Sceptics about deliberative democracy point out that some issues involve material that is inaccessible to the untrained public, while other issues highlight fundamental value differences that cannot be resolved by public discussion. Value pluralism and public incompetence present serious challenges that threaten to limit the practical scope of deliberative democracy. This project aims to meet these challenges by considering cases that illustrate the successes and failures of public interaction. I draw upon the Oregon experiment, the BC Citizens’ Assembly, the Quebec kirpan controversy, and Turkey’s ongoing headscarf debate to outline useful procedures and institutional elements for a more robust deliberative theory. Provided these procedural suggestions, I argue that deliberative democracy can be a functional theory under non-ideal social conditions.

In this essay, I aim to elucidate a concept of public justification. I outline several challenges faced by political philosophers, including a desire to secure stability and treat people respectfully against a background of reasonable pluralism. I suggest that John Rawls‟ account of public reason provides a helpful starting point for accomplishing these goals. But critics have been both persistent and persuasive in their objections to public reason‟s central element of reasons all can accept. I explicate three dominant criticisms: incomprehensibility, attenuation and exclusion. First, some critics have argued that the very idea of reasons all can accept cannot be plausibly articulated. Second, critics maintain that the set of reasons all can accept is insufficiently robust to solve constitutional essentials and matters of basic justice. Third, critics note that if public justification is constrained by reasons all can accept, then many informative and effective arguments must be excluded from the public sphere. In response to these criticisms, I argue for an interpretation of reasons all can accept which is sensitive to critics‟ reasonable demand for an explicit account of each element of the doctrine. My interpretation demonstrates the superfluity of what I call the sharability constraint—the thesis that only reasons acceptable to all can function as justifications in the public sphere. Once the sharability constraint is rejected, I argue that the problem of exclusion dissipates, but that substantive restrictions on acceptable reasons are still possible. I am optimistic that this approach is less attenuating than one constrained by sharability and that, at least under favourable empirical conditions, more problems can be resolved by this approach than by standard Rawlsian theory. I draw on actual convergence in the international realm to bolster this optimism. Finally, I relate this approach to the widespread influence of deliberative democracy. I argue that procedural apparatuses are insufficient for political legitimacy, but that deliberation may be an invaluable tool for uncovering reasons required by substantive justification. / Graduate

This study tries to understand the internal dynamics of the civil society organizations in Turkey on the experiences of three CSOs: the Ankara Branches of KADER, MAZLUMDER and IMO by focusing on the intra&ndash / organizational practices (the decision making processes, elections, general meetings, division of labor, basic conflicts and divergences, the disagreements, the way of deliberation and consensus). It tries to shed light on the transformative potential of the CSO&rsquo / s in public sphere as civil organizations themselves in time both in the sense of their political stances and organizational structure. The research was designed in the form of a case study including both the depth interwiews and participant observations. In this framework, ten depth-interviews were made with members having different qualities for each of these CSOs and participant observations were realized in the general meetings, elections and activities of these organizations. Since the aim of this study is to understand the contribution of the CSOs to the public sphere, the research findings were interpreted and considered basically in the light of the two main theoretical positions: the deliberative (Habermas) and agonistic (Laclau and Mouffe) democracy. The study espoused a post-structuralist conception of democracy combined with a weakened model of deliberation and dialogue pointing out the requirement of the existential publicity of man (Arendt) in the world. In this context, this study tries to discuss the following questions within the framework of the public sphere experience of the three CSOs throughout the thesis. Is the concept of civil society a proper concept for understanding the peculiar experience of Turkey (with reference to the historical context of civil associational life in Turkey and the recent civil resurrection)? Do civil organizations have the capacity to serve for deepening and consolidation of democracy in public sphere? Are these civil organizations democratic and participatory with regard to their intra-organizational structures and decision-making processes? And, more importantly, do they have any capacity to influence the process of democratic transformation in Turkey?

