Deliberative democracy is an important concept for anyone who wishes to facilitate a positive relationship between citizens and the democratic structures that represent them.
It is vital that policy-makers, public officials and engaged citizens understand what deliberative democracy is, why it is useful, and what it looks like in practice.
What is Deliberative Democracy?
Deliberative democracy is based on the principle that people can, through good communication and extensive deliberation, come together to make effective decisions about the policy areas that affect their lives and communities.
Thoughtful debates, considered discussion and group brainstorming emphasise the idea of informed consent. Collaboration, as opposed to conflict, is always prioritised. Those participating in deliberative democracy are encouraged to hear and fully engage with other points of view that they may not otherwise have considered.
Deliberative democracy is only possible in an atmosphere of tolerance and mutual respect. Those participating in the process must also have access to the same information and crucially, these discussions must be as free as possible from external power structures and internal hierarchies.
“Deliberative democracy puts meaningful communication at the heart of democracy, not as a naive hope, but in full recognition of the real capacities and limitations of citizens, politicians and political processes.”
– Bachtiger et al, The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy.
The Difference Between Deliberative Democracy and Representative Democracy
Many of us will be more familiar with the idea of representative democracy.
Representative democracy lets citizens elect officials, who can then make policy decisions on their behalf. Often these representatives are chosen due to a party allegiance which the voter believes most closely aligns with their beliefs and principles – aka your local councillor.
But not everyone represented by an elected official necessarily voted for them. In many countries, including the UK, representatives are chosen through a system where the candidate with the most votes wins, regardless of whether they received an absolute majority.
By contrast, deliberative democracy focuses on consensus-based decision-making. The theory is that the deliberative process will help encourage citizen participation and determine which option holds the most value, while also convincing the vast majority of those involved.
Direct Democracy vs Deliberative Democracy
Direct democracy shares similarities and differences with both representative democracy and deliberative democracy.
Direct democracy, like deliberative democracy, allows every citizen to have their own say on specific policies rather than relying on elected representatives to act as intermediaries. Examples of direct democracy would be the 2016 EU referendum, or the 2014 Scottish Independence referendum.
Informed decision-making is not necessarily an inherent part of direct democracy, so those conducting referendums – usually governments – have to use other additional methods to ensure that the process meets expectations. In the case of the Scottish independence referendum, that meant a series of public consultations.
The policy-making and decision process in these three modes of democracy can be summarised as:
- Deliberative Democracy: Through extensive discussion and debate. Consensus based.
- Direct Democracy: Voting directly on a given policy or issue. Majority opinion is enacted.
- Representative Democracy: Elected representatives are trusted to act on behalf of the views of their constituents.
What are the Benefits of Deliberative Democracy?
Deliberative democracy is usually less well-known than representative and direct democracy, but there are a significant number of benefits to this practice.
Better Informed Decision-Making
Deliberative democracy centres rational debate and discussion in the decision-making process. In the ideal form, it involves a calm exchange of ideas and solutions based on evidence and logical reasoning.
This environment both necessitates and helps to create an open exchange of information. Although participants are encouraged to critically analyse all viewpoints, there are no winners or losers in a consensus-based decision. This means that information can be exchanged more clearly and objectively.
This environment can create space for better informed decision-making, where participants have access to more factual information about a given policy-proposal than they may otherwise have had.
Increased Levels of Public Trust
All forms of citizen engagement can have a positive effect on levels of public trust in the policy-making process. When citizens feel that they have a say and a stake in the policies, plans and projects that affect their lives, they feel less alienated from the policy-making process and the institutions running them.
This is particularly important at present, where levels of trust in public institutions are low. In a 2024 study by the ONS, less than a third of people felt that they could trust the Government. This was only slightly higher for local governments, and even lower for parliament.
Deliberative democracy puts power into the hands of the public when it comes to the policies that directly affect them. What’s more, it strives to create a collaborative rather than a combative environment in which to discuss those policies. Deliberative approaches have been shown to significantly increase the level of trust people have in a given policy decision.
Improved Community Cohesion
Along with building greater trust in public institutions, deliberative democracy has the potential to increase the level of trust that citizens have in one another. Through engaging in mutually respectful discussions, participants come into contact with alternate perspectives and therefore develop a shared understanding.
Community engagement is a key part of the democratic process. Deliberative democracy can help citizens to collaboratively reach decisions that are beneficial to the community as a whole.
