Books by Selen AYIRTMAN ERCAN
Oxford University Press, 2022
Deliberative democracy is a diverse and rapidly growing field of research. But how can deliberati... more Deliberative democracy is a diverse and rapidly growing field of research. But how can deliberative democracy be studied? Research Methods in Deliberative Democracy provides a unique collection of over 30 methods to study deliberative democracy. Written in an accessible style, it provides guidance for scholars and students on how to conduct rigorous and creative research on the public sphere, structured forums, and political institutions. Each chapter introduces a particular method, elaborates its utility in deliberative democracy research, and provides guidance on its application, as well as illustrations from previous studies. This book celebrates the methodological pluralism in the field, and hopes to inspire scholars to undertake methodologically robust, intellectually creative, and politically relevant empirical research. To download the book, please click here: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/research-methods-in-deliberative-democracy-9780192873361?prevSortField=8&resultsPerPage=100&sortField=8&type=listing&lang=en&cc=me#
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The fabric of democracy is threadbare in many contemporary societies. Connections that are vital ... more The fabric of democracy is threadbare in many contemporary societies. Connections that are vital to the functioning and integrity of our democratic systems are wearing thin. Citizens are increasingly disconnected — from their elected representatives, from one another in the public sphere, and from complex processes of public policy. In such disconnected times, how can we strengthen and renew our democracies? This book develops the idea of democratic mending as a way of advancing a more connective approach to democratic reform. It is informed by three rich empirical cases of connectivity in practice, as well as cutting-edge debates in deliberative democracy. The empirical cases uncover empowering and transformative modes of political engagement that are vital for democratic renewal. The diverse actors in this book are not withdrawing, resisting or seeking autonomy from conventional institutions of representative democracy but actively experimenting with ways to improve and engage with them. Through their everyday practices of democratic mending they undertake crucial systemic repair work and strengthen the integrity of our democratic fabric in ways that are yet to be fully acknowledged by scholars and practitioners of democratic reform.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Journal Articles by Selen AYIRTMAN ERCAN
The introductory article to this special issue highlights three fundamental yet often neglected q... more The introductory article to this special issue highlights three fundamental yet often neglected questions related to the current diagnosis of a crisis of democracy: What is meant by the term “crisis”? Which democracy is in crisis? And what, if anything, is “new” about the current crisis of democracy? We answer these questions by considering the multi-vocal contribution of purposefully curated short articles in this special issue. We argue that when engaging with the “crisis of democracy” diagnosis, it is important to unpack not only the normative presumptions one has in relation to what democracy is and should be, but also the recent transformations in the way politics is understood and practiced in contemporary societies.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Environmental politics is increasingly enacted online. New spaces of political communication, suc... more Environmental politics is increasingly enacted online. New spaces of political communication, such as websites, blogs, Facebook and YouTube, are changing the way environmental politics is practiced by providing an alternative platform for advocacy and mobilisation. But what other roles do online spaces perform in the enactment of contemporary environmental politics? This paper explores this question from the perspective of deliberative democracy. We study the performance of online spaces through a dramaturgical analysis of various websites, Facebook pages and YouTube clips active in a regional coal seam gas controversy in Australia. Our analysis finds that beyond interest advocacy and mobilisation online spaces play important performative functions by enlarging the stage of politics, re-casting the characters on the stage, enabling a diversity of performances, and re-scripting controversies. These functions have important democratic implications: they enable and shape the formation of deliberative systems that form around environmental issues, and influence who is seen as the legitimate participants, and how they engage in the controversy.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
