens engagement , identity politics and democratic theory .

< Back Anne Nygaard Jedzini PhD Candidate About Anne Nygaard Jedzini is a PhD researcher on power-sharing at Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at University of Canberra. She is the recipient of the Australian Research Council Special Research Initiative 2021 PhD Scholarship. Anne is the former Vice Mayor and Councillor of the City of Aarhus in Denmark where she held public office from 2014-2018. The City of Aarhus is her Danish hometown and where she is originally from. Anne is currently elected as the Australian Political Studies Association Postgraduate Caucus representative and is a member of the Australian Political Studies Association's Executive Committee. She is also currently appointed as the HDR member on the External Review Panel for the Faculty for Business, Government & Law at University of Canberra. For her PhD, Anne examines how power is shared, exercised and experienced, and to what extent power-sharing has deliberative dimensions in deliberative and participatory processes (democratic innovations) in Australian local governments. More specifically, her PhD examines the democratic, political and institutional conditions for power-sharing through deliberation between councillors and community members in a comparative case study of three Australian local government councils. She is set to complete her PhD by June, 2024. Anne has extensive experience from Danish politics. As Vice Mayor, she served as political member of five committees. Two of these committees were deliberative co-creation task committees with both councillors and relevant members of the public. During her time in public office, Anne focused on how members of the community could have more direct impact on public policymaking. She also focused on how to create the best possible conditions for startups, entrepreneurs and small business owners. Throughout her time in Danish politics, Anne ran multiple political bipartisan campaigns. These campaigns sought to bring different perspectives, lived-experiences and worldviews together over issues such as lack of democratic participation, enablement of young people's voices and gender inequality in local government politics. Much of her research interests stem from her lived-experience with power, democratic innovations and policymaking in Denmark. Anne's research interests include power and power-sharing in institutions/organisations, democratic innovations, deliberative/participatory democracy, political leadership, Australian politics and qualitative research methods. PhD supervisors Nicole Curato (Primary Supervisor) Selen Ercan (Secondary Supervisor) Academic Experience 01.07.2023-present. Job Title: Academic Tutor in Power and Policymaking . Organisation: Griffith School of Government and International Relations, Griffith University, Australia. Responsibility: Academic tutor and marker for a total of thirty undergraduate students in the unit, Power and Policymaking , throughout trimester 2. 01.08.2021-present. Job Title: Academic Tutor in Political Leadership . Organisation: Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra, Australia. Responsibility : Academic tutor and marker for a total of forty undergraduate students in the unit, Political Leadership , throughout semester 2. 01.02.2022-01.12.2022. Job Title: Academic Tutor in Introductions to Politics and Government . Organisation: Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra, Australia. Responsibility: Academic tutor and marker for a total of forty undergraduate students in the unit, Introductions to Politics and Government , throughout semester 1 and 2. 01.08.2021-01.12.2022. Job Title: Academic Tutor in Investigating and Explaining Society . Organisation: Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance, University of Canberra, Australia. Responsibility : Academic tutor and marker for a total of sixty undergraduate students in the unit, Investigating and Explaining Society , throughout semester 2. 01.03.2021-01.07.2021. Job Title: Event Manager on Australian Citizens’ Jury on Genome Editing . Organisation: Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance, University of Canberra, Australia. Responsibility: Event manage the research project Australian Citizens’ Jury on Genome Editing which was also a three-day event held at the Museum of Australian Democracy from June 17-20, 2021. 01.08.2020-31.12.2020. Job Title: Senior Research Assistant on “Network Analysis of Emissions of Transport and Gas Users in the ACT.” Organisation: Griffith University, Australia. Responsibility: Identify key transport emission stakeholders in the ACT to determine their carbon footprint. Professional Experience 01.02.2019-01.08.2020. Job Title: Sales and Business Development Director. Organisation: Suncil International ApS, Australia. Responsibility: Develop market strategy across Australia through strategic business development. 