Anticipatory exclusion

Last updated

Anticipatory exclusion refers to a citizen's decision not to attend a discussion due to the anticipation of being excluded. The citizen would never take part in a discussion because he/she believes that his/her views and perspectives wouldn't be given equal time or consideration, when compared to dominant views. In other words, the (often realistic) fear of being excluded, discounted, or dismissed causes a person to decline an opportunity to attend a public event. Calling this "exclusion" implies that the individual's personal decision not to participate actually reflects a larger historical pattern of active exclusion toward similar individuals.

Contents

Causes

Anticipatory exclusion is often caused by internal exclusion, which is the way certain dominant ideas and social perspectives can control a discussion even when participants have diverse perspectives (Fung 2004, p. 49). In contrast, external exclusion refers to the fact that minority viewpoints are rarely heard due to structural inequalities in a community (Fung, 2004).

Background

It is generally associated with Dahl's criteria for a democratic process, inclusion and effective participation, which many political theorists consider essential for a participatory or deliberative democracy (Dahl, 1989). Many democratic theorists attempt to solve the challenge of anticipatory and other types of exclusion through formal equalization mechanisms, including structural and economic reforms that would guarantee all citizens have adequate time, education, and resources to deliberate (Sanders 1997, p. 7). But even when these inequalities are adjusted for Sanders argues that deliberative institutions might cater to and perpetuate inequalities against historically disenfranchised groups (e.g., women, minorities) (see also, Schattan, Coelho, Pozzoni, Montoya 2005).

See also

Related Research Articles

Direct democracy Democracy in which all people make decisions, without intermediate representatives

Direct democracy or pure democracy is a form of democracy in which people decide on policy initiatives directly. This differs from the majority of currently established democracies, which are representative democracies. The theory and practice of direct democracy and participation as its common characteristic was the core of work of many theorists, philosophers and politicians, among whom the most important are Jean Jacques Rousseau, John Stuart Mill, and G.D.H. Cole.

Deliberation meeting or inquiry of concerned persons or advisors for the purpose of deliberation, discussion or decision on some matter or action

Deliberation is a process of thoughtfully weighing options, usually prior to voting. Deliberation emphasizes the use of logic and reason as opposed to power-struggle, creativity, or dialog. Group decisions are generally made after deliberation through a vote or consensus of those involved.

Deliberative democracy or discursive democracy is a form of democracy in which deliberation is central to decision-making. It adopts elements of both consensus decision-making and majority rule. Deliberative democracy differs from traditional democratic theory in that authentic deliberation, not mere voting, is the primary source of legitimacy for the law.

Participatory democracy or participative democracy emphasizes the broad participation of constituents in the direction and operation of political systems. Etymological roots of democracy imply that the people are in power and thus that all democracies are participatory. However, participatory democracy tends to advocate more involved forms of citizen participation and greater political representation than traditional representative democracy.

Public participation (decision making) inclusion of individuals and organizations in decision-making and opinion-forming processes

Participation in social science refers to different mechanisms for the public to express opinions – and ideally exert influence – regarding political, economic, management or other social decisions. Participatory decision-making can take place along any realm of human social activity, including economic, political, management, cultural or familial.

In Western European political science, the term polyarchy was used by Robert Dahl to describe a form of government in which power is invested in multiple people. It takes the form of neither a dictatorship nor a democracy. This form of government was first implemented in the United States and France and was gradually adopted by many other countries. According to Dahl, the fundamental democratic principle is “the continuing responsiveness of the government to the preferences of its citizens, considered as political equals” with unimpaired opportunities. A polyarchy is a state that has certain procedures that are necessary conditions for following the democratic principle.

A deliberative opinion poll, sometimes called a deliberative poll, is a form of opinion poll that incorporates the principles of deliberative democracy. Professor James S. Fishkin of Stanford University first described the concept in 1988. The typical deliberative opinion poll takes a random, representative sample of citizens and engages them in deliberation on current issues or proposed policy changes through small-group discussions and conversations with competing experts to create more informed and reflective public opinion. A typical polling utilizes participants drawn from a random and representative sample to engage in small-group deliberations to create more informed and reflective public opinion. Deliberative polls have been tested around the world, including in the European Union, the United States, China, and Australia.