隨著環保運動的推展，環境影響評估制度也應運而生。然而長期以來，環評制度的發展多著重在開發行為的環境影響評估，其進行的時間點太晚、無法整體考量社經環境、缺乏累積性影響評估，也使環評制度難以發揮保護環境的效果。近年來受到重視的政策環評，則是將環評層次提升到政府的政策、計畫與方案，其評估的重點，在於整合的角度、多面向的關心並評估策略對整體國家發展的影響，過程中廣納各種意見，與公共政策緊密相關，以達到環境、經濟及社會永續發展的目標。相較於開發環評，政策環評過程中的民眾參與更加重要。然而，過去國內在政策環評的相關研究中，鮮少針對民眾參與進行研究。 本文以民眾參與為基礎，從規劃理論及審議式民主觀點中所重視的「溝通」為出發，探討各理論的理念，期望能以其為借鏡，爲我國政策環評民眾參與途徑尋得新的啟發。同時，全面檢視我國政策環評制度及實施個案，檢討制度缺失及民眾參與情形，以對我國制度提出建言。 經過檢討後發現，我國政策環評發展已超過十年，相關法令規則雖經過多次檢討修正並與世界先進國家發展趨勢相近，但實務執行案例有限，在民眾參與及社會反應情形上的評估，亦未落實，尚難見民眾參與在政策環評過程中的效果；而政策環評不論在評估時點、範疇、適用範圍或細節程度等，均與開發環評有所差異，兩者適用之民眾參與程序亦不應等同視之。本文借鏡審議式民主的落實方式，及行政程序法所賦予民眾表示意見的權利，嘗試將公民會議及聽證制度與政策環評流程結合，透過制度設計，讓一般民眾也能參與環評程序並實質對環評結果產生影響。實際作法為： 一、在政策、計畫或方案構想提出之際，即舉辦公民會議，提供公眾議題的相關資訊及討論場域。 二、結合行政程序法中「計畫確定程序之聽證」的舉行，使民眾意見透過政策環評程序納於決策之中。 最後，本文建議，未來在制度修正方面，應要能突破政策環評適用的侷限性，擴大其適用範圍，提早其進行的時間點；並且強化民眾參與機制，使其意見能在各階段發聲，納入決策，同時加強重視價值思考及追蹤管理，以使政策環評機制能更加完備。 / With the promotion of the environmental movement, environmental impact assessment (EIA) system also began to develop. However, the EIA system primarily emphasized the development process, and because the EIA was often conducted too late in the project cycle for the socio-economic environment to be considered on a larger scale, the lack of cumulative impact assessment makes it difficult for the EIA system to be effective for environmental protection. Strategic environmental assessment (SEA), which has received much attention in recent years, applies the EIA process to government policies, plans and programs. The focus of its evaluation is integrated perspectives, multi-oriented care, and the impacts of SEA on the overall national development. Integrated consideration of opinions and close association with public policies in the SEA process contribute to continuing environmental, economic, and social sustainable development. Therefore, public participation in SEA is more important than which in EIA. However, few domestic researches on public participation in SEA have been done in the past. This paper is based on public participation and written from the perspective of communication which is valued by planning theories and deliberative democracy. Through exploring the various theories, this paper intends to find a new way for which the public in Taiwan can opt to participate in the SEA. At the same time, the paper does a comprehensive review of the domestic SEA system and the implemented cases and evaluates the shortcomings of the system and the public participation in the cases to offer suggestions for the improvement of the system. Following the review, this paper finds that while the domestic SEA system has been developed for more than a decade and the related laws and regulations have been reviewed and revised numerous times to catch up with the world trend, cases of implementation of the SEA are few, and public participation and assessment of social responses have not yet been fully carried out. Moreover, since the EIA and SEA are different in terms of assessment timing, scope, or detail level, the EIA and the SEA should adopt different procedures of public participation. Referring to the practice of deliberative democracy and the Administrative Procedure Act which gives people the right to express their views, this paper attempts to combine a consensus conference, the hearing policy, and the SEA process to allow the general public to participate in the SEA process and influence decision-making. The implementations are described as the following: First, when a concept of a policy, plan or program is proposed, a consensus conference should be held promptly to provide the public with information and a forum. Second, combine the SEA and hearing with planned procedures to include the public’s feedback in decision-making. Finally, this paper suggests that when the government amends the system in the future, it should break the limitations of the SEA, expand its scope of application, conduct the SEA early in project planning, and strengthen the public participation mechanisms to include the public’s opinions at each stage of the process and in decision-making. Meanwhile, consideration of values and monitoring are strengthened to make the mechanisms more complete.