01.04.2018-01.02.2019. Job Title: Business Developer. Organisation: Suncil International ApS, Denmark. Responsibility: Stakeholder management of customers and business partners in EU and MENA region. Public Office 01.01.2014-01.01.2018. Job Title: Vice Mayor and Councillor: Political member of The Committee of Volunteering and Co-creation Political member of The Committee of Co-Citizenship Political member of The Committee of Finance Political member of The Committee of Children and Young People Political member of The Committee of Gender Equality and Diversity Organisation: Aarhus Municipality, Denmark. Responsibility: Preside over the political governance of the City of Aarhus through evidence-based policy decisions. Non-Peer Reviewed Publications Jedzini, Anne Nygaard. 2023. Politicians must share deliberative power to increase legitimacy. Type of Publication: Blog article published March 16, 2023 in the European Consortium’s Political Science Research blog, The Loop. Journal Articles under Peer Review Jedzini, Anne Nygaard. 2021. How do city council politicians facilitate co-creation? Evidence from Australia and Denmark. Type of Publication: Empirical journal article submitted November 15, 2021 in the Australian Journal of Political Science. Author Statement: I undertook an interpretivist empirical study of in-depth interviews with sixteen Danish and Australian city council politicians. I specifically explored what motivates city council politicians to practice and participate in co-creation processes, what societal stakeholders are included in co-creation processes and what the similarities and differences of co-creation processes are in Danish and Australian local governments in urban and regional areas. I recruited the research participants through my own political networks, transcribed the audio files of the interviews, wrote the interviews up in an analytical table, and did a thematic analysis of the research data against my main and sub-research questions. Academic Conferences 20.06.2022-22.06.2022. Title: Jedzini, Anne Nygaard. 2021. How do city council politicians understand and facilitate co-creation? An explorative study of Australian and Danish local governments. Organisation: Deliberative Democracy and Public Opinion Summer School, Turku, Finland. Details: Deliberative democracy conference with participation of deliberative democracy scholars from across the world. 09.06.2022-11.06.2022. Title: Jedzini, Anne Nygaard. 2021. How do city council politicians understand and facilitate co-creation? An explorative study of Australian and Danish local governments. Organisation: The Transatlantic Dialogue 16, Roskilde, Denmark. Details: Public administration conference with participation of American and European public administration scholars. 16.02.2022-17.02.2022. Title: Jedzini, Anne Nygaard. 2021. How do city council politicians understand and facilitate co-creation? Evidence from Australia and Denmark. Organisation: Australian Political Studies Association, Brisbane, Australia. Details: POP (Political Organisations & Participation) 2022 Workshop for emerging political science scholars in Australia. Presentations 21.02.2023. Title: Jedzini, Anne Nygaard. 2023. Democratic Innovations: From Aarhus to ACT. Organisation: City Renewable Authority, ACT Government and International Association for Public Participation Australasia, Canberra, Australia. Details: ‘Engaging in our city’ IAP2 Local Network breakfast event with participation of three speakers and sixty engagement practitioners from the public, private and civic sector in the ACT. Scholarships and Prizes 09.11.2021. Prize: Citations for Outstanding Contributions to Student Learning for the Investigating and Explaining Society unit team. Organisation: University of Canberra Teaching Excellence Awards and Citations, University of Canberra. 23.02.2021. Scholarship: Australian Research Council Special Research Initiative 2021 PhD Scholarship. Organisation: Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance, University of Canberra. Academic Administration 01.04.2023-present. Title: Research Student Member. Organisation: External Review Panel for the University of Canberra Faculty for Business, Government & Law, Australia. 01.12.2022-present. Title: Postgraduate Caucus Representative. Organisation: Australian Political Studies Association Executive Committee, Australian Political Studies Association, Australia. 01.03.2022-31.01.2023. Title: Higher Degree by Research Representative. Organisation: Graduate Research Committee, University of Canberra, Australia. 01.09.2020-31.12.2020. Title: Student Advisory Board Member. Organisation: The School of Humanities and Social Sciences, La Trobe University, Australia. 01.01.2020-31.12.2020. Title: Master Student Board Member. Organisation: The Academic Board, La Trobe University, Australia. Political Advisory 26.07.2022-28.07.2022. Title: Political intern for Dr. Helen Haines MP Independent Member for Indi. Organisation: House of Representatives, Parliament of Australia, Australia. 01.08.2021-01.06.2022. Title: Deliberative Democracy Expert. Organisation: Kim for Canberra Party, Australia. 01.08.2016-01.12.2016. Title: Campaign Organiser. Organisation: The Danish Social Liberal Party’s U.S. Election Volunteer Team, Denmark. 01.01.2015-01.12.2016. Title: Political Advocate. Organisation: Danes for Hillary, Denmark. Research Interests Deliberative/participatory democracy Democratic/political institutions Democratic innovations Public administration Public governance Political leadership Australian politics Qualitative research methods

