IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/polstu/v51y2003i1p180-196.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Legitimacy Problems in Deliberative Democracy

Author

Listed:
  • John Parkinson

Abstract

The classic accounts of deliberative democracy are also accounts of legitimacy: ‘that outcomes are legitimate to the extent they receive reflective assent through participation in authentic deliberation by all those subject to the decision in question’ (Dryzek, 2001, p. 651). And yet, in complex societies deliberative participation by all those affected by collective decision‐making is extremely implausible. There are also legitimacy problems with the demanding procedural requirements which deliberation imposes on participants. Given these problems, deliberative democracy seems unable to deliver legitimate outcomes as it defines them. Focusing on the problem of scale, this paper offers a tentative solution using representation, a concept which is itself problematic. Along the way, the paper highlights issues with the legitimate role of experts, the different legitimate uses of statistical and electoral representation, and differences between the research and democratic imperatives driving current attempts to put deliberative principles into practice, illustrated with a case from a Leicester health policy debate. While much work remains to be done on exactly how the principles arrived at might be transformed into working institutions, they do offer a means of criticising existing deliberative practice.

Suggested Citation

  • John Parkinson, 2003. "Legitimacy Problems in Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51(1), pages 180-196, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:polstu:v:51:y:2003:i:1:p:180-196
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-9248.00419
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9248.00419
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-9248.00419?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ian Chowcat, 2000. "Moral Pluralism, Political Justification and Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 48(4), pages 745-758, September.
    2. Graham Smith & Corinne Wales, 2000. "Citizens' Juries and Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 48(1), pages 51-65, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:elg:eechap:14395_25 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Mark Pennington, 2003. "Hayekian Political Economy and the Limits of Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51(4), pages 722-739, December.
    3. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/5405 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Hugh Ward & Aletta Norval & Todd Landman & Jules Pretty, 2003. "Open Citizens’ Juries and the Politics of Sustainability," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51(2), pages 282-299, June.
    5. Robert E. Goodin & Simon J. Niemeyer, 2003. "When Does Deliberation Begin? Internal Reflection versus Public Discussion in Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51(4), pages 627-649, December.
    6. Maria Cerreta & Gaia Daldanise & Ludovica La Rocca & Simona Panaro, 2021. "Triggering Active Communities for Cultural Creative Cities: The “Hack the City” Play ReCH Mission in the Salerno Historic Centre (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-22, October.
    7. Carlos Rico Motos, 2019. "‘Let the Citizens Fix This Mess!’ Podemos’ Claim for Participatory Democracy in Spain," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(2), pages 187-197.
    8. Coburn, Josie & Bone, Frederique & Hopkins, Michael M. & Stirling, Andy & Mestre-Ferrandiz, Jorge & Arapostathis, Stathis & Llewelyn, Martin J., 2021. "Appraising research policy instrument mixes: a multicriteria mapping study in six European countries of diagnostic innovation to manage antimicrobial resistance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    9. Brian Witt, 2019. "Evaluating the Effects of a Minimalist Deliberative Framework on the Willingness to Participate in a Payment for Ecosystem Services Program," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-26, June.
    10. Street, Jackie & Duszynski, Katherine & Krawczyk, Stephanie & Braunack-Mayer, Annette, 2014. "The use of citizens' juries in health policy decision-making: A systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 1-9.
    11. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/5405 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Hilal Erkuş & Yavuz Selim Alkan & Gülşah Tırış, 2024. "Deliberative Democracy and Making Sustainable and Legitimate Development Plans: The Case of the Antalya Kırcami Agrihood," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-29, March.
    13. Josie Coburn & Frederique Bone & Andy C. Stirling & Michael M. Hopkins & Jorge Mestre-Ferrandiz & Stathis Arapostathis & Martin J. Llewelyn, 2021. "Appraising research policy instrument mixes: a multicriteria mapping study in six European countries of diagnostic innovation to manage antimicrobial resistance," SPRU Working Paper Series 2021-03, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    14. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/5405 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Ana Yetano & Sonia Royo & Basisilo Acerete, 2009. "What is driving the increasing presence of citizen participation initiatives?," Documentos de Trabajo dt2009-02, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Universidad de Zaragoza.
    16. Gastón de los Reyes & Markus Scholz, 2023. "Assessing the Legitimacy of Corporate Political Activity: Uber and the Quest for Responsible Innovation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(1), pages 51-69, April.
    17. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/5405 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Carolyn M. Hendriks & John S. Dryzek & Christian Hunold, 2007. "Turning Up the Heat: Partisanship in Deliberative Innovation," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 55(2), pages 362-383, June.
    19. Azad Singh Bali & Michael Howlett & Jenny M Lewis & M Ramesh, 2021. "Procedural policy tools in theory and practice [The stick, the carrot, and other strategies: A theoretical analysis of governmental intervention]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(3), pages 295-311.
    20. Paul, Charlotte & Nicholls, Rachel & Priest, Patricia & McGee, Rob, 2008. "Making policy decisions about population screening for breast cancer: The role of citizens' deliberation," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 314-320, March.
    21. Ruth Wouters & Bieke De Fraine & Maarten Simons, 2019. "What is at Stake in Deliberative Inquiry? A Review About a Deliberative Practice," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 193-217, April.
    22. Carlos Rico Motos, 2019. "‘Let the Citizens Fix This Mess!’ Podemos’ Claim for Participatory Democracy in Spain," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(2), pages 187-197.
    23. Rebecca Wells & Candice Howarth & Lina I. Brand-Correa, 2021. "Are citizen juries and assemblies on climate change driving democratic climate policymaking? An exploration of two case studies in the UK," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 168(1), pages 1-22, September.
    24. Shlomi Segall, 2005. "Political Participation as an Engine of Social Solidarity: A Sceptical View," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 53(2), pages 362-378, June.
    25. Maija Karjalainen & Lauri Rapeli, 2015. "Who will not deliberate? Attrition in a multi-stage citizen deliberation experiment," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 407-422, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:polstu:v:51:y:2003:i:1:p:180-196. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0032-3217 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.