This study looks at the National Citizens' Technology Forum (NCTF), a modified version of the consensus conference, which took place in March, 2008 in six cities across the U.S. to understand how inclusive these methods of public participation are in practice. The research focused on two of these sites. Inclusion of participants was defined in terms of presence, voice and being heard. Transcripts of the audio-visual recordings of the proceedings were the main data of analysis. By focusing on the talk within these deliberative forums, the study looked at how the rules of engagement and status (ascribed and achieved) differences between participants can affect inclusion. The analysis did not reveal any substantial effects of ascribed characteristics on deliberation. Facilitation and the presence of expertise among the participants were found to influence inclusion and equality among participants. These findings suggest that organizers and facilitators of deliberative exercises have to be reflexive of their role as well as aware of the group dynamics. The results also address the larger questions within science and technology policy like the role of expertise and the public in decision making, the institutional design of participatory exercises, and their relation to the political culture and the policy process.

Why is it that the international scientific consensus on climate change has not been followed by a proportionate policy response in Canada? Perhaps the relationships between the country’s science organizations and government agencies are not functioning properly. My research adopts an interdisciplinary approach (i.e. science studies and political science) to this issue, highlighting the relevant literature’s underlying consensus on co-production, a norm of deliberative two-way engagement between scientists and policy-makers. I hypothesize that relationships embodying elements of co-productive design (e.g. informal communication, appointed liaisons) are more likely to facilitate climate action. To test this, I examine three cases of climate science-policy partnership in Canada by interviewing participants from both sides. The partnership between the Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium and BC municipalities exhibits substantial influence on policy, tied to a considerable degree of co-productive design. The partnership between the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions and the Climate Action Secretariat of the BC provincial government also displays notable design characteristics, but primarily facilitates side benefits and soft influences rather than concrete policy changes. The attempted partnership between the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences and the federal government exhibits few elements of co-productive design and has been effectively terminated, demonstrating the prerequisite importance of political interest. The relevant literature is not sufficiently nuanced to fully predict or explain these situations, so I put forward a new theoretical model. My science-policy relationship hierarchy (SPRHi) suggests that each such case can be classified as incidental interaction, basic partnership, interactive dialogue, or true co-production. It specifies the conditions which must be met for any given relationship to improve, maximizing potential benefits and influences. Concrete policy changes seem to result only from true co-production, though, which generally requires exceptional external requirements and thus cannot be deliberately facilitated. As such, co-productive design ultimately does not offer a clear way to address Canada’s climate inaction. I suggest that further research be conducted on international coordination mechanisms, public attitudes, and (especially) political leadership. However, the soft influences of science-policy partnerships may affect these broader factors in unpredictable ways, so the importance of co-productive design should not be underestimated. / Graduate

Made available in DSpace on 2016-12-12T20:34:14Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Tomaz.pdf: 277088 bytes, checksum: a95800bb5c70d7866a3cd1b1b977bf95 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2006-06-27 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / The present dissertation has for aim to analyze the participation of school deliberative bodies (SDB) that snores in the construction of a Democratic Management, taking in consideration the stimulated or hindered social relations from the participation and of the decentralization in and the taking of decision. Leaving of the estimated one of that the exercise of the democracy is a process in construction. Thus, in theoretical terms, it is argued education in a emancipating perspective and the management forms that favors this process, considering questions as citizenship, democracy, democratic perspectives for the education, democratic management of the education, the participation, the decentralization and the SDB. In analytical terms, one searched to indicate the advances and the limits of the construction of the Democratic Management, analyzing the contributions of SDB in two schools of Basic Education, of the State government of Santa Catarina, in the city of Palhoça / A presente dissertação tem por objetivo conhecer em que medida o Conselho Deliberativo Escolar (CDE) participa da democratização da Gestão da escola, levando em consideração as relações sociais incentivadas ou tolhidas a partir da participação e da descentralização nas tomadas de decisão. Partindo do pressuposto de que o exercício da democracia é um processo em construção. Assim, em termos teóricos, discute-se a educação em uma perspectiva emancipadora e as formas de gestão que favorecem este processo, considerando-se questões como, democracia, cidadania, o CDE, a autonomia, gestão democrática da educação, a participação e a descentralização. Em termos analíticos, buscou-se indicar os avanços e os limites da construção da Gestão Democrática, analisando a participação dos CDE em duas escolas de Educação Básica, da Rede Estadual de Ensino de Santa Catarina, no município de Palhoça