< Back Jordan McSwiney Senior Research Fellow About Jordan McSwiney is a Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. He completed his PhD at The University of Sydney in 2021. Jordan’s research focuses on the far right, with a particular focus on their communication and organisation. His work has been published in Information, Communication & Society, New Media & Society, and Patterns of Prejudice , among others. He is the author of Far-right political parties in Australia: Disorganisation and electoral failure (Routledge). At the Centre, Jordan is working on the project ‘Democratic Resilience: The Public Sphere and Extremist Attacks’ (Discovery Project, funded by Australian Research Council, 2021-25) Key Publications McSwiney, J. (2024). Far-right political parties in Australia: Disorganisation and electoral failure . Routledge. McSwiney, J., & Sengul, K. (2024). Humour, ridicule, and the far right: Mainstreaming exclusion through online animation . Television and New Media , 25(4), 315-333. Jasser, G., McSwiney, J., Pertwee, E., & Zannettou, S. (2023). ‘ Welcome to #GabFam’: Far-right virtual community on Gab . New Media & Society, 25 (7), 1728–1745. McSwiney, J., Vaughan, M. Heft, A., & Hoffman., M. (2021). Sharing the hate? Memes and transnationality in the far right’s digital visual culture . Information, Communication & Society , 24 (16) 2502-2521. McSwiney, J. (2021). Social networks and digital organisation: Far right parties at the 2019 Australian federal election .  Information, Communication & Society , 24 (10), 1401-1418. A full list of Jordan McSwiney’s publications is available here . Public Engagement Australian efforts on Islamophobia flag despite Christchurch wake-up call . Al Jazeera . 2024, March 15. Recovering the ‘Aryan worldview’: the Western Australian book publisher under scrutiny over far-right texts . The Guardian . 2024, January 15 “It’s just a joke”: why we need to pay attention to far-right humour . RightNow! Blog, Center for Research on Extremism (C-REX). 2024, January 8. Why it’s so hard to stop neo-Nazi public hate parades . The Age . 2023, November 12. Far-right groups targeting young people, inquiry finds . The Age . 2022, August 30. Right-wing parties line up for make-or-break Victorian state election . The New Daily . 2022, 22 June. Dr Jordan McSwiney on One Nation & Western Civilisation . Yeah Nah Pasaran! 2022, 9 June. Labor and the Liberals are waging an election meme war – but what is the point? The Guardian . 2022, May 1. Visiting Appointments 2023 - Visiting Fellow. Centre for Research on Extremism (C-REX), University of Oslo, Norway. 2020 - Research Fellow, Digitalisation and the Transnational Public Sphere, Wizenbaum Institute, Berlin, Germany 2019 - Doctoral Fellow, WZB Berlin, Berlin, Germany

< 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.

< Back Jonathan Kuyper Associate and Former PhD Student About Jonathan Kuyper is a political theorist and international relations scholar working mainly with democratic theory, with a special focus on deliberative democracy. He is interested in how democratic theory can be employed to understand changes in domestic politics brought about by globalization, as well as offers ways to respond to these changes.

< Back MAPPING DEMOCRATIC INNOVATIONS IN PARTICIPEDIA ABSTRACT This presentation proposes a new analytical approach to classifying democratic innovations based on prototypical radial categorization. The proposed categorization strategy is empirically evaluated on real-world democratic innovations drawn from Participedia, the largest crowdsourcing platform in democratic innovation. Participedia database is analyzed through multiple factor analysis (MFA) and hierarchical clustering on principal components (HCPC). The analysis highlights four clusters that are a subset of two main groups that coincide with the normative categorization of participatory and deliberative democracy. BIO Francesco Veri is a Swiss National Science Foundation Postdoctoral Fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra. 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.

