|
|
 |
Current Research
|
The research activities in deliberative democracy range
between highly theoretical and applied projects. There is particular emphasis running
through many of the projects on bridging the divide between theory, practice
and institutionalisation.
Current Projects |
(Click to expand/contract) |
Project Title
(link) |
Funding |
Investigators |
Short Description |
(Jan 2008–2010) |
ARC (linkage)
newDemocracy |
John Dryzek and Simon Niemeyer
(with Lyn Carson, Janette HartzKarp, Ian Marsh & Luca Belgiorno-Nettis) |
This project will develop and analyse one of the world’s most ambitious exercises in citizen deliberation to date. At the centre is a Citizens’ Parliament, composed of one person randomly selected from each of the 150 federal electoral divisions in Australia. The Citizens’ Parliament will deliberate questions concerning governmental reform. The project will analyse citizen engagement with politics, the degree to which typical citizens can deliberate complex political issues, and how citizen preferences, capacities, and judgments change in deliberation. Contributions will be made to democratic theory, to the design of institutions for authentic citizen deliberation, and to the social science of citizen participation. |
Climate Change and the Public Sphere
(Jan 2008–2010) |
ARC (Discovery) |
Simon Niemeyer, Kersty Hobson, Paul t’Hart, Will Steffen, Janette Lindesay, Brendan Mackey |
This project develops an understanding of Australia’s response to climate change and ways to improve adaptation from a governance perspective. An interdisciplinary team will construct and use original climate change scenarios to assess public responses through interviews, survey methods, contrasting individual responses with results of deliberative forums and follow up interviews. Significant developments in methods and concepts and understanding of adaptation will have an international audience. It will produce a series of regionally specific scenarios, statement of likely responses and role of institutional design and policy in improving adaptation. |
(2005-2008) |
ARC (Discovery) |
John Dryzek, Simon Niemeyer
and Selen Ayirtman |
This
project explores the nature of democratic deliberation with a view to improving
theories of democracy and prospects for institutionalising the benefits
ascribed to deliberative democracy. It aims to systematically address
fundamental questions about what it means to deliberate using empirical
investigation of actual deliberative process. The methods employed are have
been trialled with promising results and accepted as being consistent with
normative deliberative theory. These will involve both formal hypothesis testing and qualitative
exploration of results to reveal insights about the process of
deliberation. The findings will be
used to re-examine theory and formulate recommendations for instutionalisation
deliberative democracy in both Australian and international contexts.
|
Communication across Difference in a Democracy: Australian Muslims and the Mainstream |
ARC (Discovery) |
John Dryzek, Bora Kanra |
Australian Muslims have been at the centre of media attention particularly since September the 11th. Even though they comprise no more than 1,5 per cent of the total population, the debate on the compatibility of Islamic and Western values has been very prominent. To date, this debate has focused little attention of the attitudes of Australian Muslims and how they perceive themselves in relation to Western values. This gap, often filled by negative stereotypes, has a wide range of implications in the area of contemporary governance and public policy.
This research project will study the relationship between Islamic communities in Australia and the wider society in the context of ideas about cultural difference and democracy. The degree to which Australian Muslims develop a sense of belonging and social responsibility towards mainstream society is directly linket dot the level of their inclusion as well as participation in Australia's multicultural scheme. This project therefore aims to contribute to the possibilities to foster a more productive social and political relationship between Australian Muslims and the mainstream.
The empirical substance will consist of interviews with both Muslims and non-Muslims, with a view to mapping and analysing discourses about difference and democracy in Australia. The knowledge generated can then be deployed to identify exactly how communication across difference can be promoted in this kind of case. The research informed by a theoretical perspective that highlights the role of social learning in deliberation in a diverse and democratic society. The project will study both ordinary citizens and opinion leaders in Islamic and non-Islamic communities and will complement existing work in the Research School of Social Sciences, notably the current ARC-funded project of John Dryzek and Simon Niemeyer on how both pluralism and consensus can get produced in the process of political deliberation, and so reinforce the School's position as a world leader in the study of deliberative democracy. |
Past Projects |
(Click to expand/contract) |
Project Title
(link) |
Funding |
Investigators |
Short Description |
The Theory and Practice of Deliberative Democracy
2004-2007 |
ARC (Discovery) |
John Dryzek and Bob Goodin |
This project links the theory of deliberative
democracy to institutional innovation, to benefit both, through comparative
case analyses of democratic innovations in different countries. It is
hypothesized that particular kinds of institutional innovation (such as
consensus conferences, stakeholder dialogues) will work out quite differently
in different political contexts. The results of the comparative case analyses
will be used to reflect back upon, and reformulate, deliberative democratic
theory. Cases studied include consensus conferences on genetically modified
food in Denmark, France, and USA.
|
Research Activities with other partners |
(Click to expand/contract) |
Project Title |
Partner |
Investigators |
Short Description |
ForestERA — New Mexico Forest Restoration Stakeholder and Public Input |
ForestERA |
Simon Niemeyer and John Dryzek |
Dyzek and Niemeyer are both collaborating with ForestERA at the Northern Arizona
University (USA) in the design and analysis of deliberative processes around
the issue of forest restoration. The results will also be used as a case study
for the Micropolitics of Deliberation Project.
|
Future of Fremantle Traffic Bridge — Community Engagement Process |
Janette HartzKarp
21st Century Dialogue |
Simon Niemeyer and Selen Ayirtman |
Based on the analysis of the community engagement process and the deliberative poll conducted to find out the preferences of residents of Fremantle and the wider city of Perth regarding the future of Fremantle Traffic Bridge, this research investigatigates whether and how preferences change as a result of the deliberative process. |
Biobanking in British Columbia — A Deliberative Public Consultation |
W. Maurice Young Centre for Applied Ethics, University of British Columbia |
Simon Niemeyer and John Dryzek |
more Information |
Biobanking (Mayo Clinic) |
Mayo Clinic (USA) |
Simon Niemeyer and John Dryzek |
|
Into the Void: Exploring the Impact of Participatory Processes in research
and policy contexts |
CSIRO |
Simon Niemeyer |
This research explores the
relationship between deliberative methods and outcomes — such as policy
implementation. It will consider questions of appropriateness (what is the
appropriate nature of impact) and effectiveness (in terms of level of impact)
of deliberative participation. By assessing actual experience of running deliberative
processes with respect to research outcomes, the research aims to investigate
both barriers and pathways to a desired level of impact. Important questions
regarding the appropriate level of impact in both theory and practice will be
addressed. Given existing institutional settings mechanisms whereby this
appropriate level can be achieved and ways in which barriers can be transformed
will be explored.
This initiative will brought
together researchers from within CSIRO and Australian Universities who have
engaged in participatory/deliberative research to reflect from their experience
and explore avenues for improving its interface with decision outputs. This
will result in better understanding of the practice of deliberative input in
the Australian context, by way of use of domestic case studies and comparison
with international practice. Another benefit will be the development of
strategies for improving the nexus between public input and decision processes.
|
|
|
|
|
