Practicing deliberative policy analysis: two cases from China and Europe

ABSTRACTDeliberative policy analysis (DPA) has fallen short and has been far from reaching its potentials as an alternative to traditional policy analysis. As a response, DPA has been reframed toward a methodological orientation. This article is a follow-up to the two special issues on DPA in 2019 and 2020. It begins by outlining the methodological framework of DPA, introducing its key considerations, the process, and the proposed organizational solution. Two DPA cases, conducted in China and Europe, are presented to showcase how the framework has been used in practice, and in authoritarian and democratic context, respectively. Then, the article brings up our discussions of and reflections on the two cases from a comparative perspective, regarding their different political contexts, foci on conflicts of interests or values/worldviews, and the design of the processes. We end the article by proposing some topics for further exploration.KEYWORDS: Deliberative policy analysismethodological frameworkdeliberationconsensus buildingpractical cases AcknowledgmentsThe authors would like to thank Hendrik Wagenaar and two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments on this article. The authors also appreciate the contribution and collaboration of the EAD team and the advisors of the Volt Europa deliberation project.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1. A widely referenced definition of public policy is ‘whatever governments choose to do or not to do’ (Dye Citation2016, 1). Here we can understand ‘policy’ in a broader way: policy refers to public decision made by governments, communities, other public organizations, or international actors within their jurisdiction. It could be in forms of law, regulation, decree, plan or program, public rules or notice, guidelines or vision, organizational charter or constitution, international treaty or agreement, etc. DPA can be widely applied to these situations.2. In China, public participation is mandatory in three major institutional scenarios, public price hearing (Yang and Schachter Citation2003), administrative rule-making (Horsley Citation2018), and environmental impact assessment (Enserink and Alberton Citation2016).Additional informationNotes on contributorsYa LiYa Li is a professor of Public Administration at Beihang University, China, He also serves as the founding director of the Laboratory for Deliberative Policy Analysis (LDPA). His research focuses on deliberative policy analysis, public deliberation, and public dispute resolution. He proposed the methodological orientation of DPA and has accordingly conducted more than a dozen purposeful practice in Beijing. His recent books include Deliberative Policy Analysis (China Social Sciences Press 2022) and Resolving Public Disputes Creatively (Renmin 2015).Lukas SaleckerLukas Salecker is a political economist based in Berlin, Germany. He has actively engaged as a consultant, organizer, and leader in initiatives empowering citizens, challenging the status quo, and shaping a collective future for the common good. In 2021, he co-organized a participatory process based on the citizen assembly model within Volt Europa, piloting the practice of Deliberative Policy Analysis in a Western context. Recently, he initiated the deliberAIde project, harnessing AI to enhance deliberative decision-making for inclusive, consensual, and sustainable democratic participation.