Former PhD student < Back Emerson Sanchez Former PhD student About Emerson M. Sanchez researches the role of environmental knowledge in contributing to industrial disasters and exploring ways to avert such tragedies. He has also conducted research on social movements, indigenous rights, social health, and gender and development. He recently completed his PhD at the University of Canberra.

< Back Deliberation and representation in referendum processes Ronald Van Crombrugge, KU Leuven Tue 22 August 2017 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract Referendums – and other forms of popular participation such as the citizen initiative – are a controversial topic. While they promise popular control over government, in reality, they are often characterised by a lack of understanding of the issue by the broader public, which in turn opens up room for different forms of elite manipulation. For this reason, deliberative democrats in particular have often been sceptical of the deliberative potential of mass democracies, and especially instruments of direct democracy such as the referendum. However, the recent turn in deliberative democracy literature towards deliberative systems raises a number of opportunities to re-examine referendums. From a deliberative systems perspective, referendums could potentially fulfil a useful democratic role as the last legitimating step in a larger deliberative process, even though they might not be able to fulfil all the requirements of the deliberative ideal. Yet, even when we accept that referendums have a potential role to play in a deliberative system, we are still presented with the question: how can thousands, or even millions of people deliberate together during the referendum campaign? It is to this question the article seeks to provide an answer. This will require putting into question some of the conditions of the “ideal deliberative procedure”, such as full information and equal speaking time, which can hardly ever be expected during a referendum campaign. There, necessarily only the few will do the actual talking, while most citizens will merely listen. But is this normatively acceptable? Or does this mean giving up on the very core of the deliberative ideal? I will argue that an answer can be found by looking at the role representation – in its broadest sense – plays in referendum campaigns. If differences in power during the referendum campaign can be seen as subject to a broader relation of representation, they might be less problematic from a democratic point of view. In addition, I will argue that under the right circumstances, representation can fulfil the role of an “epistemic resource” which can help citizens to reach a competent decision on the issue at hand. Inversely, when these circumstances are not in place, representation might actually undermine the quality of citizens’ judgments. To make these arguments, I will look at referendum campaigns through the conceptual lens of the “representative claim” as developed by Michael Saward. This allows a shift in attention away from the traditional focus on the talker and towards the listener. Rather than attempting to attain the goals of full information and equal voice during the campaign, we should instead focus on increasing the capacity of ordinary citizens to deliberatively and competently accept or refuse the claims that are made by various elected or unelected representatives, as well as enable them to expose claims which are manifestly unfounded or manipulative. This requires giving attention to the background conditions in which the different claims are made and leads to questions of how the broader public sphere is structured and regulated. About the speaker Ronald Van Crombrugge (°Jette, 1992) graduated in 2013 as a bachelor of laws with a minor in political sciences (magna cum laude). He received his master's degree of laws in 2015 (magna cum laude), option research master. Since October 2015 he is working at KU Leuven's Institute for Constitutional Law, where he specialises in the law of politics. As part of his current research, Ronald is evaluating the law on referendums from the perspective of deliberative democratic theory. The research centers on two questions: first, whether mechanisms of direct democracy such as the referendum have a useful role to play in a deliberative democracy, and second, how the law on referendums can be adapted to better accommodate the principles of deliberative democracy. Previous Next

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.

