Making direct democracy deliberative through random assemblies

John W. Gastil, Robert Richards

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

36 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Direct-democratic processes have won popular support but fall far short of the standards of deliberative democracy. Initiative and referendum processes furnish citizens with insufficient information about policy problems, inadequate choices among policy solutions, flawed criteria for choosing among such solutions, and few opportunities for reflection on those choices prior to decision making. We suggest a way to make direct democracy more deliberative by grafting randomly selected citizen assemblies onto existing institutions and practices. After reviewing the problems that beset modern direct-democratic elections and the long history of randomly selected citizen assemblies, we propose five different varieties of randomly constituted citizen bodies-Priority Conferences, Design Panels, Citizens' Assemblies, Citizens' Initiative Reviews, and Policy Juries. After selecting members through stratified random sampling of citizens, each of these assemblies would operate at a different stage of the legislative process, from initial problem identification through approval of a finished ballot measure. Highly structured procedures guided by professional moderators and featuring expert testimony on policy and legal matters would help to ensure deliberative quality, and careful institutional designs would make each body politically powerful. In the end, these citizen bodies would be likely to address the deliberative deficit of direct democracy and better achieve the public's desired policy objectives.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)253-281
Number of pages29
JournalPolitics and Society
Volume41
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2013

Fingerprint

direct democracy
citizen
information policy
deliberative democracy
referendum
moderator
testimony
deficit
election
expert
decision making
history

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Political Science and International Relations

Cite this

Gastil, John W. ; Richards, Robert. / Making direct democracy deliberative through random assemblies. In: Politics and Society. 2013 ; Vol. 41, No. 2. pp. 253-281.
@article{3ad542a62420418385171088ce9e66c9,
title = "Making direct democracy deliberative through random assemblies",
abstract = "Direct-democratic processes have won popular support but fall far short of the standards of deliberative democracy. Initiative and referendum processes furnish citizens with insufficient information about policy problems, inadequate choices among policy solutions, flawed criteria for choosing among such solutions, and few opportunities for reflection on those choices prior to decision making. We suggest a way to make direct democracy more deliberative by grafting randomly selected citizen assemblies onto existing institutions and practices. After reviewing the problems that beset modern direct-democratic elections and the long history of randomly selected citizen assemblies, we propose five different varieties of randomly constituted citizen bodies-Priority Conferences, Design Panels, Citizens' Assemblies, Citizens' Initiative Reviews, and Policy Juries. After selecting members through stratified random sampling of citizens, each of these assemblies would operate at a different stage of the legislative process, from initial problem identification through approval of a finished ballot measure. Highly structured procedures guided by professional moderators and featuring expert testimony on policy and legal matters would help to ensure deliberative quality, and careful institutional designs would make each body politically powerful. In the end, these citizen bodies would be likely to address the deliberative deficit of direct democracy and better achieve the public's desired policy objectives.",
author = "Gastil, {John W.} and Robert Richards",
year = "2013",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0032329213483109",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "41",
pages = "253--281",
journal = "Politics and Society",
issn = "0032-3292",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "2",

}

Making direct democracy deliberative through random assemblies. / Gastil, John W.; Richards, Robert.

In: Politics and Society, Vol. 41, No. 2, 01.06.2013, p. 253-281.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Making direct democracy deliberative through random assemblies

AU - Gastil, John W.

AU - Richards, Robert

PY - 2013/6/1

Y1 - 2013/6/1

N2 - Direct-democratic processes have won popular support but fall far short of the standards of deliberative democracy. Initiative and referendum processes furnish citizens with insufficient information about policy problems, inadequate choices among policy solutions, flawed criteria for choosing among such solutions, and few opportunities for reflection on those choices prior to decision making. We suggest a way to make direct democracy more deliberative by grafting randomly selected citizen assemblies onto existing institutions and practices. After reviewing the problems that beset modern direct-democratic elections and the long history of randomly selected citizen assemblies, we propose five different varieties of randomly constituted citizen bodies-Priority Conferences, Design Panels, Citizens' Assemblies, Citizens' Initiative Reviews, and Policy Juries. After selecting members through stratified random sampling of citizens, each of these assemblies would operate at a different stage of the legislative process, from initial problem identification through approval of a finished ballot measure. Highly structured procedures guided by professional moderators and featuring expert testimony on policy and legal matters would help to ensure deliberative quality, and careful institutional designs would make each body politically powerful. In the end, these citizen bodies would be likely to address the deliberative deficit of direct democracy and better achieve the public's desired policy objectives.

AB - Direct-democratic processes have won popular support but fall far short of the standards of deliberative democracy. Initiative and referendum processes furnish citizens with insufficient information about policy problems, inadequate choices among policy solutions, flawed criteria for choosing among such solutions, and few opportunities for reflection on those choices prior to decision making. We suggest a way to make direct democracy more deliberative by grafting randomly selected citizen assemblies onto existing institutions and practices. After reviewing the problems that beset modern direct-democratic elections and the long history of randomly selected citizen assemblies, we propose five different varieties of randomly constituted citizen bodies-Priority Conferences, Design Panels, Citizens' Assemblies, Citizens' Initiative Reviews, and Policy Juries. After selecting members through stratified random sampling of citizens, each of these assemblies would operate at a different stage of the legislative process, from initial problem identification through approval of a finished ballot measure. Highly structured procedures guided by professional moderators and featuring expert testimony on policy and legal matters would help to ensure deliberative quality, and careful institutional designs would make each body politically powerful. In the end, these citizen bodies would be likely to address the deliberative deficit of direct democracy and better achieve the public's desired policy objectives.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84877325830&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84877325830&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0032329213483109

DO - 10.1177/0032329213483109

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84877325830

VL - 41

SP - 253

EP - 281

JO - Politics and Society

JF - Politics and Society

SN - 0032-3292

IS - 2

ER -