Les conséquences de nos modes de production et de consommation sur l’environnement mondial sont reconnues et analysées depuis plusieurs décennies : changement climatique, effondrement de la biodiversité, tensions sur de nombreuses ressources stratégiques etc.Notre travail s’inscrit dans un courant de pensée visant à développer d’autres indicateurs de richesse. Dans une perspective de durabilité forte, nous nous concentrons sur une comptabilité biophysique (non monétaire), apte à pointer les externalités environnementales. Si une part importante des recherches dans ce domaine a été dédiée aux échelons nationaux, nous nous intéressons ici aux échelles locales, et en particulier aux régions françaises. Après avoir étudié les caractéristiques d’outils existants mobilisés dans les domaines de l’économie écologique et de l’écologie industrielle, comme l’Empreinte Ecologique, l’Analyse de Flux de Matières (AFM), l’Analyse de Cycle de Vie ou l’Analyse Entrée-Sortie, nous nous focalisons sur les filières de production que nous analysons à partir des quantités de matières qu’elles mobilisent au cours des étapes de production, transformation, transport et consommation. La méthode développée, AFM Filière, permet de produire des schémas de flux cohérents au niveau national, dans chaque région, et quand les données le permettent, à des niveaux infra-régionaux. Ceux-ci sont basés sur un processus systématique de réconciliation des données disponibles. Nous évaluons la précision de ces données d’entrée, ce qui permet de fournir des intervalles de confiance sur les résultats, pouvant à leur tour pointer vers des manques de connaissance. En particulier, nous fournissons une évaluation détaillée de la précision de l’enquête permanente sur le transport routier de marchandises (TRM), une pièce maîtresse de l’AFM Filière. Nous montrons au passage que réaliser le bilan matières sur une période de plusieurs années permet non seulement de s’affranchir du problème des stocks, mais aussi de réduire significativement l’incertitude sur les échanges entre régions. Nous adaptons par la suite la méthode des chaînes de Markov absorbantes pour tracer les flux jusqu’à leur destination finale et allouer les pressions sur l’environnement produites tout au long de la filière. Les flux de matières peuvent également être couplés à des modèles économiques afin de prévoir leur évolution en réponse à certaines politiques. En collaboration avec le Laboratoire d’Economie Forestière (LEF), nous fournissons ainsi la première tentative de représentation des flux sur la filière forêt-bois française, et analysons l’impact de différentes politiques de réduction des exports de bois brut sur l’économie et sur les flux physiques. Enfin, nous montrons comment il serait possible d’articuler ces analyses de filières avec les méthodes d’analyse qualitative déployées dans le domaine de l’écologie territoriale, et en particulier, l’analyse des jeux d’acteurs dans la filière. Nous situons notre travail dans le cadre normatif de la démocratie délibérative. A ce titre, nous réfléchissons aux apports de la comptabilité biophysique aux processus de décisions publiques incluant diverses parties prenantes. Nous dressons un panorama des modes de décision, des étapes clé d’un processus d’aide à la décision, des méthodes multicritères mais également des différentes formes que peut prendre la participation des citoyens. Nous proposons finalement une méthode d’aide à la délibération fondée sur l’élicitation de la satisfaction et du regret éprouvé par chaque partie prenante face à un futur donné. Celle-ci vise à organiser la discussion sur le mode du consensus apparent, qui facilite par nature le respect des minorités. Enfin, en partant des principales critiques adressées à la quantification, nous proposons en conclusion une réflexion sur les conditions qui permettraient de mettre la comptabilité écologique au service de l’émancipation démocratique. / The consequences of our modes of production and consumptions on the global environment have been recognized and analyzed for many decades: climate change, biodiversity collapse, tensions on numerous strategic resources etc. Our work follows a line of thought aiming at developing other indicators of wealth, alternative to the Growth Domestic Product. In particular, in a perspective of strong sustainability, we focus on biophysical (non-monetary) accounting, with the objective of pinpointing environmental externalities. A large part of existing research in this domain being targeted towards national levels, we rather focus on subnational scales, with on strong emphasis on French regions. With decentralization policies, these territories are indeed given increasing jurisdiction and also benefit from greater margins of action than national or international levels to implement a transition to sustainability. After studying the characteristic of existing tools used in the fields of ecological economics and industrial ecology, such as the Ecological Footprint, Material Flow Analysis (MFA), Life Cycle Assessment or Input-Output Analysis, we focus on supply chains that we analyze through the quantities of materials they mobilize during the production, transformation, transport and consumption steps. The