“扩大”审议性小型公众的内部动力

IF 1.2 Q3 COMMUNICATION Communication and the Public Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI:10.1177/20570473221106025
J. Rountree, Chris Anderson, Justin Reedy, M. Nowlin
{"title":"“扩大”审议性小型公众的内部动力","authors":"J. Rountree, Chris Anderson, Justin Reedy, M. Nowlin","doi":"10.1177/20570473221106025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent deliberative systems research has emphasized the need to “scale up” deliberative mini-publics by exploring connections between mini-publics and broader arenas of policymaking. Less is known, however, about how the policy environment in a state or region might itself influence a deliberative event. In this article, we set out to examine how the internal dynamics of mini-publics are affected by the scaling-up process of connecting to larger policymaking domains. To better understand how the external role of deliberation affects the internal dynamics, we analyze two notable cases of deliberative forums addressing public problems. In both cases, the 2017 Our Coastal Future Forum in South Carolina and the 2020 Oregon Citizens’ Assembly on coronavirus disease-19 recovery, citizen participants grappled with the challenge of scaling up to larger policy outcomes. We conduct a thematic analysis of transcripts from both events, focusing on how citizens discuss their role in influencing policy and talk about the potential for policy output from the mini-publics. The analysis reveals that the scaling-up process invites a pragmatic orientation within deliberation, centering on issues of efficiency, scope, and efficacy.","PeriodicalId":44233,"journal":{"name":"Communication and the Public","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The internal dynamics of “scaling up” deliberative mini-publics\",\"authors\":\"J. Rountree, Chris Anderson, Justin Reedy, M. Nowlin\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20570473221106025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recent deliberative systems research has emphasized the need to “scale up” deliberative mini-publics by exploring connections between mini-publics and broader arenas of policymaking. Less is known, however, about how the policy environment in a state or region might itself influence a deliberative event. In this article, we set out to examine how the internal dynamics of mini-publics are affected by the scaling-up process of connecting to larger policymaking domains. To better understand how the external role of deliberation affects the internal dynamics, we analyze two notable cases of deliberative forums addressing public problems. In both cases, the 2017 Our Coastal Future Forum in South Carolina and the 2020 Oregon Citizens’ Assembly on coronavirus disease-19 recovery, citizen participants grappled with the challenge of scaling up to larger policy outcomes. We conduct a thematic analysis of transcripts from both events, focusing on how citizens discuss their role in influencing policy and talk about the potential for policy output from the mini-publics. The analysis reveals that the scaling-up process invites a pragmatic orientation within deliberation, centering on issues of efficiency, scope, and efficacy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44233,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Communication and the Public\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Communication and the Public\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20570473221106025\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication and the Public","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20570473221106025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

最近的审议制度研究强调需要通过探索审议迷你公众与更广泛的决策领域之间的联系来“扩大”审议迷你公众。然而,对于一个州或地区的政策环境本身如何影响审议事件,人们知之甚少。在本文中,我们着手研究微型公众的内部动态如何受到连接到更大的政策制定领域的扩大过程的影响。为了更好地理解协商的外部作用如何影响内部动力,我们分析了两个值得注意的协商论坛解决公共问题的案例。在2017年南卡罗来纳州“我们的沿海未来论坛”和2020年俄勒冈州冠状病毒病康复公民大会这两种情况下,公民参与者都在努力应对扩大政策成果的挑战。我们对这两个事件的记录进行了专题分析,重点关注公民如何讨论他们在影响政策方面的作用,以及如何谈论微型公众的政策产出潜力。分析表明,扩大规模的过程需要在审议中以务实为导向,以效率、范围和效力为中心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The internal dynamics of “scaling up” deliberative mini-publics
Recent deliberative systems research has emphasized the need to “scale up” deliberative mini-publics by exploring connections between mini-publics and broader arenas of policymaking. Less is known, however, about how the policy environment in a state or region might itself influence a deliberative event. In this article, we set out to examine how the internal dynamics of mini-publics are affected by the scaling-up process of connecting to larger policymaking domains. To better understand how the external role of deliberation affects the internal dynamics, we analyze two notable cases of deliberative forums addressing public problems. In both cases, the 2017 Our Coastal Future Forum in South Carolina and the 2020 Oregon Citizens’ Assembly on coronavirus disease-19 recovery, citizen participants grappled with the challenge of scaling up to larger policy outcomes. We conduct a thematic analysis of transcripts from both events, focusing on how citizens discuss their role in influencing policy and talk about the potential for policy output from the mini-publics. The analysis reveals that the scaling-up process invites a pragmatic orientation within deliberation, centering on issues of efficiency, scope, and efficacy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
2.80%
发文量
13
期刊最新文献
Populist politicians’ representations of the people: A comparative visual content analysis of candidates’ Instagram posts in 2023 Turkish general elections Women governors in the United States use more communal language than male governors in their State of the State addresses and tweets and achieve greater policy success Investigating the relationship between knowledge of the media industry and media trust in a government-owned and government-controlled media system Nationalisms on China’s evolving internet Three decades on the Chinese internet: Attention, authority, and cultural production
×
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