This editorial introduction presents an overview of the themes explored in the symposium on ‘Deli... more This editorial introduction presents an overview of the themes explored in the symposium on ‘Deliberative Systems in Theory and Practice’. The concept of ‘deliberative system’ has gained renewed attention among deliberative democrats. A systemic approach to deliberative democracy opens up a new way of thinking about public deliberation. However, as the key protagonists responsible for the systemic resurgence acknowledge, the framework requires greater theoretical critical scrutiny and empirical investigation. The symposium will contribute to this endeavor by bringing together cutting edge research on the theory and practice of deliberative systems. This introduction offers a brief outline and review of the existing systemic approaches to deliberation, articulating the overlaps and differences and reflecting on the prospects and problems of each. In doing so, we take a generational approach that delineates the development of deliberative democracy into three generations, and argue that the focus on deliberative systems has implications that are so significant for the examination of theory and practice that it heralds a fourth generation for deliberative democracy. We conclude this introduction by providing a brief synopsis of each paper and highlighting the significance of the debates for critical policy studies.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
International Political Science Review, 2020
What is the state of deliberative democracy in the age of serial crisis? This survey article prov... more What is the state of deliberative democracy in the age of serial crisis? This survey article provides a descriptive and reflective assessment of recent developments in the field in the light of a political context in which there is growing incivility, political polarization, normalization of disinformation and the growing appeal of finding simplistic solutions to complex problems. We describe deliberative democracy as a field of research that has evolved to become (a) assertive in practice, (b) precise in theory, (c) global in reach and (d) ambitious in empirical research. For each of these facets of deliberative democracy, we reflect on the extent to which the field has responded to conceptual, empirical and political challenges, and identify its shortcomings, which warrant further attention. We conclude by drawing attention to research imperatives that the field needs to address to remain relevant in a highly unequal, climate-challenged and increasingly fragile global public sphere.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Transforming Government: People, Processes and Policy, 2020
Purpose-The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how a systemic view of democracy can provide ... more Purpose-The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how a systemic view of democracy can provide insights into the myriad ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic affects democracies worldwide. This enables the authors to offer practical suggestions for strengthening democracy through meaningful participation in the spaces where deficits are most apparent. Design/methodology/approach-The authors use the systems approach that has emerged from the deliberative and participatory democracy literature in recent years to map out the impacts of COVID-19. In this paper, the authors set out this approach as an agenda for future, more comprehensive research. Findings-The authors' preliminary overview suggests that democratic spaces are reconfigured during COVID-19, with participatory spaces shrinking, overlapping and invading each other. Based on the systemic overview, the authors suggest participatory interventions to address particular points of weakness such as accountability. Originality/value-Taking a systemic approach to analysing COVID-19's impacts on democracy enables the authors to understand the pressure points where democratic values and participation are under strain and where citizens' participation is essential not only for strengthening democracy but also addressing the public health challenge of COVID-19.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
This article argues that deliberation provides a suitable ll1ethod for understanding what the pub... more This article argues that deliberation provides a suitable ll1ethod for understanding what the public ideally wants when it C0111es to decision 1naking. Qlnethodology provides the basis for an ideal approach for understanding what is happening during deliberation andfor developing a deeper understanding of the choices being 1nade. The approach reported in this article involves using Q sorting in conjunction with a survey of policy preferences, both ad111inistered before and after deliberation. The focus is a deliberative process conductedto decide thefllture ofthe ageing Frelnantle Bridge, "'here the issue involved conflicting vaIlles. The Q analysis revealed three 111ain positions (factors) in relation to the issue, each tending to correspond to different kinds ofoptions for replacing the bridge. Overalt deliberation resliited in a l110ve awayfro 111 concern about the heritage value ofthe old bridge and toward a safety-orientedposition. There was also a corresponding change...
