Search Results
378 items found for ""
- Academic Partners | delibdem
Academic Partners We uphold research excellence by collaborating with an international network of academic partners in diverse disciplines and countries. Earth System Governance John Dryzek and Jonathan Pickering are involved in the Earth System Governance project, the world’s largest network of social scientists working on global environmental governance. John and Jonathan were authors on the project’s new ten-year Science and Implementation Plan. John completed his term as a longstanding member of the project’s Scientific Steering Committee, and Jonathan joined the new Committee. Jonathan continued to co-convene the project’s working group on ecological democracy and co-edited a special issue of the Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning based on the group’s work. European Consortium for Political Research’s Standing Group on Democratic Innovation The Centre maintains an active presence in the activities of the European Consortium for Political Research’s Standing Group on Democratic Innovations. Together with our associates André Bächtiger (University of Stuttgart), Kimmo Grönlund (Åbo Akademi), Sofie Marien (KU Leuven), and Jane Suiter (Dublin City University), our Associate Professor Nicole Curato serves as the co-chair of the Standing Group’s Steering Committee. The standing group coordinates activities related to the study of democratic innovations in Europe, with the aim of fostering an epistemic community of scholars working towards understanding how democratic innovations can improve our politics. Global Citizens’ Assembly Consortium The consortium to organise a deliberative global citizens’ assembly on genome editing continues to gather momentum. Our partners include Missions Publiques (France and Germany), Involve (UK), Genepool Productions (Melbourne), and the University of Tasmania Centre for Law and Genetics. Partners involved in developing national deliberative processes on the same issue include researchers at Welcome Genome Campus (UK), Keele University (UK), Deakin University, Federal University of Minas Gerais (Brazil), Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, KU Leuven (Belgium), University of Cape Town (South Africa), Arizona State University (USA), University of British Columbia (Canada). Our Centre is also one of the founding partners of the Global Citizens’ Assembly in connection with the 26th Conference of the Parties of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Institute for Democratic Engagement and Accountability (IDEA) at The Ohio State University Our Connecting to Parliament project is made possible by our new collaboration with IDEA. Through Professor Michael Neblo and his team of researchers, our Centre was able to design and implement the Australian version of Connecting to Congress which aims to create authentic and actionable engagement between representatives and their constituents International Ethics Research Group John Dryzek, Jonathan Pickering and Ana Tanasoca are members of the International Ethics Research Group convened by the University of New South Wales Canberra. The group meets regularly to discuss work-in-progress papers. Presentations by Centre members have included a paper by Jonathan on 'Ethical mapmaking: the epistemic and democratic value of normative theory in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessments'. The National Science and Technology Institute for Digital Democracy The Centre collaborates with the Brazilian National Science and Technology Institute for Digital Democracy, which is multi-institutional and multidisciplinary network of research groups and laboratories from all over the world focusing on the use of digital tools to enhance democracy. We continue our joint research activities with through our associate Ricardo Fabrino Mendonça from the Federal University of Minas Gerais. Participedia Our Centre partners with the global research project, Participedia. Selen Ercan and Lucy Parry are members of the Participedia team. Lucy Parry has been providing systematic and practical information on democratic innovations across Australia. Participedia is a collaborative effort to identify, document, and learn from the hundreds of thousands of new channels of citizen involvement occurring in governments, communities, and organizations throughout the world. Participedia's crowdsourcing platform gives everyone the ability to share knowledge and information about these processes. The resulting catalogue provides the information necessary for scholars, practitioners, and members of the public to understand the development of citizen engagement and its contribution to democracy and governance. Participedia is made possible by a Partnership Grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). The project was founded by principal investigator Professor Mark Warren of the University of British Columbia and co-investigator Professor Archon Fung of Harvard University’s Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation. Political Studies Association UK A strong connection to the PSA Participatory and Deliberative Democracy Specialist Group (PDD) has been established this year, as Hans Asenbaum, a long standing PDD co-convenor joined the Centre. With 350 members, PDD is a vibrant network of scholars of deliberative democracy. The connection to PDD allows the Centre to deepen its contacts and collaborative projects with leading scholars in the UK. The PDD convenor team has put all its effort into supporting and engaging the scholarly community in these challenging times. Among the highlights were a six-part summer webinar series that showcased the current work of PDD members and a picture contest for Early Career Researchers Great Barrier Reef Futures Citizens’ Jury Funded by James Cook University (Claudia Benham, Simon Niemeyer and Hannah Barrowman) Moral Disagreements: Philosophical and Practical Implications Funded by the Australian Catholic University (Richard Rowland, Selen Ercan, David Killoren, and Lucy J Parry). Protests and Political Engagement Funded by the Federal University of Minas Gerais Grant. (Selen A. Ercan, Ricardo F. Mendonca, Umut Ozguc). Connecting to Parliament A collaboration between Centre for Deliberative democracy and Global Governance and the Institute for Democratic Engagement and Accountability.
