Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Institutionalising public deliberation: Insights from the Scottish Parliament

  • Original Article
  • Published:
British Politics Aims and scope

Abstract

This article analyses the institutionalisation of public and civic forms of deliberation within the Scottish Parliament. The analysis focuses on the committee system of the Parliament and is constructed around a unique database, created by the authors, which records the nature of all deliberative instances involving parliamentary committees and members of the public/stake-holding groups between 1999 and 2009. Findings emerge from the data that are of relevance to two main audiences. First, those with a concern for the abstractions of deliberative theory are provided with much needed empirical evidence about the institutionalisation of deliberative processes within a national legislature. And second, those with a concern for legislative studies and devolved politics are provided with a novel evaluation of deliberation that feeds into wider debates about the principles of the Scottish Parliament. Our findings show that the committees of the Scottish Parliament have been relatively successful in institutionalising a deliberative system comprised of a range of discursive spheres of varying complexity. However, this optimism must be tempered by the observation that this is a system in decline.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Executive funding was withdrawn from the Forum in 2005, ostensibly because this arrangement compromised its independence and impartiality. It is interesting to note, however, that the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body refused to pick up the tab on the basis that the Forum was culpable of duplicating the work of Parliament, which was deemed to have made significant progress in increasing public participation.

  2. Committee reports contain virtually no data regarding the impact deliberations have on participant preferences. However, the 2002 Justice 1 civic participation event is an exception here, as pre- and post-deliberation preferences were recorded. Although there was ‘considerable stability’ regarding participants’ views on the aims of sentencing, there was a ‘substantial change’ regarding appropriate sentences. It must be noted though that participants were party to expert briefings and activities relating to short case studies that would also have impacted on their preferences.

References

  • Arter, D. (2004) The Scottish Parliament committees and the goal of ‘new politics’: A verdict on the first four years of the devolved Scottish Parliament. Journal of Contemporary European Studies 12 (1): 71–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bächtiger, A., Spörndli, M., Steenbergen, M.R. and Steiner, J. (2005) The deliberative dimensions of legislatures. Acta Politica 40: 225–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohman, J. (1998) The coming age of deliberative democracy. The Journal of Political Philosophy 6 (4): 400–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohman, J. and Rehg, W. (1997) Introduction. In: J. Bohman and W. Rehg (eds.) Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. (2000) Designing the Scottish Parliament. Parliamentary Affairs 53 (3): 542–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A. (2008) Social Research Methods, 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmen, C. and Shephard, M. (2009) Committees in the Scottish Parliament. In: C. Jeffery and J. Mitchell (eds.) The Scottish Parliament 1999–2009: The First Decade. Edinburgh, UK: Luath Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1996) Procedure and substance in deliberative democracy. In: S. Benhabib (ed.) Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 95–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Consultative Steering Group. (1999) Shaping Scotland's Parliament: Report of the Consultative Steering Group on the Scottish Parliament. Edinburgh, UK: Scottish Office.

  • Davis, A. (2009) Evaluating communication in the British Parliamentary public sphere. British Journal of Politics and International Relations 11 (2): 280–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J.S. (1992) Ecology and discursive democracy: Beyond liberal capitalism and the administrative state. Capitalism Nature Socialism 3 (2): 18–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J.S. (2000) Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals Critics and Contestations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J.S. (2001) Legitimacy and economy in deliberative democracy. Political Theory 29 (5): 651–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elstub, S. (2006) A double-edged sword: The increasing diversity of deliberative democracy. Contemporary Politics 12 (2–3): 301–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elstub, S. (2008) Weber's Dilemma and a dualist model of deliberative and associational democracy. Contemporary Political Theory 7: 169–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fearon, J. (1998) Deliberation as discussion. In: J. Elster (ed.) Deliberative Democracy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fung, A. (2003) Survey article: Recipes for public spheres: Eight insitutional design choices and their consequences. Journal of Political Philosophy 11 (3): 338–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fung, A. (2007) Minipublics: Deliberative designs and their consequences. In: S.W. Rosenberg (ed.) Deliberation, Participation and Democracy: Can the People Govern? Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gastil, J. and Levine, P. (eds.) (2005) The Deliberative Democracy Handbook. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutmann, A. and Thompson, D. (1996) Democracy and Disagreement: Why Moral Conflict Cannot be Avoided in Politics, and What Should be Done About It. London: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutmann, A. and Thompson, D. (2004) Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1996) Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpin, D., Mcleod, I. and McLaverty, P. (2010) Committee hearings of the Scottish Parliament. Who gives evidence? And does it contribute to ‘policy learning’? Paper Submitted to the Political Studies Association Conference.

