<p>After the appointment of a new European Commission in 2004, “communication” was made a top priority on the agenda. The Commission presented a new communication policy, which would establish a dialogue with the citizens, thereby bringing more democracy to the union and bridging the gap to the citizens. Three documents containing the policy were published, namely an internal action plan for the Commission, Plan D which establishes the framework for national debates and a whitepaper on EU communication policy. These documents were met by mistrust and criticism from many different actors such as journalists and experts.</p><p>The aim of this master thesis is to examine this new communication policy from a deliberative democratic perspective. The thesis asks whether the new policy has a potential of contributing to deliberative democracy, by investigating the documents from a discursive point of view. Deliberative democracy focuses mainly on public discussions and the generation of a general will by public conversation where every one has a right to participate on equal terms. This thesis uses a discursive interpretation, as stated by the philosopher Jürgen Habermas, where the public sphere and political rights which constitutes the public area plays an important role. The theoretical perspective is used in the thesis to understand and assess the policy.</p><p>To be able to draw conclusions, the new communication policy is searched for discursive ideas and the occurrence is analyzed by a both qualitative and quantitative text analysis. The analysis shows that the policy includes a lot of actions that goes well along with a discursive perspective, as defined in the thesis, although some important considerations are missing. The new communication policy as presented by the European Commission has therefore a good potential of contributing to deliberative democracy in the Union.</p><p>The policy is also discussed in relation to the criticism that has been presented regarding the theory of deliberative democracy. The thesis shows that the communication policy includes actions which decrease the importance of this criticism, allowing for the policy to possibly contribute to European democracy and decreasing the democratic deficit.</p>

The addition of random selection to our arsenal of methods for selecting political officials would enhance performance against norms of representative democracy. I employ historical and analytic methods to explore the nature of sortition and its relation to political equality, rational decision-making, and legitimate representation. Sortition both expresses a democratic commitment to political equality and facilitates improved performance under this democratic norm. It can be rational to eschew reasons in the process of selecting political officials, and decision-making bodies chosen randomly can be expected to make good decisions. I also address concerns stemming from representative norms, surrounding random selection of officials, arguing that random selection can enhance the resemblance and responsiveness of representatives. Finally, I detail some possibilities for institutional arrangements that would deliver the benefits of sortition while addressing the challenges it presents. / text

Studiecirkeln är en pedagogisk praktik som tillskrivs en roll i den svenska demokratin. Studiecirkelns genomförande svarar väl mot en demokratisk praktik som framställs i deliberativ demokratiteori. Avhandlingens idé är att belysa deliberativ demokratiteori med empiri. Med studier av studiecirkelsamtal ges möjlighet att diskutera teorin med samtalsdata. Samtalsdata genererades genom analyser av ett videoinspelat cirkelsamtal som handlade om hållbar utveckling. Studiens teoretiska ram visar fyra olika bidraga till den deliberativa demokratiteorin. Dessa presenteras i en indelning som skiljer mellan något som i avhandlingen kallas för den rationella argumentationens överläggning och en retoriskt orienterade överläggning. Genom denna indelning ges fler möjligheter att tolka fenomen i samtalsempirin och vice versa. Beträffade åsiktsbildningen i studiecirkelsamtalet finner man att cirkeldeltagarna berör en mängd olika företeelser. I detta urskiljs deltagares egna åsikter samt föreställningar som är producerade i normativa sfärer. Samtalsprocessen kännetecknas att den varierar från en period till en annan. Det gör att tillgängligheten för deltagare att kunna bidra med och ta del av yttranden varierar. Resultaten reser frågor till teorin om tolkningen av vissa begrepp. / In Sweden study circles are viewed as a vital part of the democracy due to the opportunity of the participants to deliberate. The way that the study circles work corresponds well with the notion of democratic deliberations promoted in theories of deliberative democracy. The main idea with this thesis is to elucidate the theory of deliberative democracy with empirical data from deliberations in a study circle. There are several contributions to the theory of deliberative democracy. In the thesis a distinction is made between theories that focus on the rational argument and theories that accept rhetorical speech as complement to the rational argument. In short the results show that the study circle conversation in one sense qualifies as a democratic deliberation. The participants are free to argue and allowed to have different views. When it comes to the contents of the conversation two systems of categories illustrate their formation of views. One categorisation illustrates that the participants use a wide range of opinions. The second categorisation stresses that the views of the participants were influenced by different sources. The analysis of the conversation shows a complex pattern of communication that differs from one period to another. This raises questions on how concepts used in the theories will be understood and interpreted in the light of empirical data.

The aim of this study is to quantify the extent to which political correctness, understood as an implicit social convention of restraint on public expression, operates within a community. Due to a scarcity of prior experimental research in the area, a new method was developed for the purpose of the study. Using random selection, the treatment consists of exposing groups averaging 10 individuals to a survey on diversity and immigration matters. The effect is measured as the discrepancy in attitudes that is revealed between anonymous and non-anonymous responses to the treatment survey. Control groups are similarly exposed to a survey on traditional left-right matters. The discrepancies are then compared. The results are controlled for possible influence by factors including group size, sex ratio, and length of study. The general effect of the treatment is not statistically significant, possibly as a result of small sample size. Further analysis shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of women and the extent of attitude discrepancy. On one interpretation, this means that women in the population are on average more responsive to political correctness than men. Due to the population’s skewed characteristics, the results are not generalised. Future researchers in the area are advised to draw their sample from a more representative population, to investigate additional subject matters and to collect more sophisticated data, in particular on the level of the individual.

