Journal Article•
Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy
About: This article is published in Review of Metaphysics.The article was published on 1997-02-01 and is currently open access. It has received 2568 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Democracy.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that integrated, multi-stakeholder, scientific assessment processes, particularly collaborative assessments of policy alternatives and their various implications, offer potential advantages in this regard, compared with alternatives for bridging scientific expertise and public policy.
Abstract: Putting the recently adopted global Sustainable Development Goals or the Paris Agreement on international climate policy into action will require careful policy choices. Appropriately informing decision-makers about longer-term, wicked policy issues remains a considerable challenge for the scientific community. Typically, these vital policy issues are highly uncertain, value-laden and disputed, and affect multiple temporal and spatial scales, governance levels, policy fields, and socioeconomic contexts simultaneously. In light of this, science-policy interfaces should help facilitate learning processes and open deliberation among all actors involved about potentially acceptable policy pathways. For this purpose, science-policy interfaces must strive to foster some enabling conditions: (1) “representation” in terms of engaging with diverse stakeholders (including experts) and acknowledging divergent viewpoints; (2) “empowerment” of underrepresented societal groups by co-developing and integrating policy scenarios that reflect their specific knowledge systems and worldviews; (3) “capacity building” regarding methods and skills for integration and synthesis, as well as through the provision of knowledge synthesis about the policy solution space; and (4) “spaces for deliberation”, facilitating direct interaction between different stakeholders, including governments and scientists. We argue that integrated, multi-stakeholder, scientific assessment processes—particularly the collaborative assessments of policy alternatives and their various implications—offer potential advantages in this regard, compared with alternatives for bridging scientific expertise and public policy. This article is part of a collection on scientific advice to governments.
66 citations
Cites background from "Between Facts and Norms: Contributi..."
...Any decision made subsequently has to be justified on the basis of this deliberation—it has to be made plausible in light of the arguments heard before (Habermas, 1996b)....
[...]
...…2010), Pettit’s “republican-contestation” theory (Pettit, 2000), Chambers’ “reasonable” democratic theory (Chambers, 1996), Young’s “communicative” theory (Young, 1993), and, perhaps most famously, Habermas’ “deliberative politics” (Habermas, 1996a, 1996b,), and earlier works such as Dewey (1927)....
[...]
...Different institutions and actors can serve as intermediate suppliers of a political core area to screen and structure discourses, being an amplifier (as well as filter) for particular messages and interests (Habermas, 1996b)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors explored the deliberative potential of environmental assessment (EA) and concluded that EA has a "hidden" potential, which follows from the institutional flexibility of EA, that is, because EA legislation specifies minimal requirement for public participation.
Abstract: In this paper the deliberative potential of environmental assessment (EA) is explored. The analysis is structured around four principles derived from Jurgen Habermas's conception of discourse as an ideal procedure for rational and democratic decision-making. The results show that there are many barriers to an implementation of the Habermasian principles. Nevertheless, it is concluded that EA has a ‘hidden’ deliberative potential, which follows from the institutional flexibility of EA, that is, because EA legislation specifies minimal requirement for public participation, requirements that developers and authorities can exceed by using more inclusive and more dialogue-based participatory tools. Finally, the need for additional investigations of deliberation in EA is discussed.
65 citations
Cites background from "Between Facts and Norms: Contributi..."
...…democracy, Habermas formulates an alternative notion of democratic politics by extracting the most attractive elements of the liberal and the republican traditions in political theory and incorporating these elements into a communicative framework (Habermas, 1990; 1996a; 1996b; 1999; 2001)....
[...]
...If at all, political outcomes are legitimate because they survive a deliberative process among free and equal individuals (Habermas, 1996a, pages 296–302; 1996b; Knight and Johnson, 1994)....
[...]
...…democracy, such as “discursive democracy” (Dryzek, 1990), “contestatory democracy” (Pettit, 2000), “reasonable democracy” (Chambers, 1996), “communicative Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal December 2005 283 democracy” (Young, 1993), and “deliberative politics” (Habermas, 1996a; 1996b)....
[...]
...Political actors are viewed as participants in public discussions regarding common interests, and political practice is characterised as an open and public activity in which deliberation and participation form the core elements (Habermas, 1996a, pages 296–302; 1996b; 2001)....
[...]
...Deliberative politics is understood to involve collective searches for common interests, and negotiation and bargaining between conflicting private interests (Habermas, 1996a, pages 157–168; 1996b)....
