Deliberative and Participatory Democracy in the UK

IF 2.1 2区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS British Journal of Politics & International Relations Pub Date : 2013-01-30 DOI:10.1111/1467-856X.12001
Stewart Davidson, Stephen Elstub
{"title":"Deliberative and Participatory Democracy in the UK","authors":"Stewart Davidson,&nbsp;Stephen Elstub","doi":"10.1111/1467-856X.12001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p><i>This article:</i>\n \n </p><ul>\n \n <li>Provides an overview of the development of deliberative and participatory democracy in the UK.</li>\n \n <li>Critically analyses the success of consecutive UK national governments in fostering deliberative and participatory processes.</li>\n \n <li>Surveys the development of deliberative and participatory processes in the UK at sub-national and local level.</li>\n \n <li>Provides a starting point for comparative politics on deliberative and participatory democracy between the UK and other polities.</li>\n </ul>\n <p>This article responds to Michael Saward's call for a more context-specific approach to the study of democracy by exploring developments in, obstacles to, and prospects for, a more deliberative and participatory model of democracy in the UK. A review is undertaken first of the New Labour and coalition governments' attempts at constitutional reform, in order to assess the implications these efforts have had, and continue to have, for the institutionalisation of such a model of democracy. Despite proclamations of lofty ambition successive UK governments have wrapped themselves in the straightjacketing logic of the Westminster model of parliamentary government. As a consequence their actual proposals lack ambition and are often incoherent. The story told in this respect is therefore one of largely unrealised rhetoric. The ‘largely’ qualifier is included, however, in recognition of the space created by Labour's constitutional reforms for participation at the peripheries of governance. The second section of the article focuses on these spaces by, first, commenting briefly on whether the participatory aspirations of the architects of Scottish devolution have been realised before, second, examining the use of specific deliberative mechanisms—such as citizens' juries, deliberative polls and participatory budgeting—at varying locations within the political system and in public agencies and services. Evidence of democratic innovation is presented; however, any optimism on this front must be tempered, as the power-sharing potential of such mechanisms, and their capacity to move us towards a more comprehensive and joined-up deliberative system in the UK, is hampered by the lack of a facilitating institutional landscape. Finally, an overview is provided of the three remaining articles that make up this special section on deliberative and participatory democracy in the UK.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51479,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Politics & International Relations","volume":"16 3","pages":"367-385"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/1467-856X.12001","citationCount":"32","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Politics & International Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-856X.12001","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 32

Abstract

This article:

  • Provides an overview of the development of deliberative and participatory democracy in the UK.
  • Critically analyses the success of consecutive UK national governments in fostering deliberative and participatory processes.
  • Surveys the development of deliberative and participatory processes in the UK at sub-national and local level.
  • Provides a starting point for comparative politics on deliberative and participatory democracy between the UK and other polities.

This article responds to Michael Saward's call for a more context-specific approach to the study of democracy by exploring developments in, obstacles to, and prospects for, a more deliberative and participatory model of democracy in the UK. A review is undertaken first of the New Labour and coalition governments' attempts at constitutional reform, in order to assess the implications these efforts have had, and continue to have, for the institutionalisation of such a model of democracy. Despite proclamations of lofty ambition successive UK governments have wrapped themselves in the straightjacketing logic of the Westminster model of parliamentary government. As a consequence their actual proposals lack ambition and are often incoherent. The story told in this respect is therefore one of largely unrealised rhetoric. The ‘largely’ qualifier is included, however, in recognition of the space created by Labour's constitutional reforms for participation at the peripheries of governance. The second section of the article focuses on these spaces by, first, commenting briefly on whether the participatory aspirations of the architects of Scottish devolution have been realised before, second, examining the use of specific deliberative mechanisms—such as citizens' juries, deliberative polls and participatory budgeting—at varying locations within the political system and in public agencies and services. Evidence of democratic innovation is presented; however, any optimism on this front must be tempered, as the power-sharing potential of such mechanisms, and their capacity to move us towards a more comprehensive and joined-up deliberative system in the UK, is hampered by the lack of a facilitating institutional landscape. Finally, an overview is provided of the three remaining articles that make up this special section on deliberative and participatory democracy in the UK.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
英国的协商民主与参与民主
本文:概述了英国协商民主和参与式民主的发展。批判性地分析了英国历届国家政府在促进审议和参与进程方面的成功。调查审议和参与进程的发展在英国在次国家和地方层面。提供了一个起点,比较政治协商和参与式民主之间的英国和其他政治。这篇文章回应了Michael Saward的呼吁,即通过探索英国更具协商性和参与性的民主模式的发展、障碍和前景,采用一种更具体的方法来研究民主。本文首先回顾了新工党和联合政府在宪法改革方面的努力,以评估这些努力对这种民主模式的制度化所产生的影响。尽管宣称雄心勃勃,但历届英国政府都将自己包裹在威斯敏斯特议会政府模式的紧身衣逻辑中。因此,他们的实际建议缺乏雄心,而且往往是不连贯的。因此,在这方面讲述的故事基本上是一种未实现的修辞。然而,“很大程度上”的限定词被包括在内,是为了承认工党的宪法改革为参与治理的外围创造的空间。文章的第二部分关注这些空间,首先,简要评论苏格兰权力下放建筑师的参与性愿望是否已经实现,其次,检查在政治体系内不同地点以及公共机构和服务中具体审议机制的使用,例如公民陪审团,审议民意调查和参与性预算。提出了民主创新的证据;然而,在这方面的任何乐观情绪都必须有所缓和,因为这些机制的权力分享潜力,以及它们推动我们在英国建立一个更全面、更联合的审议制度的能力,由于缺乏便利的制度环境而受到阻碍。最后,概述了其余三篇文章,这些文章构成了英国协商和参与民主的特别部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: BJPIR provides an outlet for the best of British political science and of political science on Britain Founded in 1999, BJPIR is now based in the School of Politics at the University of Nottingham. It is a major refereed journal published by Blackwell Publishing under the auspices of the Political Studies Association of the United Kingdom. BJPIR is committed to acting as a broadly-based outlet for the best of British political science and of political science on Britain. A fully refereed journal, it publishes topical, scholarly work on significant debates in British scholarship and on all major political issues affecting Britain"s relationship to Europe and the world.
期刊最新文献
Crisis politics of dehumanisation during COVID-19: A framework for mapping the social processes through which dehumanisation undermines human dignity. Britain's COVID-19 battle: The role of political leaders in shaping the responses to the pandemic. COVID-19 vaccine apartheid and the failure of global cooperation. Alcohol policy, multi-level governance and corporate political strategy: The campaign for Scotland's minimum unit pricing in Edinburgh, London and Brussels. 'The Pope's own hand outstretched': Holy See diplomacy as a hybrid mode of diplomatic agency.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1