Deliberative Mini-Publics: Innovating Citizens in the Democratic Process

Research output: Contribution to journalBook/Film/Article review

Abstract

There was a time when mini-publics were considered the exemplar of deliberative practice. A forum composed of a diverse set of randomly selected individuals exchanging reasons to determine the best course of action is regarded as a corrective to democratic deficits in “traditional” forms of political participation. A lot has been written about the virtues of these forums—from Archon Fung’s landmark piece in 2003 which first registered the term “mini -publics” in the vocabulary of deliberative studies (Archon Fung, “Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and Their Consequences,” Journal of Political Philosophy 11[September 2003]: 338–367) to a series of monographs showcasing the nuts and bolts of designing, implementing and evaluating deliberative forums.
The growing interest in deliberative systems, however, places the study of mini-publics at a crossroads. Today, debates about the function of mini-publics in relation to formal institutions and the broader public sphere have started to take root, particularly in the context of sharp critiques against the legitimacy and impact of mini-publics as discrete sites of deliberation.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)859-860
Number of pages2
JournalPerspectives on Politics
Volume14
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2016

Fingerprint

political philosophy
political participation
deliberation
vocabulary
deficit
legitimacy
citizen
time

Cite this

@article{efac3c6feb7440b9ab2e066a0f08af05,
title = "Deliberative Mini-Publics: Innovating Citizens in the Democratic Process",
abstract = "There was a time when mini-publics were considered the exemplar of deliberative practice. A forum composed of a diverse set of randomly selected individuals exchanging reasons to determine the best course of action is regarded as a corrective to democratic deficits in “traditional” forms of political participation. A lot has been written about the virtues of these forums—from Archon Fung’s landmark piece in 2003 which first registered the term “mini -publics” in the vocabulary of deliberative studies (Archon Fung, “Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and Their Consequences,” Journal of Political Philosophy 11[September 2003]: 338–367) to a series of monographs showcasing the nuts and bolts of designing, implementing and evaluating deliberative forums. The growing interest in deliberative systems, however, places the study of mini-publics at a crossroads. Today, debates about the function of mini-publics in relation to formal institutions and the broader public sphere have started to take root, particularly in the context of sharp critiques against the legitimacy and impact of mini-publics as discrete sites of deliberation.",
author = "Nicole CURATO",
year = "2016",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1017/S1537592716002164",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "859--860",
journal = "Perspectives on Politics",
issn = "1537-5927",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "3",

}

Deliberative Mini-Publics: Innovating Citizens in the Democratic Process. / CURATO, Nicole.

In: Perspectives on Politics, Vol. 14, No. 3, 09.2016, p. 859-860.

Research output: Contribution to journalBook/Film/Article review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Deliberative Mini-Publics: Innovating Citizens in the Democratic Process

AU - CURATO, Nicole

PY - 2016/9

Y1 - 2016/9

N2 - There was a time when mini-publics were considered the exemplar of deliberative practice. A forum composed of a diverse set of randomly selected individuals exchanging reasons to determine the best course of action is regarded as a corrective to democratic deficits in “traditional” forms of political participation. A lot has been written about the virtues of these forums—from Archon Fung’s landmark piece in 2003 which first registered the term “mini -publics” in the vocabulary of deliberative studies (Archon Fung, “Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and Their Consequences,” Journal of Political Philosophy 11[September 2003]: 338–367) to a series of monographs showcasing the nuts and bolts of designing, implementing and evaluating deliberative forums. The growing interest in deliberative systems, however, places the study of mini-publics at a crossroads. Today, debates about the function of mini-publics in relation to formal institutions and the broader public sphere have started to take root, particularly in the context of sharp critiques against the legitimacy and impact of mini-publics as discrete sites of deliberation.

AB - There was a time when mini-publics were considered the exemplar of deliberative practice. A forum composed of a diverse set of randomly selected individuals exchanging reasons to determine the best course of action is regarded as a corrective to democratic deficits in “traditional” forms of political participation. A lot has been written about the virtues of these forums—from Archon Fung’s landmark piece in 2003 which first registered the term “mini -publics” in the vocabulary of deliberative studies (Archon Fung, “Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and Their Consequences,” Journal of Political Philosophy 11[September 2003]: 338–367) to a series of monographs showcasing the nuts and bolts of designing, implementing and evaluating deliberative forums. The growing interest in deliberative systems, however, places the study of mini-publics at a crossroads. Today, debates about the function of mini-publics in relation to formal institutions and the broader public sphere have started to take root, particularly in the context of sharp critiques against the legitimacy and impact of mini-publics as discrete sites of deliberation.

U2 - 10.1017/S1537592716002164

DO - 10.1017/S1537592716002164

M3 - Book/Film/Article review

VL - 14

SP - 859

EP - 860

JO - Perspectives on Politics

JF - Perspectives on Politics

SN - 1537-5927

IS - 3

ER -