IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/policy/v55y2022i3d10.1007_s11077-022-09465-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Expert hearings in mini-publics: How does the field of expertise influence deliberation and its outcomes?

Author

Listed:
  • Mikko Leino

    (University of Turku)

  • Katariina Kulha

    (University of Turku)

  • Maija Setälä

    (University of Turku)

  • Juha Ylisalo

    (University of Turku)

Abstract

One of key goals of deliberative mini-publics is to counteract expert domination in policymaking. Mini-publics can be expected to democratize expertise by providing citizens with good opportunities for weighing expert information. Yet, there are concerns about undue influence of experts even within mini-publics. We test these expectations by analysing data from an online mini-public organized in Finland in March 2021. The topic of deliberation was measures taken to contain the COVID-19 pandemic. We examine whether experts’ field of specialization and the order of expert hearings had an impact on how participants’ views developed. We find that neither the field of expertise nor the order of hearings had systematic effects on participants’ perceptions on containment measures. The results suggest that interactive modes of expert hearings in mini-publics seem not to be prone to domination by experts.

Suggested Citation

  • Mikko Leino & Katariina Kulha & Maija Setälä & Juha Ylisalo, 2022. "Expert hearings in mini-publics: How does the field of expertise influence deliberation and its outcomes?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(3), pages 429-450, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:55:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s11077-022-09465-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s11077-022-09465-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11077-022-09465-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11077-022-09465-3?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luskin, Robert C. & Fishkin, James S. & Jowell, Roger, 2002. "Considered Opinions: Deliberative Polling in Britain," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(3), pages 455-487, July.
    2. Andrew G.H. Thompson & Oliver Escobar & Jennifer J. Roberts & Stephen Elstub & Niccole M. Pamphilis, 2021. "The Importance of Context and the Effect of Information and Deliberation on Opinion Change Regarding Environmental Issues in Citizens’ Juries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-21, September.
    3. Aviezer Tucker, 2008. "Pre-emptive Democracy: Oligarchic Tendencies in Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 56, pages 127-147, March.
    4. Persson, Mikael, 2015. "Education and Political Participation," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 45(3), pages 689-703, July.
    5. Irina Georgieva & Tella Lantta & Jakub Lickiewicz & Jaroslav Pekara & Sofia Wikman & Marina Loseviča & Bevinahalli Nanjegowda Raveesh & Adriana Mihai & Peter Lepping, 2021. "Perceived Effectiveness, Restrictiveness, and Compliance with Containment Measures against the Covid-19 Pandemic: An International Comparative Study in 11 Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-15, April.
    6. Maija Setälä & Kimmo Grönlund & Kaisa Herne, 2010. "Citizen Deliberation on Nuclear Power: A Comparison of Two Decision‐Making Methods," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(4), pages 688-714, October.
    7. Lala Muradova & Hayley Walker & Francesca Colli, 2020. "Climate change communication and public engagement in interpersonal deliberative settings: evidence from the Irish citizens’ assembly," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(10), pages 1322-1335, November.
    8. Maija Setälä & Kimmo Grönlund & Kaisa Herne, 2010. "Citizen Deliberation on Nuclear Power: A Comparison of Two Decision-Making Methods," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58, pages 688-714, October.
    9. Aviezer Tucker, 2008. "Pre‐emptive Democracy: Oligarchic Tendencies in Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 56(1), pages 127-147, March.
    10. Jennifer J. Roberts & Ruth Lightbody & Ragne Low & Stephen Elstub, 2020. "Experts and evidence in deliberation: scrutinising the role of witnesses and evidence in mini-publics, a case study," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(1), pages 3-32, 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. Maczka, Krzysztof & Matczak, Piotr & Mielewczyk, Marcin & Przewoźna, Patrycja & Inglot, Adam & Wężyk, Piotr & Zięba-Kulawik, Karolina & Hawryło, Paweł, 2023. "Narratives on cutting down trees on private land. A comparison of urban and rural municipalities in Poland using the Q-deliberation method," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    2. Katariina Kulha & Mikko Leino & Maija Setälä & Maija Jäske & Staffan Himmelroos, 2021. "For the Sake of the Future: Can Democratic Deliberation Help Thinking and Caring about Future Generations?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-13, May.
    3. Pankaj Koirala & Raja Rajendra Timilsina & Koji Kotani, 2021. "Deliberative Forms of Democracy and Intergenerational Sustainability Dilemma," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-18, July.
    4. Kaat Smets & Pierangelo Isernia, 2014. "The role of deliberation in attitude change: An empirical assessment of three theoretical mechanisms," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(3), pages 389-409, September.
    5. Lisette Beek & Niek Mouter & Peter Pelzer & Maarten Hajer & Detlef Vuuren, 2024. "Experts and expertise in practices of citizen engagement in climate policy: a comparative analysis of two contrasting cases," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 177(1), pages 1-22, January.
    6. Stephen Elstub & Jayne Carrick & David M. Farrell & Patricia Mockler, 2021. "The Scope of Climate Assemblies: Lessons from the Climate Assembly UK," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-17, October.
    7. John C. Besley & Sang‐Hwa Oh, 2014. "The Impact of Accident Attention, Ideology, and Environmentalism on American Attitudes Toward Nuclear Energy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(5), pages 949-964, May.
    8. Dawn Nafus & Eve M. Schooler & Karly Ann Burch, 2021. "Carbon-Responsive Computing: Changing the Nexus between Energy and Computing," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-26, October.
    9. Never, Babette & Anselmetti, Chiara, 2023. "Political participation patterns of the emerging middle classes in Peru and the Philippines," IDOS Discussion Papers 11/2023, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    10. Tuchen, Stefan & Nazemi, Mohsen & Ghelfi-Waechter, Signe Maria & Kim, Euiyoung & Hofer, Franziska & Chen, Ching-Fu & Arora, Mohit & Santema, Sicco & Blessing, Lucienne, 2023. "Experiences from the international frontlines: An exploration of the perceptions of airport employees during the COVID-19 pandemic," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    11. Nadja Bömmel & Guido Heineck, 2023. "Revisiting the causal effect of education on political participation and interest," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(6), pages 664-682, November.
    12. Delshad, Ashlie B. & Raymond, Leigh & Sawicki, Vanessa & Wegener, Duane T., 2010. "Public attitudes toward political and technological options for biofuels," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 3414-3425, July.
    13. Briguglio, Marie & Delaney, Liam & Wood, Alex, 2018. "Partisanship, priming and participation in public-good schemes," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 136-150.
    14. 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.
    15. Marcus Österman, 2021. "Can We Trust Education for Fostering Trust? Quasi-experimental Evidence on the Effect of Education and Tracking on Social Trust," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 211-233, February.
    16. Ruqiang Lai & Loo-See Beh, 2025. "The Impact of Political Efficacy on Citizens’ E-Participation in Digital Government," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-23, January.
    17. Deng, Chung-Yeh & Wu, Chia-Ling, 2010. "An innovative participatory method for newly democratic societies: The "civic groups forum" on national health insurance reform in Taiwan," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 896-903, March.
    18. Nicole Curato & Marit Böker, 2016. "Linking mini-publics to the deliberative system: a research agenda," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(2), pages 173-190, June.
    19. Raphael Brade & Marc Piopiunik, 2016. "Education and Political Participation," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 14(1), pages 70-73, 05.
    20. Maija Setälä & Kimmo Grönlund & Kaisa Herne, 2010. "Citizen Deliberation on Nuclear Power: A Comparison of Two Decision‐Making Methods," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(4), pages 688-714, October.

    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:kap:policy:v:55:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s11077-022-09465-3. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.