Noocracy, or "aristocracy of the wise", as originally defined by Plato, is a system of governance where decision making is in the hands of philosophers, similar to his idea of Philosopher kings. The idea was further expanded upon by geologist Vladimir Vernadsky, and philosophers Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and Édouard Le Roy, and their concept of the Noosphere.

The National Issues Forums (NIF) is a US-based non partisan, nationwide network of civic, educational, and other organizations and individuals whose common interest is to promote public deliberation in America. NIF sponsors public forums and training institutions for public deliberation." Everyday citizens get to deliberate on various issues through NIF forums. Some of the issues discussed include civil rights, education, energy, government, etc. "Think, Deliberate, Act" is the slogan on the NIF.

Televoting, telephone voting or phone voting is a method of decision making and opinion polling conducted by telephone. Televoting can also extend to voting by SMS text message via a mobile cell phone.

Public participation participation of citizens in various policy decisions and planning processes

Public participation, also known as citizen participation, is the inclusion of the public in the activities of any organization or project. Public participation is similar to but more inclusive than stakeholder engagement.

In social sciences, participation inequality consists of difference between levels of participation of various groups in certain activities. Common examples include:

Radical democracy can be defined as "a type of democracy that signals an ongoing concern with the radical extension of equality and liberty". Radical democracy is concerned with a radical extension of equality and freedom. Another feature is the idea that democracy is an un-finished, inclusive, continuous and reflexive process.

In governance, sortition is the selection of political officials as a random sample from a larger pool of candidates. Filling individual posts or, more usually in its modern applications, to fill collegiate chambers. The system intends to ensure that all competent and interested parties have an equal chance of holding public office. It also minimizes factionalism, since there would be no point making promises to win over key constituencies if one was to be chosen by lot, while elections, by contrast, foster it. In ancient Athenian democracy, sortition was the traditional and primary method for appointing political officials, and its use was regarded as a principal characteristic of democracy.

Inclusive management is a pattern of practices by public managers that facilitate the inclusion of public employees, experts, the public, and politicians in collaboratively addressing public problems or concerns of public interest.

Archon Fung, is the Ford Foundation Professor of Democracy and Citizenship at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government and co-founder of the Transparency Policy Project. Fung served as an Assistant Professor of Public Policy at the Kennedy School from July 1999-June 2004, then as an Associate Professor of Public Policy at the Kennedy School from July 2004-October 2007, and finally as a Professor of Public Policy from October 2007-March 2009 before being named as the Ford Foundation Chair of Democracy and Citizenship in March 2009. In 2015, he was elected to the Common Cause National Governing Board.

A citizens' assembly is a body formed from the citizens of a state to deliberate on an issue or issues of local or national importance. The membership of a citizens' assembly is randomly selected, as in other forms of sortition.

Embedded democracy

Embedded democracy is a form of government in which democratic governance is secured by democratic partial regimes. The term "embedded democracy" was coined by political scientists Wolfgang Merkel, Hans-Jürgen Puhle, and Aurel Croissant, who identified "five interdependent partial regimes" necessary for an embedded democracy: electoral regime, political participation, civil rights, horizontal accountability, and the power of the elected representatives to govern. The five internal regimes work together to check the power of the government, while external regimes also help to secure and stabilize embedded democracies. Together, all the regimes ensure that an embedded democracy is guided by the three fundamental principles of freedom, equality, and control.

The term online deliberation describes the emerging field of practice and research related to the design, implementation and study of deliberative processes that rely on the use of electronic information and communications technologies (ICT).

John Gastil currently holds a joint appointment as Professor of Communication Arts & Sciences and Professor of Political Science at Penn State University. He is known for his research on deliberative democracy and group decision making.

References