method developed, the Supply-Chain MFA, provides coherent flow diagrams at the national scale, but also in every region and, when data allow it, at infra-regional levels. These diagrams are based on a systematic reconciliation process of available data. We assess the precision of input data, which allows to provide confidence interval on results, and in turn, to put the light on lacks of knowledge. In particular, we provide a detailed uncertainty assessment of the French domestic road freight survey (TRM), a crucial piece of the Supply-Chain MFA. By doing so, we show that undertaking the study on a period of several years not only solves the issue of stocks but also significantly reduces uncertainties on trade flows between regions. We then adapt the Absorbing Markov Chains framework to trace flows to their final destination and to allocate environmental pressures occurring all along the supply chain. For instance, in the case of cereals, we study energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, the blue water footprint, land use and the use of pesticides. Material flows can also be coupled with economic modeling in order to forecast how they will likely respond to certain policies. In collaboration with the laboratory of forest economics (LEF), we thusly provide the first attempt of representing the whole French forest-wood supply-chain, and we analyze the impact of a set of policies on both the economy and physical flows. Finally, we show the opportunities of linking these supply-chain results with qualitative methods unfold in the domain of territorial ecology, stakeholder analysis in particular. We situate our work in the normative framework of deliberative democracy and are therefore interested in the contributions of biophysical accounting to public decision processes that include diverse stakeholders. We propose an overview of decision modes, key steps of decision-aiding, multicriteria methods, but also of the various forms taken by citizen participation. We eventually design a deliberation-aiding method, based on elicitation of each stakeholder’s satisfaction and regret regarding a given future. It aims at organizing the discussion on an apparent consensus mode, which by nature facilitates the respect of minorities. Finally, based on the main criticisms addressed to quantification, we propose in conclusion thoughts on the conditions that could put biophysical accounting at the service of democratic emancipation.

Humanitarian interventions tend to be justified by claims to the existence of an obligation upon ‘us' (the benevolent saviours) to intervene militarily when a state is responsible for large-scale atrocity crimes against its own population. However, this justification is paradoxical, given that there is rarely held to exist a commensurate obligation to address structural violence (even when ‘we' may be partly responsible for, or complicit within, structures that are violent). The paradox arises because structural violence can be harmful – even evil – in its own right, and can also lead to – or exacerbate – direct violence. Hence, intervening militarily, and inevitably causing further harm in the act of intervening, results in a moral shortfall. This shortfall is indicative of a prevailing understanding of harm that is blind to the potential for structures to be violent. In responding to the paradox, I adopt a critical cosmopolitan perspective to argue that because structural violence can be harmful on a great scale, and because it is co-constitutive of direct violence, we ought not to countenance intervening with the use of military force (with what this brings in the form of inevitable intended and unintended harm) to stop direct violence without also considering and addressing violent structures, especially if they are violent structures that we are, ourselves, embedded within. Therefore, it is morally imperative to engage in an ongoing process of illumination and addressing of evil structures to rectify the harms they cause, alongside any efforts to stem direct violence, if any sort of intervention is to be legitimate and just. This requires us to a) expand our understanding of harm and evil at the global level, and b) engage in consistent and sustained deliberative processes that bring to the forefront structural violence and structural underpinnings of direct violence.

Submitted by Alane dos Santos Viana (alane.viana@ucsal.br) on 2017-11-17T18:14:09Z No. of bitstreams: 1 TESECARRERA-FREITAS.pdf: 4997878 bytes, checksum: 863c14e618b6ab284550c0717379570c (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Rosemary Magalhães (rosemary.magalhaes@ucsal.br) on 2017-11-20T14:35:20Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 TESECARRERA-FREITAS.pdf: 4997878 bytes, checksum: 863c14e618b6ab284550c0717379570c (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-11-20T14:35:29Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 TESECARRERA-FREITAS.pdf: 4997878 bytes, checksum: 863c14e618b6ab284550c0717379570c (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-07-27 / Três em cada quatro habitantes da América Latina vivem em centros urbanos. No Brasil, cidades como: Salvador, São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Belo Horizonte e Recife apresentam evidentes problemas metropolitanos, exigindo ações coordenadas entre os Municípios, a sociedade civil e os agentes econômicos. Admite-se, em certas circunstâncias, a participação dos Estados membros e da União. O modelo de governabilidade interfederativa deverá ser capaz de garantir o equilíbrio federativo e a gestão democrática das cidades. A institucionalização das regiões metropolitanas, conquanto, desde 1988, seja papel dos