< Back What exactly is voting to consensual deliberation? Emmanuel Ifeanyi Ani, University of Ghana Tue 27 October 2020 11:00am - 12:00pm Virtual seminar Abstract There have been two parallel views regarding the role of voting in deliberation. The first is that deliberation before the fabrication of balloting was completely devoid of voting. The second is that voting is, not just part of deliberation, but is standard to deliberation. I argue in this article that neither of these views is correct. Implicit voting has always existed across time and space but only as a last resort in the event of a failure of natural unanimity. What is relatively modern is the establishment of what I call explicit voting, namely, balloting, outside deliberation and often without deliberation. I also distinguish between natural and artificial unanimities, and clarify that artificial unanimities are products of implicit voting. I demonstrate these clarifications with some examples of deliberation. I deploy these clarifications to rid a certain debate of confusion regarding the precise role of voting in consensual deliberation. About the speaker Emmanuel Ifeanyi Ani is a Senior Lecturer and has taught Critical Thinking for several years at the University of Ghana, Accra. He holds a BA in Philosophy from the University of Ibadan, a B. Phil in Philosophy from the Pontificia Università Urbaniana Roma (Urban Pontifical University, Rome), Italy, an MA and a PhD in Political Philosophy from Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Nigeria. He is the University of Ghana external assessor for affiliate institutions on Logic and Critical Thinking. He was the Chair of Long Essay, Library and Graduate Studies, Department of Philosophy and Classics, University of Ghana. He briefly visited the Centre for Deliberative Democracy, Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis, University of Canberra (November-December 2017), and is one of the Associate Editors at the Journal of Deliberative Democracy. He has published in many high impact journals including Philosophical Papers, Journal of Political Philosophy, Philosophia, South African Journal of Philosophy, African Studies Quarterly, and Canadian Philosophical Review. He is a contributor to the Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy, and the winner of the 2018 University of Ghana Humanities Provost Publication Award (Mid-Career Category). Previous Next

< Back End of Year Report 2025 Centre for Deliberative Democracy 2025 , University of Canberra Summary Welcome to the 2025 end-of-year report of the Centre for Deliberative Democracy. This year, the Centre advanced major research, teaching, and public engagement initiatives. The leadership of our Early Career Researchers and strong collaborations strengthened democratic practice and advanced the vision of the Faculty of Business, Government and Law and the University of Canberra. Read more Previous Next

< Back Overdoing democracy: The problem of political polarization Tue 18 August 2020 Robert Talisse, Vanderbilt University 11:00am - 12:00pm Virtual seminar Seminar recording is available on our YouTube channel. Abstract Democracy is such an important social good that it seems natural to think that more is always better. However, we also recognize that it’s possible to have too much of a good thing. In this talk, Robert Talisse (Vanderbilt University) draws from current findings regarding political polarization to argue that, as important a social good as democracy is, it is nonetheless possible for citizens to overdo it. Today, our everyday activities are increasingly fused with our political profiles: commercial spaces, workplaces, professions, schools, churches, sports teams, and even public parks now tend to embody a particular political valence. When politics is permitted to saturate our social environments, we impair the capacities we need in order to enact democracy well. In a slogan, when we overdo democracy in this way, we undermine it. The solution is to build venues and activities where people can engage in cooperative activities together in which their political identities are neither bolstered nor suppressed, but simply beside the point. If we want to do democracy well, we need to put politics in its right place. About the speaker Robert Talisse is a political philosopher focusing on democracy and civic ethics. He has authored over a dozen academic books and more than 100 peer-reviewed articles. In addition, Talisse hosts the podcast Why We Argue, and co-hosts the podcast New Books in Philosophy. Talisse is also a regular contributor to various public philosophy venues such as Aeon, Scientific American Mind, 3 Quarks Daily, 3AM Magazine, Skeptical Inquirer, Free Inquiry, Think, and Institute for Arts and Ideas magazine. Previous Next

< Back The Politics of the Anthropocene John S. Dryzek, Jonathan Pickering 2019 , Oxford University Press Winner of the 2019 Clay Morgan Award Committee for Best Book in Environmental Political Theory Summary The Politics of the Anthropocene is a sophisticated yet accessible treatment of how human institutions, practices, and principles need to be re-thought in response to the challenges of the Anthropocene, the emerging epoch of human-induced instability in the Earth system and its life-support capacities. However, the world remains stuck with practices and modes of thinking that were developed in the Holocene – the epoch of around 12,000 years of unusual stability in the Earth system, toward the end of which modern institutions such as states and capitalist markets arose. These institutions persist despite their potentially catastrophic failure to respond to the challenges of the Anthropocene, foremost among them a rapidly changing climate and accelerating biodiversity loss. Read more Previous Next

< 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 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