Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Non-deliberative politics in deliberative democracy: distinct approaches for different actors

  • Andrea Felicetti (a1)

This article advances one of the most important debates in recent scholarship on democratic theory: the one on deliberative systems. In the wake of the systemic turn deliberative scholars agree that not all components of a deliberative system can or even need to be deliberative. However, there is little clarity about the role of non-deliberative politics in a system and to what extent these are justifiable while we seek a more deliberative society. In this paper I first illustrate the main ideas of the systemic turn, explore the distinction between ‘deliberative’ and ‘non-deliberative’ politics and investigate the main arguments justifying non-deliberative politics. Then, I build upon these arguments to shed new light on the relationship between deliberative and non-deliberative politics. I identify three distinctive actors in deliberative systems (political institutions, empowered agents, and public space actors). Finally, I argue that deliberative democrats should adopt three different approaches (intensive, moderate, and free) in order to assess whether the use of non-deliberative politics by each of these actors is legitimate.

Corresponding author
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

A. Bächtiger , S. Niemeyer , M. Neblo , M.R. Steenbergen and J. Steiner (2010), ‘Disentangling diversity in deliberative democracy: competing theories, their blind spots and complementarities’, Journal of Political Philosophy 18: 3263.

S. Chambers (2003), ‘Deliberative democratic theory’, Annual Review of Political Science 6: 307326.

S. Chambers (2012), ‘Deliberation and mass democracy’, in: J. Parkinson and J. Mansbridge (eds), Deliberative Systems, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 5271.

S. Collignon (2007), ‘The three sources of legitimacy for European fiscal policy’, International Political Science Review 28: 155184.

N. Curato (2012), ‘A sequential analysis of democratic deliberation’, Acta Politica 47(4): 423442.

A. Crespy (2014), ‘Deliberative democracy and the legitimacy of the European Union: a reappraisal of conflict’, Political Studies 62: 8198.

D. della Porta and D. Rucht (eds) (2013), Meeting Democracy. Power and Deliberation in Global Justice Movements , Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

J. Dodge (2015), ‘The deliberative potential of civil society organizations: framing hydraulic fracturing in New York’, Policy Studies 36(3): 249266.

J.S. Dryzek (2001), ‘Legitimacy and economy in deliberative democracy’, Political Theory 29: 651669.

J.S. Dryzek (2009), ‘Democratization as deliberative capacity building’, Comparative Political Studies 42: 13791402.

J.S. Dryzek , D. Downes , C. Hunold and D. Schlosberg (2003), Green States and Social Movements: Environmentalism in the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and Norway, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

A. Felicetti (2013), ‘Localism and the transition movement’, Policy Studies 34: 559574.

A. Fung (2005), ‘Deliberation before the revolution toward an ethics of deliberative democracy in an unjust world’, Political Theory 33: 397419.

R.E. Goodin (2005), ‘Sequencing deliberative moments’, Acta Politica 40: 182196.

J. Kuyper (2015), ‘Democratic deliberation in the modern world: the systemic turn’, Critical Review 27(1): 4963.

J. Kuyper (2016), ‘Systemic representation: democracy, deliberation, and nonelectoral representatives’, American Political Science Review (110)2: 308324.

J.J. Mansbridge (1994), ‘Using power/fighting power’, Constellations 1: 5373.

J.J. Mansbridge , J. Bohman , S. Chambers , D. Estlund , A. Føllesdal , A. Fung , C. Lafont and B. Manin (2010), ‘The place of self-interest and the role of power in deliberative democracy’, Journal of Political Philosophy 18: 64100.

R.F. Mendonça (2016), ‘Mitigating systemic dangers: the role of connectivity inducers in a deliberative system’, Critical Policy Studies 10: 171190.

A. Moore (2016), ‘Deliberative elitism? Distributed deliberation and the organization of epistemic inequality.Critical Policy Studies 10: 191208.

D. Owen and G. Smith (2015), ‘Survey article: deliberation, democracy, and the systemic turn’, Journal of Political Philosophy 23: 213234.

J. Parkinson (2006), Deliberating in the Real World: Problems of Legitimacy in Deliberative Democracy, Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

J. Parkinson (2012), ‘Democratizing deliberative systems’, in J. Parkinson and J. Mansbridge (eds), Deliberative Systems, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 151172.

J. Parkinson and J. Mansbridge (eds) (2012), Deliberative Systems, New York: Cambridge University Press.

C. Pateman (2012), ‘Participatory democracy revisited’, Perspectives on Politics 10: 719.

B. Prosser , A. Renwick , A. Giovannini , M. Sandford , M. Flinders , W. Jennings , G. Smith , P. Spada , G. Stoker and K. Ghose (2017), ‘Citizen participation and changing governance: cases of devolution in England’, Policy & Politics 45(2): 251269.

W. Smith (2016), ‘The boundaries of a deliberative system: the case of disruptive protest’, Critical Policy Studies 10: 152170.

J. Steiner (2008), ‘Concept stretching: the case of deliberation’, European Political Science 7: 186190.

H. Stevenson and J.S. Dryzek (2012a), ‘The discursive democratisation of global climate governance’, Environmental Politics 21: 189210.

H. Stevenson and J.S. Dryzek (2012b), ‘The legitimacy of multilateral climate governance: a deliberative democratic approach’, Critical Policy Studies 6: 118.

R.B. Talisse (2005), ‘Deliberativist responses to activist challenges: a continuation of Young’s dialectic’, Philosophy and Social Criticism 31: 423444.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Italian Political Science Review / Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica
  • ISSN: 0048-8402
  • EISSN: 2057-4908
  • URL: /core/journals/italian-political-science-review-rivista-italiana-di-scienza-politica
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *



Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 9
Total number of PDF views: 20 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 260 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 19th June 2017 - 19th August 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.