[...]
TL;DR: The authors examines two reasons for accepting this view and for rejecting global egalitarianism, and finds both wanting, and then presents three challenges to any view that holds that the scope of principles of distributive justice should be determined by the boundaries of the state.
Abstract: Many hold that the state has normative significance because its borders define the scope of egalitarian principles of distributive justice. On this view egalitarian principles of distributive justice should be applied within the state but should not be adopted at the global level. This article examines two reasons for accepting this view and for rejecting global egalitarianism, and finds both wanting. It then presents three challenges to any view that holds that the scope of principles of distributive justice should be determined by the boundaries of the state. It concludes by noting four distinct ways in which the state has normative significance, each of which can be endorsed by global egalitarians.
65 citations
Cites background from "Between Facts and Norms: Contributi..."
...This view has some affinities with Jürgen Habermas’ views on ‘constitutional patriotism’ (Habermas, 1997, p. 500; 1999, p. 118, pp. 225–6)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors analyzed more than 5,000 articles from five national German quality newspapers and found that during the 2000/2001 German BSE crisis, politicians were mostly blamed as problem causers and to a far lesser degree business and agriculture.
Abstract: The 2000/2001 German BSE crisis unfolded as a public drama where awkward crisis management and political attacks on industrial agriculture sparked intense, prolonged media coverage. Mediatisation and politicisation of BSE went hand in hand. In the process, responsibilities for problems and solutions were socially constructed. A high level of press coverage and a policy turnabout (Agrarwende) became mutually reinforcing, according to our analysis of more than 5,000 articles from five national German quality newspapers. Politicians had a prominent standing but did not dominate the BSE discourse; speakers from civil society, the private sector and the media had a relatively good ‘standing’. Before the policy change, consumers appeared as the main victims in the media, while afterwards it was agriculture. Throughout the crisis, politicians were mostly blamed as problem causers and to a far lesser degree business and agriculture. Politicians were also overwhelmingly framed as problem solvers, far more than science, agriculture, business and consumers. As the new policy unfolded, more issue frames were articulated, suggesting that the debate shifted from BSE to the general direction of agriculture policy and the distribution of subsidies, but also to the relation between nature and technology and to a lesser degree the relation between food and consumers. Localisation and globalisation of food and international issues played minor roles. In the context of wider research on mass media and public opinion, the case study shows how media coverage tends to politicise food hazards. Food scares offer high news values and attract wide audiences. While industrial agriculture received much blame, major responsibility was attributed to the political system.
65 citations
Cites background from "Between Facts and Norms: Contributi..."
...According to normative concepts of democracy, public debate should couple political-administrative power to societal problems in order to hold incumbents responsible and ensure responsiveness on a systemic level (Habermas, 1996; Feindt, 2001)....
[...]
22 Jun 2012
TL;DR: It is argued that transparency and open data will be damaging for unwarranted trust, but this will open up a space for warranted trust to flourish, and it is necessary to consider the wider infosphere, putting deliberative processes in place to foster trust.
Abstract: This paper examines the ways in which using the World Wide Web to promote transparency and to disseminate open data will affect warranted and unwarranted trust in politics and within societies. It is argued that transparency and open data will be damaging for unwarranted trust, but this will open up a space for warranted trust to flourish. Three types of theory about trust and decision-making in politics are discussed: social capital theories, rational choice theories and deliberative democracy theories. Using the UK government's transparency programme in crime and criminal justice as an example, it is argued that mechanisms being pioneered to disseminate open data online, such as sites like data.gov and data.gov.uk, promote trust on each theory, although the supply of data is necessary but not sufficient. It is also necessary to consider the wider infosphere, putting deliberative processes in place to foster trust.
65 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: In this comprehensive social theory of the Internet and the networked information economy, Benkler describes how patterns of information, knowledge, and cultural production are changing--and shows that the way information and knowledge are made available can either limit or enlarge the ways people can create and express themselves.
Abstract: With the radical changes in information production that the Internet has introduced, we stand at an important moment of transition, says Yochai Benkler in this thought-provoking book. The phenomenon he describes as social production is reshaping markets, while at the same time offering new opportunities to enhance individual freedom, cultural diversity, political discourse, and justice. But these results are by no means inevitable: a systematic campaign to protect the entrenched industrial information economy of the last century threatens the promise of today's emerging networked information environment. In this comprehensive social theory of the Internet and the networked information economy, Benkler describes how patterns of information, knowledge, and cultural production are changing--and shows that the way information and knowledge are made available can either limit or enlarge the ways people can create and express themselves. He describes the range of legal and policy choices that confront us and maintains that there is much to be gained--or lost--by the decisions we make today.