This is particularly essential in policy areas that may otherwise be contentious, or cause divisions within a given community.
More Civic Engagement
When people feel disenfranchised or disconnected from the democratic process, they are unlikely to have a high level of civic engagement.
Deliberative democracy can give people the tools they need to participate more fully in the democratic structures and processes that affect their lives. Those who are engaged through deliberative democracy can build their understanding of a given subject, and thus be more confident in acting according to that understanding.
Deliberative democracy rarely stands alone as a system of governance. It can, however, be essential to enriching other forms of democracy. Someone who takes part in a Citizens Assembly may be more likely to vote, take part in a protest, start a pressure group, or otherwise demonstrate civic engagement.
A More Diverse Public Discourse
Diversity makes democracies stronger. Unfortunately, it is common for the views of only some groups to be represented in the policy-making process. Even areas that have citizens with a wide range of backgrounds may find that not all groups are fully represented by the democratic process.
Ensuring that any public engagement activity is fully representative of the communities that a given policy, plan or project will effect is essential. However, there are sometimes difficulties in achieving this. A thorough community engagement strategy can go a long way in addressing this issue.
By seeking to involve as many citizens as possible in open discussion, deliberative democracy can succeed in including people who may not otherwise have taken part have a voice in the democratic process.
What Does Deliberative Democracy Look Like?
Deliberative democracy in practice can take many forms. Examples of deliberative democracy processes include the following:
1. Citizens’ Assemblies
A Citizens’ Assembly brings people together to discuss and debate complex issues. Often, these issues have a personal impact on their lives and their communities.
A Citizens’ Assembly is often organised by a public body in order to find out how the public feels about a specific issue, particularly once they have access to factual information pertinent to the issue. This understanding allows public bodies to make policy decisions that reflect their citizenry.
2. Citizen Juries
Citizen Juries are similar to Citizens’ Assemblies, differing mainly in scale. Where Citizens’ Assemblies may involve hundreds or even thousands of participants, a Citizen Jury is much smaller and often takes place over a shorter period of time.
Citizen Juries can still be a useful reflection of public understanding and will if they are selected randomly, and care is taken to form a representative group.
3. Mini-publics
The term mini-public is sometimes used interchangeably with Citizens’ Assemblies and Citizen Juries. In fact, mini-publics are similar in that they bring together groups of people that may be large or small to deliberate on a specific issue.
The only real difference is that while Citizen Assemblies and Citizen Juries tend to be organised by public bodies, mini-publics are sometimes organised by other organisations such as universities or think tanks in order to better understand public feeling. Citizen Assemblies and Citizen Juries can be said to be a specific subset of the broad category of mini-publics.
4. Participatory Budgeting
Participatory budgeting is where citizens and community groups are asked to deliberate specifically on the issue of how public money should be spent.
This may relate to a specific project or plan, or it may relate to an entire council budget. This process allows everyone to share their view on a public budget, while also allowing the dissemination of information relating to public finances.
Participatory budgeting is often conducted via simulation platforms. This allows the easy sharing of information and in-depth analysis of citizen responses. Within the context of deliberative democracy, this should take place following an in-depth discussion amongst participants.
5. Geospatial Mapping
Similar to participatory budgeting, geospatial mapping (or placemaking) asks participants in this activity to consider policy and planning decisions through a specific lens. In this case, through mapping activities.
Geospatial mapping is a great way to contextualise discussion and debate, allowing participants to visualise the impact of a given plan more clearly. It also allows clearer communication with facilitators about what the participants want to see.
In the context of deliberative democracy, geospatial mapping tools can be used alongside more qualitative information as part of a larger discussion about the area.
6. Deliberative Polling
Deliberative polling is an opinion poll that is taken before and after a deliberative activity. While not really a deliberative democracy activity in of itself, it is a useful tool to understand the effect that deliberative democracy can have. It allows facilitators to see the shift in opinions that occur as a result of an open and honest discourse between different groups of people. It usually occurs alongside one of the activities previously mentioned.
Citizen Space is the go-to platform for connecting governments, developers, and citizens. If you’d like to learn more about how our software streamlines public engagement and provides planners with enriched geospatial data, book a free demo and we’ll walk you through it.
Sign up for the Delib newsletter here to get relevant updates posted to your email inbox.