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Democratic Theory, 2020
As countries around the world went into lockdown, we turned to 32 leading scholars working on dif... more As countries around the world went into lockdown, we turned to 32 leading scholars working on different aspects of democracy and asked them what they think about how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted democracy. In this article, we synthesize the reflections of these scholars and present five key insights about the prospects and challenges of enacting democracy both during and after the pandemic: (1) COVID-19 has had corrosive effects on already endangered democratic institutions, (2) COVID-19 has revealed alternative possibilities for democratic politics in the state of emergency, (3) COVID-19 has amplified the inequalities and injustices within democracies, (4) COVID-19 has demonstrated the need for institutional infrastructure for prolonged solidarity, and (5) COVID-19 has highlighted the predominance of the nation-state and its limitations. Collectively, these insights open up important normative and practical questions about what democracy should look like in the face of an emergency and what we might expect it to achieve under such circumstances.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
As countries around the world went into lockdown, we turned to 32 leading scholars working on dif... more As countries around the world went into lockdown, we turned to 32 leading scholars working on different aspects of democracy and asked them what they think about how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted democracy. In this article, we synthesize the reflections of these scholars and present five key insights about the prospects and challenges of enacting democracy both during and after the pandemic: (1) COVID-19 has had corrosive effects on already endangered democratic institutions, (2) COVID-19 has revealed alternative possibilities for democratic politics in the state of emergency, (3) COVID-19 has amplified the inequalities and injustices within democracies, (4) COVID-19 has demonstrated the need for institutional infrastructure for prolonged solidarity, and (5) COVID-19 has highlighted the predominance of the nation-state and its limitations. Collectively, these insights open up important normative and practical questions about what democracy should look like in the face of an emergency and what we might expect it to achieve under such circumstances.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
What is the state of deliberative democracy in the age of serial crisis? This survey article prov... more What is the state of deliberative democracy in the age of serial crisis? This survey article provides a descriptive and reflective assessment of recent developments in the field, in light of a political context where there is growing incivility, political polarisation, normalisation of disinformation, and growing appeal of simplistic solutions to complex problems. We describe deliberative democracy as a field of research that has evolved to become (1) assertive in practice, (2) precise in theory, (3) global in reach, and (4) ambitious in empirical research. In each of these facets of deliberative democracy, we reflect on the extent to which the field has responded to conceptual, empirical and political challenges, and identify the field's shortcomings that warrant further attention. We conclude by drawing attention to research imperatives that the field needs to address to remain relevant in a highly unequal, climate-challenged, and increasingly fragile global public sphere.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Policy Sciences, 2019
Listening is an important feature of policy making and democratic politics. Yet in an era of incr... more Listening is an important feature of policy making and democratic politics. Yet in an era of increased polarisation the willingness and capacity of citizens to listen to each other, especially those they disagree with, is under strain. Drawing insights from a divisive community conflict over proposed coal seam gas development in regional Australia, this article examines how citizens listen to each other in a polarised controversy. The analysis identifies four different listening practices that citizens enact in a polarised public sphere, including (1) enclave listening between like-minded citizens; (2) alliance listening across different enclaves; (3) adversarial listening between citizens on opposing sides of the debate to monitor opponents; and (4) transformative listening where citizens listen selectively to other community members with the intention of changing their views. The article argues that all four listening practices fulfil important democratic functions in polarised debates such as enhancing the connective, reflective and communicative capacity of the public sphere. Notwithstanding these democratic contributions, under polarised conditions participatory interventions may be required to enhance the prospects of listening across difference.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
In many countries, the expansion of unconventional gas exploration and development has been met w... more In many countries, the expansion of unconventional gas exploration and development has been met with grassroots resistance; the scale and depth of which has surprised even movement organisers. An often-remarked feature of the movement's success is the teaming up of farmers and environmental organisers, historically at odds with one another on other environmental issues. This paper explores the role of emotions in building alliances, and mobilising opponents of coal seam gas (CSG) in a particular rural setting in Australia. Drawing on interviews with anti-CSG movement participants, the paper argues that emotions help to explain how the movement has mobilised and sustained alliances despite differences between movement participants. We find that while anger plays a central role in mobilising various anti-CSG actors, it is the combination of anger with joy which helps to sustain the anti-CSG movement in regional Australia. Our analysis reveals three key sites (individuals, within groups, and the public arena) where these emotions are expressed and negotiated, and emphasises the influence of the rural context in this process.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