- Deliberating in the Anthropocene: Signs and sources of reflexive governance
< Back Deliberating in the Anthropocene: Signs and sources of reflexive governance Jonathan Pickering, University of Canberra Tue 22 September 2015 11:00am - 12:00pm Fishbowl, Building 24, University of Canberra Abstract Many commentators believe that the Earth has entered a new geological epoch—the Anthropocene—marked by humanity’s pervasive impact on global ecosystems. Resulting patterns of environmental degradation pose major challenges for the planet’s inhabitants as well as for political institutions worldwide. John Dryzek has recently argued that in the Anthropocene institutions need to cultivate “ecosystemic reflexivity”, which involves “listening more effectively to an active Earth system, capacity to reconsider core values such as justice in this light, and ability to seek, receive and respond to early warnings about potential ecological state shifts” (Dryzek 2014). But what would ecosystemic reflexivity look like in practice and how could it could be cultivated? In this paper (co-authored with John Dryzek) we outline a preliminary typology of signs or indicators of ecosystemic reflexivity, and of factors that may enable or constrain reflexivity. Even if institutions may become reflexive through non-deliberative means, we argue—drawing on existing literature on deliberative systems and complex adaptive systems—that deliberative innovations hold considerable potential to promote reflexivity. In order to assess the strength of this argument in practice, we outline a planned case study on reflexivity in international institutions that fund development and environmental protection in low-income countries. 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
- Seminar Series | delibdem
Seminar Series Join our seminar series on Tuesdays from 11:00 am until 12:00 pm. These seminars are hybrid, held both in Fishbowl at Building 24 and online. Before each session, we gather for the Centre’s weekly morning tea at 10:30 am in the Retro Cafe located at Building 23. Below, you can watch our recorded seminars, including those hosted and co-hosted by the Centre since April 2020. To access past seminars, please visit our archives . If you have any questions about the seminar series, please contact our Seminar Coordinator, Ferdinand Sanchez II at ferdinand.sanchez@canberra.edu.au . Play Video Play Video Are mini-publics enough to promote deliberative democracy? Play Video Play Video Can deliberative democracy take root in settler colonial states? Play Video Play Video How can deliberative democracy listen to nonhumans? Play Video Play Video Between Imagination and Constraint, Alfred Moore, 5 December 2023 Play Video Play Video Democratising transnational deliberation from inside, Roundtable discussion, 6 December 2023 Play Video Play Video Embodying radical democracy, Moya Lloyd, 21 November 2023 Play Video Play Video Transnational citizens' assemblies, Canning Malkin and Franziska Maier, 21 November 2023 Play Video Play Video Intersectionality and Democracy, Afsoun Afsahi, 14 November 2023 Play Video Play Video The Politics of Becoming: Anonymity and Democracy in the Digital Age Play Video Play Video Politicization in the era of ‘hypervisibility’, Taina Meriluoto, 7 November 2023 Play Video Play Video Beyond the binary: abolishing the legal status of gender?, Anne Phillips, 31 October 2023 Play Video Play Video Participatory Governance Seminar: Roads to Minipublic Success Play Video Play Video Deliberative Democratic Constitutional Referendums, Hoi Kong, 3 October 2023 Play Video Play Video Unpacking power in democratic innovations, Anne Nygaard Jedzini, 26 September 2023 Play Video Play Video Participation as Assemblage, Sonia Bussu, 19 September 2023 Load More Recorded Seminars Participedia Seminars PAST SEMINARS Past Seminars
- 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.
- Should democracies permit citizens to select refugees for admission and resettlement?