  • Hendriks, C.M. (2006) Integrated deliberation: Reconciling society's dual role in deliberative democracy. Political Studies 54 (3): 486–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeffery, C and Mitchell, J. (2009) The Scottish Parliament 1999–2009: The First Decade. Edinburgh, UK: Luath Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Judge, D. (2005) Political Institutions in the United Kingdom. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Judge, D. (2006) ‘This is what democracy looks like’: New labour's blind spot and peripheral vision. British Politics 1: 367–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keating, M. (2005) The Government of Scotland: Public Policy Making after Devolution. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keating, M., Stevenson, L. and Taylor, K. (2003) Does devolution make a difference? Legislative output and the policy divergence in Scotland. Journal of Legislative Studies 9 (3): 1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • List, C. and Goodin, R.E. (2001) Epistemic democracy: Generalizing the Condorcet Jury theorem. The Journal of Political Philosophy 9 (3): 277–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansbridge, J. (1999) Everyday talk in the deliberative system. In: S. Macedo (ed.) Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGarvey, N. and Cairney, P. (2008) Scottish Politics: An Introduction. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaverty, P. and Morris, S. (2007) The Scottish Parliament: A new era for participatory democracy? In: T. Zittel and D. Fuchs (eds.) Participatory Democracy and Political Participation: Can Participatory Engineering Bring Citizens Back In? New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. (2003) Deliberative democracy and social choice. In: J.S. Fiskin and P. Laslett (eds.) Debating Deliberative Democracy. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton, P. (2005) Parliament in British Politics. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parkinson, J. (2006) Deliberating in the Real World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, N. (1997) Public deliberation: An alternative approach to crafting policy and setting direction. Public Administration 57: 124–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R. and Walters, R. (2006) How Parliament Works. Essex, UK: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, S.W. (2007) An introduction: Theoretical perspectives and empirical research on deliberative democracy. In: S.W. Rosenberg (ed.) Deliberation, Participation and Democracy: Can the People Govern? Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Scottish Constitutional Convention. (1990) Towards Scotland's Parliament. Edinburgh, UK: Convention of Scottish Local Authorities.

  • Shephard, M. and Cairney, P. (2005) The impact of the Scottish Parliament in amending government legislation. Political Studies 53 (2): 303–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, G. (2000) Toward deliberative institutions. In: M. Saward (ed.) Innovations in Democracy. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, G. (2001) Taking institutional design seriously: Institutional design and green politics. Environmental Politics 10 (3): 72–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smookler, J. (2006) Making a difference? The effectiveness of pre-legislative scrutiny. Parliamentary Affairs 59 (3): 522–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SP Paper 254. (2001) Report on the Impact of Changing Employment Patterns in Rural Scotland. First Report of the Rural Development Committee of the Scottish Parliament, http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/committees/historic/x-rural/reports-01/rar01-01-v01-01.htm, accessed 20 May 2010.

  • SP Paper 508. (2002) Report on Inquiry into the Need for Children's Commissioner in Scotland. Second Report of the Education, Culture and Sport Committee, http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/committees/historic/education/reports-02/edr02-ccs.htm.

  • SP Paper 552. (2006) Stage 1 Report on the Planning etc. (Scotland) Bill. Fifth Report of the Communities Committee of the Scottish Parliament, http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/committees/communities/reports-06/cor06-05-Vol01-00.htm.

  • SP Paper 622. (2002) Civic Participation Event on Issues of Sentencing and Alternatives to Imprisonment. Special Report for the Justice 1 Committee of the Scottish Parliament, http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/committees/historic/justice1/reports-02/j1r02-cpe-02.htm.

  • Steenbergen, M.R., Bächtiger, A., Spörndli, M. and Steiner, J. (2003) Measuring political deliberation: A discourse quality index. Comparative European Politics 1: 21–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, J., Bächtiger, A., Spörndli, M. and Steenbergen, M. (2004) Deliberative Politics in Action: Analyzing Parliamentary Discourse. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, B. (2009) Access and participation: Aiming high. In: C. Jeffery and J. Mitchell (eds.) The Scottish Parliament 1999–2009: The First Decade. Edinburgh, UK: Luath Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Urbinati, N. (2000) Representation as advocacy: A study of democratic deliberation. Policy and Politics 29 (3): 758–786.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, T. (1994) Citizens and Subjects: An Essay on British Politics. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Social Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Cowcaddens Road, G4 0BA, UK

    Stewart Davidson

  2. Department of Economic Studies and International Business, Glasgow Caledonian University, Cowcaddens Road, G4 0BA, UK

    Alastair Stark

Authors
  1. Stewart Davidson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alastair Stark
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Davidson, S., Stark, A. Institutionalising public deliberation: Insights from the Scottish Parliament. Br Polit 6, 155–186 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1057/bp.2011.3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/bp.2011.3

Keywords

Search

Navigation