Mechanisms promoting
deliberation. Deliberative polling begins with
participatory democracy
Scholars have recently proposed several
mechanisms to increase citizen participation in
democratic systems. These methods intend to
increase the agenda-setting and decision-making
powers of the people by giving citizens more direct
ways to contribute to politics.[45]
Citizens' assemblies
See also: Citizens' assembly
Also called mini-publics, citizens' assemblies are
representative samples of a population that meet to
create legislation or advise legislative bodies. As
citizens are chosen to participate by stratified
sampling, the assemblies are more representative
of the population than elected legislatures whose
representatives are often disproportionally
wealthy, male, and white.[46] Assemblies chosen by
sortition provide average citizens with the
opportunity to exercise substantive agenda-setting
and/or decision-making power. Over the course of
the assembly, citizens are helped by experts and
discussion facilitators, and the results are either put
to a referendum or sent in a report to the
government.
Critics of citizens' assemblies have raised concerns
about their perceived legitimacy. Political scientist
Daan Jacobs finds that although the perceived
legitimacy of assemblies is higher than that of
system with no participation, but not any higher
than that of any system involving self-selection.[47]
Regardless, the use of citizens' assemblies has
grown throughout the early 21st century and they
have were often used in constitutional reforms,
such as in British Columbia's Citizens' Assembly on
Electoral Reform in 2004 and the Irish Constitutional
Convention in 2012.[48]
Deliberative opinion polls
See also: Deliberative opinion poll
James S. Fishkin
Trademarked by Stanford professor James S.
Fishkin, deliberative opinion polls allow citizens to
develop informed opinions before voting through
surveying a random representative sample of
citizens to gage their opinion.[49] The same
individuals are then invited to deliberate for a
weekend in the presence of political leaders,
experts, and moderators. At the end, the group is
surveyed again, and the final opinions are taken to
be the conclusion the public would have reached if
they had the opportunity to engage with the issue
more deeply.[49] Philosopher Cristina Lafont, a critic
of deliberative opinion polling argues that the
"filtered" (informed) opinion reached at the end of
a poll is too far removed from the opinion of the
citizenry, delegitimizing the actions based on
them.[50]
E-democracy
See also: E-democracy
E-democracy is an umbrella term describing a
variety of proposals to increase participation
through technology.[51] Open discussion forums
provide citizens the opportunity to debate policy
online while facilitators guide discussion. These
forums usually serve agenda-setting purposes or are
sometimes used to provide legislators with
additional testimony. Closed forums may be used to
discuss more sensitive information: in the United
Kingdom, one was used to enable domestic violence
survivors to testify to the All-Party Parliamentary
Group on Domestic Violence and Abuse while
preserving their anonymity.
Another e-democratic mechanism is online
deliberative polling, a system in which citizens
deliberate with peers virtually before answering a
poll. The results of deliberative opinion polls are
more likely to reflect the considered judgments of
the people and encourage increased citizen
awareness of civic issues.[51]
Liquid democracy
See also: Liquid democracy
In a hybrid between direct and representative
democracy, liquid democracy permits individuals to
either vote on issues themselves or to select issue-
competent delegates to vote on their behalf.[52]
Political scientists Christian Blum and Christina
Isabel Zuber suggest that liquid democracy has the
potential to improve a legislature's performance
through bringing together delegates with a greater
awareness on a specific issue, taking advantage of
knowledge within the population. To make liquid
democracy more deliberative, a trustee model of
delegation may be implemented, in which the
delegates vote after deliberation with other Town meetings
representatives.
See also: Town meeting
Some concerns have been raised about the
implementation of liquid democracy. Blum and In local participatory democracy, town meetings
Zuber, for example, find that it produces two classes provide all residents with legislative power.[53]
of voters: individuals with one vote and delegates Practiced in the United States, particularly in New
with two or more.[52] They also worry that policies England, since the 17th century, they assure that
produced in issue-specific legislatures will lack local policy decisions are made directly by the
cohesiveness. Liquid democracy is utilized by Pirate public. Local democracy is often seen as the first
Parties for intra-party decision-making. step towards a participatory system.[57] Theorist
Graham Smith, however, notes the limited impact
Participatory budgeting of town meetings that cannot lead to action on
national issues. He also suggests that town meetings
See also: Participatory budgeting are not representative as they disproportionately
represent individuals with free time, including the
Participatory budgeting allows citizens to make elderly and the affluent.
decisions on the allocation of a public budget.[53]
Originating in Porto Alegre, Brazil, the general
procedure involves the creation of a concrete
financial plan that then serves as a recommendation
to elected representatives. Neighbourhoods are
given the authority to design budgets for the greater
region and local proposals are brought to elected
regional forums. This system lead to a decrease in
clientelism and corruption and an increase in
participation, particularly amongst marginalized
and poorer residents. Theorist Graham Smith
observes that participatory budgeting still has some
barriers to entry for the poorest members of the
population.[54]

Referendums

See also: Referendum and Popular initiative

In binding referendums, citizens vote on laws

and/or constitutional amendments proposed by a
legislative body.[55] Referendums afford citizens
greater decision-making power by giving them the
ultimate decision, and they may also use
referendums for agenda-setting if they are allowed
to draft proposals to be put to referendums in
efforts called popular initiatives. Compulsory voting
can further increase participation. Political theorist
Hélène Landemore raises the concern that
referendums may fail to be sufficiently deliberative
as people are unable to engage in discussions and
debates that would enhance their decision-making
abilities.[46]

Switzerland currently uses a rigorous system of

referendums, under which all laws the legislature
proposes go to referendums. Swiss citizens may also
start popular initiatives, a process in which citizens
put forward a constitutional amendment or propose
the removal of an existing provision. Any proposal
must receive the signature of 100,000 citizens to go
to a ballot.[56]