< Back Should democracies permit citizens to select refugees for admission and resettlement? Patti Tamara Lenard, University of Ottawa Tue 7 August 2018 11:00am - 12:00pm Fishbowl Room, Building 24, University of Canberra Abstract One way that states discharge their duties to refugees is by admitting them for resettlement. Of the millions of refugees in places of refuge, only one million are specially designated by the UNHCR for resettlement in third countries. These individuals, identified by the UNCHR as either especially vulnerable, or particularly unlikely to find any alternative permanent solution, are prioritized for admission to third countries for resettlement. Of these, only a small number are actually selected by host countries for resettlement, however; last year, just over 100 000 found permanent homes in third countries. In this article, I take all of this context seriously, to consider the ethics of one particular way of selecting refugees for resettlement, that is, by giving citizens the driver’s seat in selecting refugees for admission to resettlement. I ask, in this article, whether it is morally acceptable to permit citizens of democracies to select specific refugees for resettlement, under the condition that they are willing to support – financially and emotionally – those whom they select. I argue, ultimately, that there are moral goods that derive from permitting citizens to select refugees for admission, but that they do not outweigh the importance of offering scarce resettlement spots to those who are most in need. Therefore, any democratic refugee admission scheme that permits citizens to select refugees must constrain those who can be named for admission to those who are most in need. I conclude with some proposals for how this can be achieved. About the speaker Patti Tamara Lenard is Associate Professor of Ethics in the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Ottawa. She is the author of Trust, Democracy and Multicultural Challenges (Penn State, 2012). Her work has been published in a range of journals, including Political Studies, Ethics and International Affairs, Review of Politics, and Ethics and Global Politics. Her current research focuses on the moral questions raised by migration across borders in an era of terrorism, especially as it pertains to refugees and irregularly present migrants, trust and social cohesion, and democratic theory more generally. Her most recent work, focused on the moral dilemmas posed by denationalization for terror-related crimes, is newly published in the American Political Science Review (2018). Previous Next
- Jean-Paul Gagnon
< Back Jean-Paul Gagnon Faculty Affiliate About Jean-Paul Gagnon is a democratic theorist specializing in democracy's linguistic artifacts and the theory of non-human democracy. He edits the Berghahn (Oxford/New York) journal Democratic Theory and the Palgrave Macmillan book series on The Theories, Concepts, and Practices of Democracy. He is director of the nascent Foundation For the Philosophy of Democracy.
- Democratic Theorizing
< 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
- Building democratic resilience | delibdem
Building Democratic Resilience We investigate the role of public deliberation in highly polarised and post-crisis contexts, working closely with governments, organisations, and communities to build democratic resilience. Research Leads Jordan McSwiney Postdoctoral Research Fellow Selen A. Ercan Professor and Centre Director Projects and grants Building Democratic Resilience: Public Sphere Responses to Extremism Investigator(s): Selen A. Ercan, Jordan McSwiney, John S. Dryzek, and Peter Balint Read More Building Back Better: Participatory Governance In A Post-Haiyan World Investigator(s): Nicole Curato and April Porteria Read More Strongmen of Asia: Democratic bosses and how to understand them Investigator(s): Nicole Curato Read More Communication Across Difference In A Democracy: Australian Muslims And The Mainstream Investigator(s): Bora Kanra, John Dryzek, Selen A. Ercan, Alessandra Pecci Read More Democratic Resilience: The Public Sphere and Extremist Attacks Investigator(s): Selen A. Ercan, Jensen Sass, John Dryzek and Peter Balint Read More Deliberative democracy in the face of democratic crisis: Contributions, dilemmas and the ways forward Investigator(s): Ricardo F. Mendonça, Camilo Aggio, Viktor Chagas, Selen Ercan, Viviane Freitas, Filipe Motta, Rayza Sarmento, Francisco Tavares Read More Who will Bury the Dead? Community Responses in Duterte’s Bloody War on Drugs Investigator(s): Nicole Curato, Jayeel Cornelio and Filomin Candaliza-Gutierrez Read More The far-right challenge to democracy Investigator(s): Jordan McSwiney Read More Protests and Political Engagement Investigator(s): Selen A. Ercan, Ricardo F. Mendonca, Umut Ozguc Read More Beyond Demagogues and Deplorables: Transforming populist rhetoric for participatory futures Investigator(s): Nicole Curato Read More Key publications Building Democratic Resilience: Public Sphere Responses to Violent Extremism Selen A. Ercan, Jordan McSwiney, Peter Balint, and John S. Dryzek 2022 , State of