IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/231785.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Nation States’ Deliberativeness: Systematic Challenges, Methodological Pitfalls, and Strategies for Upscaling the Measurement of Deliberation

Author

Listed:
  • Fleuß, Dannica
  • Helbig, Karoline

Abstract

A theoretically reflected and empirically valid measurement of nation states’ democratic quality must include an assessment of polities’ deliberativeness. This article examines the assessment of deliberativeness suggested by two sophisticated contemporary measurements of democratic quality, that is, the Democracy Barometer and the Varieties of Democracy-project. We feature two sets of challenges, each measurement of deliberativeness must meet: First, it must address the methodological challenges arising in the course of conceptualizing, operationalizing, and aggregating complex concepts (see Munck and Verkuilen, 2002). Second, attempts to measure nation states’ deliberativeness are confronted with specific conceptual and systematic challenges which we derive from recent deliberative democracy scholarship. We argue that both Democracy Barometer and Varieties of Democracy-project provide highly sophisticated assessments of democratic quality, but ultimately fail to capture nation states “deliberativeness” in a theoretically reflected and methodologically sound manner. We examine the methodological, pragmatic, and systematic reasons for these shortcomings. The crucial task for measurements of nation states’ deliberativeness consists in providing a conceptual approach and methodological framework for “upscaling” existing meso-level measurements (such as the DQI). The concluding section presents conceptual and methodological strategies that can enable researchers to meet these challenges and to provide a theoretically grounded and empirically valid measurement of nation states’ deliberativeness.

Suggested Citation

  • Fleuß, Dannica & Helbig, Karoline, 2021. "Measuring Nation States’ Deliberativeness: Systematic Challenges, Methodological Pitfalls, and Strategies for Upscaling the Measurement of Deliberation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 69(2), pages 307-325.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:231785
    DOI: 10.1177/0032321719890817
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/231785/1/Full-text-article-Fleuss-et-al-Measuring-nation-state_s.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0032321719890817?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. Dannica Fleuß & Karoline Helbig & Gary S. Schaal, 2018. "Four Parameters for Measuring Democratic Deliberation: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges and How to Respond," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 11-21.
    2. Marlène Gerber, 2015. "Equal Partners in Dialogue? Participation Equality in a Transnational Deliberative Poll (Europolis)," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 63, pages 110-130, April.
    3. Gerber, Marlène & Bächtiger, André & Shikano, Susumu & Reber, Simon & Rohr, Samuel, 2018. "Deliberative Abilities and Influence in a Transnational Deliberative Poll (EuroPolis)," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(4), pages 1093-1118, October.
    4. John Dryzek, 2015. "Deliberative engagement: the forum in the system," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 5(4), pages 750-754, December.
    5. Fleuß, Dannica & Helbig, Karoline & Schaal, Gary S., 2018. "Four Parameters for Measuring Democratic Deliberation: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges and How to Respond," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 6(1), pages 11-21.
    6. Stephen Elstub, 2010. "The Third Generation of Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies Review, Political Studies Association, vol. 8(3), pages 291-307, September.
    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. Lisa Oswald, 2024. "More than news! Mapping the deliberative potential of a political online ecosystem with digital trace data," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Giebler, Heiko & Ruth, Saskia P. & Tanneberg, Dag, 2018. "Why Choice Matters: Revisiting and Comparing Measures of Democracy," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 6(1), pages 1-10.
    3. Heiko Giebler & Saskia P. Ruth & Dag Tanneberg, 2018. "Why Choice Matters: Revisiting and Comparing Measures of Democracy," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 1-10.
    4. Thiel, Thorsten, 2020. "The Normative Order of International Politics: Critique and Legitimacy," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 25-45.
    5. Peter Horton & Steve A. Banwart & Dan Brockington & Garrett W. Brown & Richard Bruce & Duncan Cameron & Michelle Holdsworth & S. C. Lenny Koh & Jurriaan Ton & Peter Jackson, 2017. "An agenda for integrated system-wide interdisciplinary agri-food research," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(2), pages 195-210, April.
    6. Abby Lindsay, 2018. "Social learning as an adaptive measure to prepare for climate change impacts on water provision in Peru," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 8(4), pages 477-487, December.
    7. Gil, Olga, 2019. "Public participation in China and the West," SocArXiv dapvj, Center for Open Science.
    8. Fanni Bársony & György Lengyel & Éva Perpék, 2020. "Enclave deliberation and common-pool resources: an attempt to apply Civic Preference Forum on community gardening in Hungary," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 687-708, April.
    9. Schäfer, Andreas & Merkel, Wolfgang, 2020. "Emanzipation oder Reaktion: Wie konservativ ist die deliberative Demokratie? [Emancipation or Reaction: How Conservative is Deliberative Democracy?]," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 61(3), pages 449-472.
    10. Harri Raisio & Pirkko Vartiainen, 2015. "Accelerating the public’s learning curve on wicked policy issues: results from deliberative forums on euthanasia," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(3), pages 339-361, September.
    11. Monika Berg & Rolf Lidskog, 2018. "Pathways to deliberative capacity: the role of the IPCC," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 148(1), pages 11-24, May.
    12. Andrew F Smith, 2014. "Political deliberation and the challenge of bounded rationality," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 13(3), pages 269-291, August.
    13. Kim Strandberg & Kim Backström & Janne Berg & Thomas Karv, 2021. "Democratically Sustainable Local Development? The Outcomes of Mixed Deliberation on a Municipal Merger on Participants’ Social Trust, Political Trust, and Political Efficacy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-17, June.
    14. 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.
    15. Matheus Alves Zanella & Ariane Goetz & Stephan Rist & Oscar Schmidt & Jes Weigelt, 2018. "Deliberation in Multi-Stakeholder Participation: A Heuristic Framework Applied to the Committee on World Food Security," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-21, February.
    16. Colvin, R.M. & Przybyszewski, E., 2022. "Local residents' policy preferences in an energy contested region – The Upper Hunter, Australia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    17. Dannica Fleuß & Karoline Helbig & Gary S. Schaal, 2018. "Four Parameters for Measuring Democratic Deliberation: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges and How to Respond," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 11-21.
    18. Fleuß, Dannica & Helbig, Karoline & Schaal, Gary S., 2018. "Four Parameters for Measuring Democratic Deliberation: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges and How to Respond," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 6(1), pages 11-21.

    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:zbw:espost:231785. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    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.