Twelve Key Findings in Deliberative Democracy Research Nicole Curato, John S. Dryzek, Selen A. Ercan, Carolyn M. Hendriks & Simon Niemeyer Abstract: This essay reflects on the development of the field of deliberative democracy by discussing twelve key findings that capture a number of resolved issues in normative theory, conceptual clarification, and as- sociated empirical results. We argue that these findings deserve to be more widely recognized and viewed as a foundation for future practice and research. We draw on our own research and that of others in the field. Deliberative democracy is a normative project grounded in political theory. And political theorists make a living in large part by disagreeing with and criticizing each other. In fact, it is possible to eval- uate the success of a political theory by the number NICOLE CURATO is Australian Re- of critics it attracts, and the vitality of its intramural search Council Discovery Early Ca- disputes. By this measure, deliberative democracy is reer Research Fellow at the Uni- versity of Canberra. very successful indeed. Yet if the normative project is to progress and be applied effectively in practice, JOHN S. DRYZEK is Australian Re- it needs to lay some issues to rest. search Council Laureate Fellow Deliberative democracy is not just the area of con- and Centenary Professor at the University of Canberra. tention that its standing as a normative political the- ory would suggest. It is also home to a large volume of SELEN A. ERCAN is Senior Re- empirical social science research that, at its best, pro- search Fellow at the University of ceeds in dialogue with the normative theory. Indeed, Canberra. the field is exemplary in this combination of politi- CAROLYN M. HENDRIKS is Asso- cal theory and empirical research. Deliberative ideas ciate Professor at the Australian have also attracted the attention of citizens, activists, National University. reform organizations, and decision-makers around SIMON NIEMEYER is Australian the world. The practical uptake of deliberative ideas Research Council Future Fellow at in political innovation provides a rich source of les- the University of Canberra. sons from experience that can be added to theoriz- (*See endnotes for complete contributor ing and social science. This combination has prov- biographies.) en extremely fruitful. Rather than proving or falsi- © 2017 by the American Academy of Arts & Sciences doi:10.1162/DAED_ a_00444 28 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DAED_a_00444 by guest on 30 September 2021 fying key hypotheses, deliberative practice Deliberation is essential to democracy. Social Nicole Curato, has sharpened the focus of the normative choice theory appears to demonstrate that John S. Dryzek, Selen A. Ercan, project, showing how it can be applied in democratic politics must be plagued by ar- Carolyn M. many different contexts. bitrariness and instability in collective de- Hendriks & We believe that conceptual analysis, logic, cision. Notably, for political scientist Wil- Simon Niemeyer empirical study, normative theorizing, and liam Riker, clever politicians can manipu- the refinement of deliberative practice have late agendas and the order in which votes set at least some controversies to rest, and are taken to ensure their preferred option we provide the following set of twelve key wins.8 But if their opponents are also clever, findings that can be used as the basis for fur- they can do the same. And in that case, there ther developments. can be no stable will of the people that can possibly be revealed by voting (in, say, a leg- Deliberative democracy is realistic. Skeptics islature). So, how can meaning and stability have questioned the practical viability of de- be restored to democracy? There are essen- liberative democracy: its ideals have been tially two mechanisms, once dictatorship is criticized as utopian and its forums have ruled out. The first is what rational choice been dismissed as mere experiments, with theorist Kenneth Shepsle calls “structure no hope of being institutionalized effec- induced equilibrium,” under which formal tively.1 rules and informal understandings restrict But skeptics have been proved wrong by strategizing, including the ability to manip- the many and diverse deliberative innova- ulate agendas and the order in which votes tions that have been implemented in a va- are taken.9 The second is deliberation. riety of political systems.2 Both state and Political theorist David Miller and, lat- nonstate institutions demand more deliber- er, John Dryzek and political philosopher ative forms of citizen engagement. Policy- Christian List have demonstrated formal- makers and politicians convene citizens’ fo- ly that deliberation can, among other re- rums to elicit informed views on particular sponses: 1) induce agreement to restrict the issues.3 Studies find that deliberating citi- ability of actors to introduce new options zens can and do influence policies, though that destabilize the decision process and impacts vary and can be indirect.4 Delib- 2) structure the preferences of participants erative forums are also being implement- such that they become “single-peaked” ed in parliamentary and electoral contexts.5 along one dimension, thus reducing the Outside the state, citizen forums are funded prevalence of manipulable cycles across and implemented variously by civil society alternatives (in which option A beats B in a organizations, think tanks, corporations, majority vote, B beats C, and C beats A).10 and international organizations to advance Empirical research confirms this effect.11 a particular cause, foster public debate, or This result explains why all democratic promote democratic reform.6 settings, in practice, feature some combina- The recent turn toward deliberative sys- tion of communication, which can be more tems demonstrates that deliberative demo- or less deliberative, and formal and infor- cratic ideals can be pursued on a large scale mal rules. The more deliberative the com- in ways that link particular forums and munication, the better democracy works. more informal practices, such as commu- Democracy must be deliberative. nication in old and new media.7 Delibera- Deliberation is more than discussion. Delib- tive democracy is not utopian; it is already erative democracy is talk-centric. But talk implemented within, outside, and across alone can be pathological, producing wild- governmental institutions worldwide. ly mixed results from an ideal deliberative 146 (3) Summer 2017 29 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/DAED_a_00444 by guest on 30 September 2021 Twelve Key perspective.12 Resolution here requires dis- tique has been raised by political theorist Findings in tinguishing carefully between deliberation Chantal Mouffe, who criticizes delibera- Deliberative Democracy and discussion. tive democrats for missing the crucial role Research Empirical observation reveals that de- that passion plays in politics and for em- liberation is more complex than original- phasizing the rationalism of liberal dem- ly theorized, involving both dispositional ocratic political thought.20 and procedural components. The purely Deliberative democrats have responded procedural rationalist model of delibera- by foregrounding the varied articulations of tion is normatively problematic because it reason-giving and consensus requirements is empirically questionable.13 Distinguish- of deliberation. Most have acknowledged ing between deliberation and discussion in- political philosopher Iris Young’s concep- troduces an emotional dimension in which tion of “communicative democracy” and dispositional factors, such as open-minded- have conditionally embraced greeting, rhet- ness, are important.14 oric, humor, testimonies, storytelling, and The overall content of this disposition other sorts of communication.21 Even the has more recently been referred to as the originally somewhat rationalistic criteria “deliberative stance,” which political the- of the widely used Discourse Quality Index orists David Owen and Graham Smith have have evolved to include storytelling as one defined as “a relation to others as equals en- indicator, recognizing the importance of gaged in mutual exchange of reasons orient- personal narratives in political claim-mak- ed as if to reaching a shared practical judge- ing.22 Recent developments in deliberative ment.”15 Achieving a deliberative stance in theory have begun to recognize the plurali- citizen deliberation involves careful facili- ty of speech cultures. The turn to delibera- tation and attention to “emotional interac- tive systems has emphasized multiple sites tion.”16 Its achievement in group settings of communication, each of which can host can be a pleasurable experience and consis- various forms of speech that can enrich the tent with ideals of human cognition.17 Scal- inclusive character of a deliberative system. ing these effects up to the wider deliberative The increasing attention paid to delibera- system requires careful attention to institu- tive cultures is also part of this trajectory, tional settings.18 in which systems of meanings and norms Deliberative democracy involves multiple sorts in diverse cultural contexts are unpacked of communication. Some democrats have to understand the different ways political charged deliberative democracy with be- agents take part in deliberative politics.23 ing overly rationalistic. For political scien- Deliberation is for all. The charge of elitism tist