NSW, Department of Premier and Cabinet Read more Mending Democracy: Democratic Repair in Disconnected Times Carolyn M. Hendriks, Selen A. Ercan, and John Boswell 2020 , Oxford University Press Read more The Crisis of Democracy and the Science of Deliberation Dryzek, J.S., Bächtiger, A. et al 2019 , Science 363: 1144-46. DOI: 10.1126/science.aaw2694 Read more Democracy in a Time of Misery: From Spectacular Tragedies to Deliberative Action Nicole Curato 2019 , Oxford University Press Read more Impact Story Our research on democratic resilience informs policy and practice in New South Wales In 2022, the Centre was commissioned to undertake research for the New South Wales Government. The research report was completed in September 2022 and the launch was hosted by Australian National University’s Herbert and Valmae Freilich Project for the Study of Bigotry. Panel speakers included Pia van de Zandt (Director, Connected Communities, NSW Department of Premier and Cabinet), Dr Emily Corner (Senior Lecturer of Criminology, Centre for Social Research and Methods, ANU), and Dr Jordan McSwiney (Postdoctoral Fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance). Emphasising the value of our report, Pia van de Zandt said, "You and your team brought valuable comparative insights, were very collaborative and cognisant of the report’s audience. Most importantly, your research made some valuable and practical findings, for NSW to consider as it further develops its response to violent extremism. The report will help us to improve our efforts to protect our democracy and enhance the resilience of communities to shocks and threats." Read more
- Creating And Analysing A Citizens' Parliament: Exploring The Public's Deliberative Capacity
< Back Creating And Analysing A Citizens' Parliament: Exploring The Public's Deliberative Capacity Investigator(s): John Dryzek, Lyn Carson, Simon Niemeyer, Janette Hartz-Karp, Ian Marsh, Luca Belgiorno-Nettis, Luisa Batalha, Nicole Curato Funded through Linkage Project (LP0882714) ($291,575), the Project Team includes: John Dryzek, Chief Investigator Lyn Carson, Chief Investigator Simon Niemeyer, Chief Investigator Janette Hartz-Karp, Chief Investigator Ian Marsh, Chief Investigator Luca Belgiorno-Nettis, Partner Investigator Luisa Batalha, Postdoctoral Research Fellow Nicole Curato, Postdoctoral Research Fellow Project Webpage http://www.citizensparliament.org.au/ Project Description The pioneering Australian Citizens’ Parliament was held in February 2009 in Old Parliament House, Canberra. The participants were 150 ordinary Australians, selected by stratified random sampling, one from each federal electoral district. They deliberated the question ‘How can Australia’s political system be strengthened to serve us better?’ The project generated a mountain of quantitative and qualitative data which is now being analysed. You can find out more by viewing the informational video of the process.
- Inclusion and the meta-conversation: Structural topic modelling the Scottish Independence Referendum
< Back Inclusion and the meta-conversation: Structural topic modelling the Scottish Independence Referendum John Parkinson, Maastricht University Tue 2 July 2019 11:00am - 12:00pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract I will presenting full results of my big data analysis of the Scottish indyref debate from 2012 to 2014, and show (a) that, in terms of topics being discussed, the real divide was not between Yes and No, but between elite and everyday conversations; (b) that economic issues were especially divided; and (c) that the single biggest topic was the meta-conversation, with citizens holding each other to deliberative norms in public. About the speaker John Parkinson is Adjunct Professor of Politics. He works on the relationships between formal policy making and a wide variety of practices in the public sphere, crossing boundaries between normative political theory, public policy, political sociology, and cultural studies. He is a leading proponent of the ‘deliberative systems’ approach, as well as the symbolic, discursive, performative aspects of policy and democratic politics. His books include Deliberating in the Real World (Oxford, 2006), Deliberative Systems (Cambridge, 2012), Democracy and Public Space (Oxford, 2012), and, with Centre Associate André Bächtiger, Mapping and Measuring Deliberation, forthcoming with Oxford in 2018. His current research project with Núria Franco-Guillén is the ARC-funded ‘Sparking a National Conversation’, which is developing new electronic social science tools to map and track claims over time and space in two cases: the Scottish independence debate of 2012-14, and the campaign to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Australian constitution, 2015-17. Previous Next
- Louise Clery
< Back Louise Clery Former PhD student About Louise Clery completed her PhD in 2006 at the Australian National University. Her dissertation ‘Social movement strategy between pragmatism and praxis: environmentalists and regional forest agreements’ was supervised by John Dryzek, with Robert E. Goodin and Val Plumwood in the panel.
