Democratic Deliberation in the Wild: The McGill Online Design Studio and the RegulationRoom Project

54 Pages Posted: 5 May 2015

See all articles by Cynthia R. Farina

Cynthia R. Farina

Cornell Law School

Hoi Kong

McGill University

Cheryl Blake

Cornell University - Law School

Mary Newhart

Cornell Law School

Nik Luka

McGill University - School of Urban Planning

Date Written: May 4, 2014

Abstract

Although there is no single unified conception of deliberative democracy, the generally accepted core thesis is that democratic legitimacy comes from authentic deliberation on the part of those affected by a collective decision. This deliberation must occur under conditions of equality, broadmindedness, reasonableness, and inclusion. In exercises such as National Issue forums, citizen juries, and consensus conferences, deliberative practitioners have shown that careful attention to process design can enable ordinary citizens to engage in meaningful deliberation about difficult public policy issues. Typically, however, these are closed exercises — that is, they involve a limited number of participants, often selected to achieve a representative sample, who agree to take part in an extended, often multi-stage process.

The question we begin to address here is whether the aspirations of democratic deliberation have any relevance to conventional public comment processes. These processes typically allow participation that is universal (anyone who shows up can participate) and highly variable (ranging from brief engagement and short expressions of outcome preferences to protracted attention and lengthy brief-like presentations). Although these characteristics preclude the kind of control over process and participants that can be achieved in a deliberation exercise, we argue that conscious attention to process design can make it more likely that more participants will engage in informed, thoughtful, civil, and inclusive discussion. We examine this question through the lens of two action-based research projects: the McGill Online Design Studio (MODS), which facilitates public participation in Canadian urban planning, and RegulationRoom, which supports public comment in U.S. federal rulemaking.

Keywords: Administrative law, Legal information, technology, political theory

Suggested Citation

Farina, Cynthia R. and Kong, Hoi and Blake, Cheryl and Newhart, Mary and Luka, Nik, Democratic Deliberation in the Wild: The McGill Online Design Studio and the RegulationRoom Project (May 4, 2014). Fordham Urban Law Journal, Vol. 41, No. 1527, 2014, Cornell Legal Studies Research Paper No. 15-14, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2602495

Cynthia R. Farina (Contact Author)

Cornell Law School ( email )

Myron Taylor Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853-4901
United States
607-225-5879 (Phone)
607-255-7193 (Fax)

Hoi Kong

McGill University ( email )

1001 Sherbrooke St. W
Montreal, Quebec H3A 1G5
Canada

Cheryl Blake

Cornell University - Law School ( email )

Myron Taylor Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853

Mary Newhart

Cornell Law School ( email )

Myron Taylor Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853-4901
United States

Nik Luka

McGill University - School of Urban Planning

Macdonald-Harrington Building
815 rue Sherbrooke Ouest
Montréal, Québec H3A 0C2
Canada

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
93
Abstract Views
907
Rank
502,806
PlumX Metrics