Studying public deliberation after the systemic turn: The crucial role for interpretive research

Selen ERCAN, Carolyn Hendriks, John Boswell

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    20 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    The recent shift towards a deliberative systems approach suggests understanding public deliberation as a communicative activity occurring in a diversity of spaces. While theoretically attractive, the deliberative systems approach raises a number of methodological questions for empirical social scientists. For example, how does one identify multiple communicative sites within a deliberative system, how does one study connections between different sites, and how does one assess the impact of the broader context on deliberative forums and systems? Drawing on multiple case studies, this article argues that interpretive research methods are well-suited to studying the ambiguities, dynamics and politics of complex deliberative systems.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)195-212
    Number of pages18
    JournalPolicy and Politics
    Volume45
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2017

    Fingerprint

    deliberation
    research method
    politics
    social scientist
    public

    Cite this

    ERCAN, Selen ; Hendriks, Carolyn ; Boswell, John. / Studying public deliberation after the systemic turn: The crucial role for interpretive research. In: Policy and Politics. 2017 ; Vol. 45, No. 2. pp. 195-212.
    @article{b9e9202d0a564a78959b5d6215db0ea9,
    title = "Studying public deliberation after the systemic turn: The crucial role for interpretive research",
    abstract = "The recent shift towards a deliberative systems approach suggests understanding public deliberation as a communicative activity occurring in a diversity of spaces. While theoretically attractive, the deliberative systems approach raises a number of methodological questions for empirical social scientists. For example, how does one identify multiple communicative sites within a deliberative system, how does one study connections between different sites, and how does one assess the impact of the broader context on deliberative forums and systems? Drawing on multiple case studies, this article argues that interpretive research methods are well-suited to studying the ambiguities, dynamics and politics of complex deliberative systems.",
    keywords = "Deliberative democracy, Deliberative system, Empirical, Interpretive research",
    author = "Selen ERCAN and Carolyn Hendriks and John Boswell",
    year = "2017",
    doi = "10.1332/030557315X14502713105886",
    language = "English",
    volume = "45",
    pages = "195--212",
    journal = "Policy and Politics",
    issn = "0305-5736",
    publisher = "Policy Press",
    number = "2",

    }

    Studying public deliberation after the systemic turn: The crucial role for interpretive research. / ERCAN, Selen; Hendriks, Carolyn; Boswell, John.

    In: Policy and Politics, Vol. 45, No. 2, 2017, p. 195-212.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Studying public deliberation after the systemic turn: The crucial role for interpretive research

    AU - ERCAN, Selen

    AU - Hendriks, Carolyn

    AU - Boswell, John

    PY - 2017

    Y1 - 2017

    N2 - The recent shift towards a deliberative systems approach suggests understanding public deliberation as a communicative activity occurring in a diversity of spaces. While theoretically attractive, the deliberative systems approach raises a number of methodological questions for empirical social scientists. For example, how does one identify multiple communicative sites within a deliberative system, how does one study connections between different sites, and how does one assess the impact of the broader context on deliberative forums and systems? Drawing on multiple case studies, this article argues that interpretive research methods are well-suited to studying the ambiguities, dynamics and politics of complex deliberative systems.

    AB - The recent shift towards a deliberative systems approach suggests understanding public deliberation as a communicative activity occurring in a diversity of spaces. While theoretically attractive, the deliberative systems approach raises a number of methodological questions for empirical social scientists. For example, how does one identify multiple communicative sites within a deliberative system, how does one study connections between different sites, and how does one assess the impact of the broader context on deliberative forums and systems? Drawing on multiple case studies, this article argues that interpretive research methods are well-suited to studying the ambiguities, dynamics and politics of complex deliberative systems.

    KW - Deliberative democracy

    KW - Deliberative system

    KW - Empirical

    KW - Interpretive research

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85018743218&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/studying-public-deliberation-after-systemic-turn-crucial-role-interpretive-research

    U2 - 10.1332/030557315X14502713105886

    DO - 10.1332/030557315X14502713105886

    M3 - Article

    VL - 45

    SP - 195

    EP - 212

    JO - Policy and Politics

    JF - Policy and Politics

    SN - 0305-5736

    IS - 2

    ER -