4,002 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors develop a framework for understanding the range of institutional possibilities for public participation, including who participates, how participants communicate with one another and make decisions together, and how discussions are linked with policy or public action.
Abstract: The multifaceted challenges of contemporary governance demand a complex account of the ways in which those who are subject to laws and policies should participate in making them. This article develops a framework for understanding the range of institutional possibilities for public participation. Mechanisms of participation vary along three important dimensions: who participates, how participants communicate with one another and make decisions together, and how discussions are linked with policy or public action. These three dimensions constitute a space in which any particular mechanism of participation can be located. Different regions of this institutional design space are more and less suited to addressing important problems of democratic governance such as legitimacy, justice, and effective administration.
1,526 citations
01 Dec 2000
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examine the current debate about the nature of democracy and discuss the main theses of the approach called "deliberative democracy" in its two main versions, the one put forward by John Rawls, and the other one put forth by Jurgen Habermas.
Abstract: This article examines the current debate about the nature of democracy and discusses the main theses of the approach called 'deliberative democracy' in its two main versions, the one put forward by John Rawls, and the other one put forwardby Jurgen Habermas. While agreeing with them as regards to the need to develop a more of democracy than the one offered by the 'aggregative' model, I submit that they do not provide an adequate understanding of the main task of democracy. No doubt, by stating that democracy cannot be reduced to a question of procedures to mediate among conflicting interests, deliberative democrats defend a conception of democracy that presents a richer conception of politics. But, albeit in a different way thanthe view they criticize, their vision is also a rationalist one which leaves aside the crucial role played by 'passions' and collective forms of identifications in the field of politics. Moreover, in their attempt to reconcile the liberal tradition with the democratic one, deliberative democrats tend to erase the tension that exist between liberalism and democracy and they are therefore unable to come to terms with the conflictual nature of democratic politics. The main thesis that I put forward in this article is that democratic theory needs to acknowledge the ineradicability of antagonism and the impossibility of achieving a fully inclusive rational consensus. I argue that a model of democracy in terms of 'agonistic pluralism' can help us to better envisage the main challenge facing democratic politics today: how to create democratic forms of identifications that will contribute to mobilize passions towards democratic designs.;
1,338 citations
TL;DR: Public diplomacy, as the diplomacy of the public, not of the government, intervenes in this global public sphere, laying the ground for traditional forms of diplomacy to act beyond the strict negotiation of power relationships by building on shared... as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: The public sphere is the space of communication of ideas and projects that emerge from society and are addressed to the decision makers in the institutions of society. The global civil society is the organized expression of the values and interests of society. The relationships between government and civil society and their interaction via the public sphere define the polity of society. The process of globalization has shifted the debate from the national domain to the global debate, prompting the emergence of a global civil society and of ad hoc forms of global governance. Accordingly, the public sphere as the space of debate on public affairs has also shifted from the national to the global and is increasingly constructed around global communication networks. Public diplomacy, as the diplomacy of the public, not of the government, intervenes in this global public sphere, laying the ground for traditional forms of diplomacy to act beyond the strict negotiation of power relationships by building on shared...
936 citations
Book•
05 Oct 2012
TL;DR: Tweets and the Streets as mentioned in this paper examines the relationship between the rise of social media and the emergence of new forms of protest, arguing that activists' use of Twitter and Facebook does not fit with the image of a "cyberspace" detached from physical reality.
Abstract: Tweets and the Streets analyses the culture of the new protest movements of the 21st century. From the Arab Spring to the "indignados" protests in Spain and the Occupy movement, Paolo Gerbaudo examines the relationship between the rise of social media and the emergence of new forms of protest. Gerbaudo argues that activists' use of Twitter and Facebook does not fit with the image of a "cyberspace" detached from physical reality. Instead, social media is used as part of a project of re-appropriation of public space, which involves the assembling of different groups around "occupied" places such as Cairo's Tahrir Square or New York's Zuccotti Park. An exciting and invigorating journey through the new politics of dissent, Tweets and the Streets points both to the creative possibilities and to the risks of political evanescence which new media brings to the contemporary protest experience.
911 citations