- Alessandra Pecci
< Back Alessandra Pecci Research Assistant About Alessandra worked as Research Assistant at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the Australian National University from 2009 to 2011.
- Quinlan Bowman
< Back Quinlan Bowman Postdoctoral Research Fellow About Quinlan Bowman is Postdoctoral Fellow at the Centre for Liberal Arts and Social Sciences and the Public Policy and Global Affairs Programme at Nanyang Technological University (Singapore).
- Building Democratic Resilience - Report Launch
< Back Building Democratic Resilience - Report Launch On 13 October, we launched the report Building Democratic Resilience - Public Sphere Responses to Violent Extremism, commissioned by the NSW Department of Premier and Cabinet. The launch took place at the ANU, hosted by the F reilich Project for the Study of Bigotry . Panelists included Dr Jordan McSwiney, Postdoctoral Fellow at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance (CDDGG) at the University of Canberra, Dr Emily Corner, Senior Lecturer of Criminology at the Centre for Social Research and Methods at the Australian National University, and Pia van de Zandt, Director of the Connected Communities team in Department of Premier and Cabinet, NSW. Pictured: Selen A. Ercan (CDDGG), Peter Balint (UNSW), Pia van de Zandt (NSW Government) and Jordan McSwiney (CDDGG)
- Faculty Affiliates | delibdem
Faculty Affiliates Jonathan Pickering Faculty Affiliate View Profile Jean-Paul Gagnon Faculty Affiliate View Profile
- A Metastudy of Democratic Deliberation: Updating Theory and Practice
< Back A Metastudy of Democratic Deliberation: Updating Theory and Practice Investigator(s): Simon Niemeyer, John S. Dryzek, Nicole Curato, Andrè Bächtiger, Marina Lindell, Mark E. Warren, Hannah Barrowman, Francesco Veri, Nardine Alnemr Funded through a Discovery Project (DP180103014) ($526,411), the Project Team includes: Simon Niemeyer, Chief Investigator John S. Dryzek, Chief Investigator Nicole Curato, Chief Investigator Andrè Bächtiger, Partner Investigator Marina Lindell, Partner Investigator Mark E. Warren, Partner Investigator Hannah Barrowman, Postdoctoral Research Fellow Francesco Veri, Postdoctoral Research Fellow Nardine Alnemr, PhD student Project Description The project combines a meta-study and comparative case study to develop a leading edge understanding of political deliberation by analysing and synthesising results from available studies of deliberation. It aims to reconcile conflicting findings and provide the first comprehensive, theoretically-grounded account of defensible claims about political deliberation. The project will compile the source material and findings in a publicly-available database to facilitate standardisation and enhancement of future research in the field. It will seek to settle important questions that remain among deliberative democrats and, more practically, facilitate avenues for democratic reform in an area where the need for renewal is increasingly pressing.
- WAIT, WHAT? DECOLONIZING DELIBERATIVE DEMOCRACY?
