A roundup of unresolved issues, silences and emerging themes in the fast-growing scholarship of deliberative democracy featured in the inaugural issue of the Journal of Deliberative Democracy. 

The Journal of Deliberative Democracy (JDD) was relaunched last August. Building on the strengths of its predecessor, the Journal of Public Deliberation, JDD aims to publish high quality research and curate timely symposiums that add value to our understanding of the theory and practice of deliberative democracy.

The inaugural issue published seven research articles on the topic Frontiers of Deliberative Democracy. Authors were challenged to identify unresolved issues, silences, and emerging themes in the field.

Here’s a roundup of the issue.

Calls for conceptual precision

We begin with two articles that call for conceptual precision. Edana Beauvais revisits an unresolved puzzle in deliberative theory: if exclusion or a lack of basic mutual respect prevents deliberation from happening, how can deliberation be a tool that empowers inclusion and promotes mutual respect? The article resolves this puzzle by proposing a typology that clarifies the antecedents and outcomes of deliberation without falling in the trap of concept stretching.

Meanwhile, William Smith draws our attention to deliberative theory’s tendency to conflate civil and uncivil disobedience under the category of ‘non-deliberative action’ and calls for nuance in understanding deliberation in the age of uncivil resistance. He challenges readers to take a more careful assessment of activist tactics, including those that use violence, in upholding deliberative norms.

By calling for conceptual precision, these two pieces not only push the boundaries of deliberative theory but also offer insights on how deliberative practice can be more sensitive to the dangers of reinforcing invisible exclusions.

Learning from postcolonial studies, populism and direct democracy

What can deliberative democracy learn from the fields of postcolonial studies, populism, and direct democracy?

The second block of articles in the special issue features ‘outsiders’ in the field of deliberative democracy. We challenged them to identify the blind spots of deliberative scholarship and encourage conversations across different areas of study.

Leyla Tavernaro-Haidarian offers an account of media ethics and deliberative democracy by drawing on the African philosophy of ubuntu. By highlighting the experiences of postcolonial societies, she reminds us of the value of media’s role as mediators and consensus-builders in linguistically diverse and hyper-partisan societies. Similarly, Maria Esperanza Casullo offers a postcolonial critique of deliberative theory by questioning its focus on disembodied reason. The socio-cultural approach to populism, she argues, can help deliberative scholarship appreciate the role of the body in communication – a reminder that the body speaks before it talks.

Deliberative democracy can also deepen its appreciation for the deliberative potential of referendums. Direct democracy scholar Alice El-Wakil challenges us to go beyond ‘minipublics thinking’ when we think about deliberation and referendums. She reminds us that referendums can also prompt recursive representation in mass democracies and challenges assumptions about the incompatibility between direct and deliberative democracy.

These articles remind us what while deliberative democracy has made a mark in various fields of study, the field can continue to do better in embracing insights from adjacent areas of research.

Frontiers of minipublics research

The last two research articles in the Special Issue focus on the frontiers of minipublics research. Daniel Steel, Naseeb Bolduc, Kristina Jenei and Michael Burgess challenge scholars and practitioners of deliberative democracy to revisit how representativeness is conceptualized and operationalized in minipublics. Different minipublics have different goals. Consequently, recruitment and representation should be purposively crafted to match minipublics’ objectives. In other words, there is no one-size-fits-all approach to representation.

The last article by Staffan Himmelroos and Lauri Rapeli explores deliberation’s potential to correct political misperceptions. Using findings from a deliberative experiment, they draw careful insights about the extent to which deliberation can address one of democracy’s most complex challenges today.

What’s next?

The Special Issue concludes with an afterword from no less than Archon Fung. It is only fitting for Fung to write the afterword in JDD’s inaugural issue, having co-written the Journal of Public Deliberation’s first article published fifteen years ago about future directions for public deliberation. This time, Fung identifies the challenges deliberative democracy faces at a time of ‘institutional fragility, deep polarization and multi-dimensional exclusionary injustice.’

Aside from research articles, the journal is also proud to publish thoughtful book reviews of some of the latest publications in the field.

We hope readers find the inaugural issue of the Journal of Deliberative Democracy useful, not only in enriching our knowledge about this fast-growing field, but also in building a global society sensitive to good reasons.

About the Author

Nicole Curato is the lead editor of the Journal of Deliberative Democracy. She is an Associate Professor at the Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance at the University of Canberra.