Estados, precisa preservar a descentralização como estratégia de desenvolvimento, assegurando às instâncias politico-administrativas locais, o protagonismo da execução de políticas públicas metropolitanas. De certa forma, o pluralismo político da Constituição brasileira de 1988, encontra melhores oportunidades para se manifestar em âmbito local, devendo ser criadas esferas públicas de participação e de deliberação acerca das funções de interesses comuns. Muito embora as primeiras regiões metropolitanas no Brasil tenham sido instituídas no ano de 1973, ao longo destes 44 anos verificou-se uma formação deficiente dos modelos de articulação intergovernamental, que, em geral, eram centralizadores e com baixo poder de mobilização social; enfim, adotavam uma gestão do tipo top-down. Em 2014, o Estado da Bahia publica a Lei Complementar nº 41 e funda novamente a região metropolitana de Salvador sob a roupagem de uma autarquia intergovernamental, intitulada Entidade Metropolitana da Região Metropolitana de Salvador (EMRMS). Esta tese se propõe a estudar se a condução deste processo que deu ensejo à EMRMS obedeceu ao viés centralizador de outros modelos de governabilidade ou se rompeu com esta tradição, promovendo uma institucionalização mais descentralizada e democrática. Apoiada em alguns cenários internacionais, especialmente no modelo de governabilidade adotado nas regiões de Barcelona (Espanha), Turim (Itália) e em algumas outras experiências de gestão metropolitana dentro do próprio país, esta tese levanta, como hipótese, que os instrumentos urbanísticos metropolitanos devem obedecer aos princípios de gestão democrática previstos no Estatuto da Cidade, privilegiando a participação direta, construindo gestões do tipo bottom-up. O propósito principal é demonstrar que o desenvolvimento metropolitano depende do empoderamento das comunidades que vivem nesses Municípios que integram a região metropolitana. Este trabalho se vale das ideias de Jürgen Habermas acerca da democracia deliberativa e das noções de desenvolvimento de Amartya Sen, como bases teóricas para fundamentar suas conclusões. Questiona ainda a legitimidade da EMRMS, uma vez que não se valeu dos princípios de gestão democrática prestigiados pelo Estatuto da Metrópole e por ter conferido ao Estado da Bahia uma posição privilegiada frente aos demais entes subnacionais. Para realizar esta pesquisa, utilizou-se o método hipotético-dedutivo, apropriando-se do estruturalismo e do institucionalismo. Foram feitos levantamentos bibliográficos e visitas a órgãos e instituições públicas, bem como pesquisa documental. / Three out of four inhabitants of Latin America live in urban centers. In Brazil, cities such as: Salvador, São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Belo Horizonte and Recife, present evident metropolitan problems, requiring coordinated actions between Municipalities, civil society and economic agents. The participation of the Member States and the Union is admitted in certain circumstances. The interdepartmental governance model should be able to guarantee the federative balance and democratic management of cities. Although the institutionalization of the metropolitan regions has been a role of the states since 1988, it should preserve decentralization as a development strategy, assuring to the local political-administrative authorities the protagonism of the execution of metropolitan public policies. To a certain extent, the political pluralism of the Brazilian Constitution of 1988 finds better opportunities to manifest itself at the local level, and public spheres of participation and deliberation should be created on the functions of common interests. Although the first metropolitan areas in Brazil were instituted in 1973, during these 44 years, there was a deficient formation of intergovernmental articulation models, which were generally centralized and with a low social mobilization power, in short, adopted top-down management. In 2014, the State of Bahia published a Complementary Law # 41 and reforms the metropolitan area of Salvador, under the guise of an intergovernmental authority entitled Metropolitan Entity of the Metropolitan Region of Salvador (EMRMS). This thesis proposes to study if the conduction of this process which gave rise to the EMRMS obeyed the centralizing bias of other models of governability or broke with this tradition, promoting a more decentralized and democratic institutionalization. Based on some international scenarios, especially in the governance model adopted in Barcelona / Es and Turin / It regions, and in other metropolitan management experiences within Brazil itself, this thesis assumes that metropolitan urban planning instruments must obey the principles of democratic management provided by the City Statute, favoring direct participation, building bottom-up management. The main purpose is to demonstrate that metropolitan development depends on the empowerment of the communities that live in these municipalities that are part of the metropolitan region. This work draws on the ideas of Jürgen Habermas about deliberative democracy and the notions of development of Amartya Sen, as theoretical bases to support its conclusions. This thesis also questions the legitimacy of the EMRMS, since it did not use the principles of democratic management prestige by the Metropolis Statute and because it conferred on the State of Bahia a privileged position if compared to other subnational entities. To carry out this research, the hypothetical-deductive method was used, appropriating structuralism and institutionalism. Bibliographical surveys and visits to public agencies and institutions, as well as documentary research were done.