< Back WAIT, WHAT? DECOLONIZING DELIBERATIVE DEMOCRACY? “Wait, what?” is a call to take a moment and to seriously consider what we mean by decolonizing deliberative democracy. About this event Deliberative democracy – as a set of norms, practices, and procedures for collective governance -- is an extension of liberalism and liberal democracy. More to the point, deliberative democracy is fundamentally rooted in intertwined logics of possessive individualism, positivism and universal truths, and settler colonialism. If theorists and practitioners of deliberative democracy are serious about decolonizing the field, this normative inheritance must be confronted. Deliberative democracy cannot be decolonized without a sustained and thoughtful interrogation of its ontological, epistemological, and ethical roots that continue to feed it. “Wait, what?” is a call to take a moment and to seriously consider what we mean by decolonizing deliberative democracy and whether this is even possible. Taking this moment is critical in ensuring that efforts to decolonize deliberative democracy do not in fact reinforce colonialism. Genevieve Fuji Johnson is a Yonsei settler of Japanese and Irish ancestry. Although proud of her family’s history of resilience, she is reckoning with their four generations of Indigenous dispossession. It is thus with gratitude and respect that she divides her time between the traditional and unceded territories of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Nations and those of the Tla-o-qui-aht Nation. Dr. Johnson is a professor of Political Science at Simon Fraser University. Seminar series convenors Hans Asenbaum and Sahana Sehgal . Please register via Eventbrite . Previous Next
- Future Proofing the Public Sphere | delibdem
PROGRAMME HIGHLIGHTS PAPERS For decades, scholars and commentators have lamented the fragilities of the space(s) where citizens can engage, coordinate, and shape political meaning – a crucial foundation for a stable democracy. Yet what does a concept, dating back to Habermas’s ‘bourgeois public sphere’ of the eighteenth century, mean in contemporary vernacular? Given the transformations in communication networks brought about by technological change, have we come to terms with the new criteria for a ‘public voice’? Do normative ideals about a thriving political public sphere need updating? Do analytic concepts (framing, gatekeeping, agenda setting) still work or do they need to be reconsidered or completely refurbished? And what can be offered by citizen-led processes of democratic renewal? This APSA-funded workshop is co-hosted by two Research Centres conducting theoretical and empirical research on the public sphere(s) – the University of Canberra’s Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance, and QUT’s Digital Media Research Centre. Bringing together postgraduate students and early career researchers with leading scholars in the field, the workshop addresses challenges and threats facing the contemporary public sphere(s) in Australia and beyond. It aims to activate a dynamic interdisciplinary network of scholars working in to explore ways in which the public sphere(s) might be ‘future-proofed’ to integrate and harness the affordances of digital technologies while still facilitating normatively desirable outcomes for vibrant democracies. The workshop format is designed to offer participants the opportunity to receive detailed feedback from leading experts on works in progress, with the aim of assisting participants to convert their draft papers into a publication. We are delighted to welcome scholars working on the broad concept of the public sphere from a variety of methodological perspectives and offering theoretical and empirical insights. Adele Webb (UC) & Katharina Esau (QUT) Workshop Co-Convenors Programme ProgAnchor Programme highlights Prog highlights Paper presenters have 8 minutes to present a synopsis of their papers. Please make sure that you stick to this timing. PowerPoint slides are welcome, but not required, and we recommend no more than 5 slides. Designed as an alternative to conference-style paper presentations, presentation of paper synopses should be structured around answering three broad questions: What is the core argument of the paper? What data is being used to support the argument? What are the implications of the research for the field? More in-depth discussion and feedback of each paper is available through the mentoring sessions. Each participant has been assigned two mentors who will read and prepare comments on the paper before the workshop. Over the course of the workshop there is time allocated for these one-on-one-discussions of the papers, which could include feedback on the substantive content, as well as tips on how to get the paper ready for publication, and which journals to consider for submission. We understand the papers are works-in-progress, so feedback will be friendly, encouraging, and constructive. The panel discussions are organised under specific themes and will start with short opening remarks by each of the panel speakers, followed by an open and collective discussion with all workshop participants. The processing and reflection session on day 2 is designed to break participants into small groups, in which participants are encouraged to collectively reflect on mentor feedback, share personal reflections on workshop discussions, and together write down three words/phrases that speak to future research agenda(s). There will be a chance to discuss these with the larger group in the final session. Venue: All activities will take place at the Kelvin Grove campus of QUT in Brisbane (Level 5, E-Block, located at the back of the Library). Registration: If possible, please arrive between 9:30-9:45am on 21 