This study aims to analyze the current discourse on citizen’s dialogue and its link to deliberative democracy, with hope to find that it is taken for granted in dialogues with citizens at local government level. The aim is to show, with a discourse analytical approach to the current democratic renewal in Swedish municipalities, how the discourse is designed and what is reproduced or restructured through printed texts published by the SKL. This by finding what is seen as truth or a form of objective reality in the deliberative democratic discourse and by analyzing the reproduction of the same. The purpose may also partly be considered creating an understanding of how this relates to or what effects this has in the discursive and social practice, as well as in seeing what consequences it can bring. Citizen´s dialogues are becoming more common. Powerful actors like SKL encourage Swedish municipalities to implement the dialogue in the organization. Information about the positive effects is spreading, while unintended consequences are not given any room at all. This can be seen as a social problem, a lack of awareness about the discourse and its social consequences or changes. Structural inequalities are reproduced by SKL publications, which give this study social relevance. The results also indicate that citizen´s dialogues have a connection to deliberative democracy yet still differ in several categories.

Youth councils are an increasingly popular tool that both government and non-governmental organizations use to inform policy and program development, to increase the participation of young people, and to improve the connection of youth to their communities and to civic life more broadly. In this thesis, the youth engagement experiences of local governments in Amherst, Nova Scotia, and Halifax Regional Municipality, Nova Scotia are examined. Both municipalities initiated youth councils in recent years in an attempt to consult on issues affecting youth in their communities. The two communities have experienced varied degrees of success in implementing these strategies. In broad terms, youth councils operated more successfully in the smaller, more self-contained community of Amherst than in the more sprawling urban municipality of the Halifax area. The divergent experiences of these two municipalities inform a discussion about the merits of youth councils as a tool for engagement for local governments. It is concluded that while youth councils can be both effective in terms of achieving immediate objectives, success is not easily reproduced in all scenarios and depends to a large extent on the characteristics of the community itself, the level of support from adults and facilitators, and the ability of the councils to meet their objectives and thus achieve legitimacy among stakeholders, creating a positive feedback look which engenders further effectiveness.

This research critically examines the process of public participation in the politically contested arena of environmental impact assessment (EIA) in two case studies: the Ekati diamond mine in Canada’s Northwest Territories and the Richards Bay Minerals project in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Each case offers the chance to examine and compare the potentialities of expanded public participation in EIA and the promise of deliberative environmental decision-making. The concept of deliberative public participation has become the new normative standard for citizen engagement in numerous planning and policy-making processes, including EIA. It calls for increased participation by previously disadvantaged communities in the decisions that affect them through multi-stakeholder dialogue. Addressing the need for a realistic assessment of deliberative democratic practice, this study explores the limits of deliberative process by looking at specific examples of EIA, bringing into focus political processes, power relations and the structural conditions affecting citizen engagement.

No description available.

This essay sets out to compare political participation in two e-petition systems: The Malmö initiative in Malmö, Sweden, and Better Reykjavik in Reykjavik, Iceland. The main question of the essay concerns the aggregative and deliberative qualities of the Malmö initiative and Better Reykjavik, as well as the relationship between aggregation and deliberation. This main question is divided into four subqueries that lead the empirical analysis. These are: (1) Which similarities and differences in terms of design are there between the Malmö initiative and Better Reykjavik? (2) To what extent have these systems mobilized an aggregative political participation? (3) What similarities and differences are there concerning aspects of deliberation? and (4) What is the correlation between aggregation and deliberation like in the two e-petition systems? The method in use is a comparative cross-sectional study with a 'most similar research design'. The empirical material of the essay includes every petition published since the start of the systems in 2008, which makes it a total survey. The petitions are analyzed by way of quantitative content analysis. In addition, the essay includes a qualitative content analysis of the design of the e-petition systems. The empirical study shows that Better Reykjavik has engaged much greater political participation in both aggregative and deliberative matters than the Malmö initiative has. Most of the differences found concerning aggregation and deliberation can be explained with differences in the design of the e-petition systems. First, Better Reykjavik offers more opportunities for aggregative participation and deliberation than Malmö. Second, the likelihood of actually getting the petition read by local politicians is far greater in Reykjavik than in Malmö. Concerning the relationship between aggregation and deliberation, this study finds no signs of contradiction between the two. As this is not a zero-sum game, e-petition systems are considered to hold good potential for meeting Robert Goodins desire to unite aggregative and deliberative ideals under the slogan "First talk, then vote".

Emerging online discussions in a Weibo (micro-blogging) platform argue for the new possibility of online deliberation in Chinese cyberspace. In order to ascertain the extent to which this platform is being used, the author has conducted a case study to measure the quality of deliberation of an online discussion of genetically modified (GM) foods in the comment section of posts written by Mr. Cui and Mr. Fang on Tencent Weibo. In order to gain a comprehensive understanding of the data, both methods of Discourse Quality Index (DQI) and interview have been used. The findings of the research indicate that the online discussion fails to meet two necessary criteria of deliberation: rational and logical statements and consensus building. However, the study results are not totally negative, since the levels of interaction, information exchange, mutual understanding and neutral expression are relatively high. According to the author, in the contemporary stage, online authoritarian deliberation faces many problems in the PRC. At micro level, first, online expression is irrational and illogical; second, it is hard to reach consensus building; third, participants are stubborn to their pre-given wills; forth, some people are indifferent to online discussions. At macro level, first, most of the online discussions have low external impact on decision-making; second, the strong government control may hinder the development of online deliberation.