March. Papers Papers Brooke Ann Coco The Superset Paradigm: Data DAOs and the Democratization of Digital Publics. Download Claire Fitzpatrick #ShoutYourAbortion and being heard: The affordances of hashtags for Counterpublics in uncertain and antagonistic digital atmospheres. Download Francesco Vittonetto Transnational populist publics in Europe and the United States. Download Friedel Marquardt Sharing First Nations stories online: the narrative-engaging capabilities of social media for marginalised groups. Download Nguyen Khac Giang The Power and Limits of Digitalized Authoritarian Deliberation: Insights from Vietnam. Download Kate O'Connor Farfan Democratic trajectories and the assessment of polarisation in the public sphere. Download Kate Scott Deradicalising Misogyny: Countering Red Pill Violence and Extremism in the Manosphere. Download Laura Davy & Molly Saunders The future of inclusive democratic participation: conditions for radical listening within the National Disability Insurance Scheme. Download Lynrose Genon Digital Peacebuilding: Examining young women leaders' use of social media to build peace in the Philippines. Download Molly Murphy Non-dialoic counterspeech and democratic participation. Download Patrick Chang Future proofing the public sphere: How social movement organisations (SMOs) could establish and maintain more inclusive engagement in Australian climate action. Download Tyler Wilson Deliberative Virtue and Social Media: Nurturing deliberation through a novel conceptualisation of social media as state-sponsored independent media. Download Zim Nwokora The Adaptive Capacity of Democracies: Theory and Institutional Mechanisms. Download
- A Q study in waiting: Three hunting discourses
< Back A Q study in waiting: Three hunting discourses Lucy Parry, University of Sheffield Mon 16 March 2015 11:00am - 12:00pm Fishbowl, Building 24, University of Canberra Abstract Here I present some tentative findings from my pilot Q study which aims to map out the current discourses that exist around the hunting of wild mammals in the UK. I first provide an overview of Q methodology, before going on to outline how I approached the study. I will then present some initial interpretation of three anti-hunting discourses and return to my original aim of the study - to understand how animals are represented in hunting discourses and to understand the role of scientific knowledge in people's evaluation of hunting - and query whether it is possible to achieve these or even desirable in the context of Q. Relevant to this is the 'Q community's' particular approach to using the method which can pose challenges to researchers. Finally, I will ask the audience to inspect my Q statements and there will be an opportunity to participate in a Q sort for those who are interested. As this research is still in the developmental stages, feedback is most welcome and as such I advance an informal, discussion style seminar. About the speaker Lucy Parry is a PhD Student from the University of Sheffield, and is here to take part in the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance’s Summer School. Lucy will be here for slightly over 2 months, and to read more about her research topic and research interests please click on this link: http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/politics/research/phd/lucy-parry Previous Next
- Belgium: The rise of institutionalized mini-publics
< Back Belgium: The rise of institutionalized mini-publics Julien Vrydagh, Vrije Universiteit Brussel and UCLouvain Tue 28 January 2020 11:00am-12pm The Dryzek Room, Building 22, University of Canberra Abstract In less than a year, Belgium has witnessed a large and sudden rise of institutionalized mini-publics. After the Ostbelgien model, the Regional Parliament of Brussels has institutionalized Citizens’ deliberative commissions, while multiple municipalities of Brussels are launching neighbourhood councils and a political party got elected based on a single promise to organize citizens’ assemblies. Belgium seems to become a leading laboratory of deliberative democracy and citizen participation. This ‘revolution’ is nonetheless surprising, for Belgium was known to be a copy-book example of neo-corporatism, whereby citizens tended to be excluded from political decision-making. How can we explain this increase? Is it a revolution or an incremental change? What do these new institutionalized mini-publics entail? What are their promises and pitfalls? This informative seminar will try to answer these questions by discussing dimension of this rise. First, I present its genesis and background. Examining Belgian mini-publics from 2001 until 2018, it provides both a descriptive analysis of what preceded and a narrative accounting for this expansion. Second, it explains in detail the design and competencies of four specific institutionalized mini-publics : a brief remainder of the Ostbelgien model; the Brussels’ Deliberative Commission (composed by elected representatives and randomly selected citizens); the atypical Citizens’ Assemblies organized by the political party Agora the neighbourhood mini-publics (sometimes combined with participatory budgets), which are mushrooming in Brussels’ municipalities. About the speaker Julien Vrydagh is a PhD student and a teaching assistant at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel and the UCLouvain. His PhD thesis investigates the conditions under which mini-publics influence public policy in Belgium. His other research interests include the link between the mini- and maxi-public, the integration of mini-publics in collaborative governance, and youth parliaments. Julien Vrydagh also provides the City of Brussels with advices on its randomly selected neighbourhood councils. Previous Next