This article introduces and develops the concept of 'communicative plenty' to capture the implica... more This article introduces and develops the concept of 'communicative plenty' to capture the implications of the increasing volume of communication, both online and face-to-face, in contemporary democracies. Drawing on recent systems thinking in deliberative democracy, the article argues that communicative plenty can offer a viable context for large scale public deliberation provided that: i) the spaces for voice and expression are accompanied by sufficient spaces of reflection and listening; and that ii) collective decisions involve sequencing of first expression, then listening, and then reflection. To substantiate this proposal, two cases where conventional democratic practices were modified either formally or informally to promote greater listening and reflection are subjected to close empirical analysis. The analysis reveals that designing spaces of reflection and listening is a practical means to enhance public deliberation and so democracy, particularly in contexts vulnerable to an overload of expression and the democratic pathologies of communicative plenty.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Journal of Peacebuilding& Development, 2017
This paper seeks to critically assess the contemporary approaches to radicalisation and violent e... more This paper seeks to critically assess the contemporary approaches to radicalisation and violent extremism in culturally diverse societies, and suggests an alternative approach drawing on the insights provided by two streams of contemporary democratic theory: deliberative democracy and agonistic pluralism. This approach puts the inevitability of conflict rather than the goal of consensus at the heart of democratic communication and offers a constructive way of dealing with such conflict in the face of deep disagreements. The paper focuses particularly on the example of Australia as a multicultural society facing the challenge of religious extremism and identifies the conditions under which the deliberative approach can address this form of extremism constructively and effectively.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
We reflect on the development of the field of deliberative democracy by discussing twelve key fin... more We reflect on the development of the field of deliberative democracy by discussing twelve key findings that capture a number of resolved issues in normative theory, conceptual clarification, and associated empirical results. We argue that these findings deserve to be more widely recognized, and viewed as a foundation for future practice and research. We draw on our own research and that of others in the field.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
This article outlines the advantages of a deliberative democratic approach to ‘illiberal cultures... more This article outlines the advantages of a deliberative democratic approach to ‘illiberal cultures’ and polarised debates in contemporary multicultural societies. In doing so, it draws on the insights of agonistic pluralism, and shows that a cross-fertilisation between certain variants of deliberative democracy and agonistic pluralism is both possible and desirable. Focusing particularly on the works of John Dryzek and William Connolly, the article highlights three normative criteria for polities to aspire to, if not fully achieve, to democratise the debates over illiberal cultural practices. These include: i) an expanded notion of inclusion underpinned by the principle of agonistic respect; ii) the presence of spaces that facilitate interaction and contestation among the multiple publics of a culturally contested issue; and iii) the generation of concrete outcomes based on discursive contestation among multiple publics. To illustrate how approximation to these criteria might look in practice, the article focuses on the example of the honour-killing debate in Britain.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The recent shift towards a deliberative systems approach suggests understanding public deliberati... more The recent shift towards a deliberative systems approach suggests understanding public deliberation as a communicative activity occurring in a diversity of spaces. While theoretically attractive, the deliberative systems approach raises a number of methodological questions for empirical social scientists. For example, how to identify multiple communicative sites within a deliberative system, how to study connections between different sites, and how to assess the impact of the broader context on deliberative forums and systems? Drawing on multiple case studies, this article argues that interpretive research methods are well suited to studying the ambiguities, dynamics and politics of complex deliberative systems.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
This editorial introduction presents an overview of the themes explored in the symposium on ‘Deli... more This editorial introduction presents an overview of the themes explored in the symposium on ‘Deliberative Systems in Theory and Practice’. The concept of ‘deliberative system’ has gained renewed attention among deliberative democrats. A systemic approach to deliberative democracy opens up a new way of thinking about public deliberation. However, as the key protagonists responsible for the systemic resurgence acknowledge, the framework requires greater theoretical critical scrutiny and empirical investigation. The symposium will contribute to this endeavor by bringing together cutting edge research on the theory and practice of deliberative systems. This introduction offers a brief outline and review of the existing systemic approaches to deliberation, articulating the overlaps and differences and reflecting on the prospects and problems of each. In doing so, we take a generational approach that delineates the development of deliberative democracy into three generations, and argue that the focus on deliberative systems has implications that are so significant for the examination of theory and practice that it heralds a fourth generation for deliberative democracy. We conclude this introduction by providing a brief synopsis of each paper and highlighting the significance of the debates for critical policy studies.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Decades of contention regarding Tasmania's forests have been accompanied by several attempts for ... more Decades of contention regarding Tasmania's forests have been accompanied by several attempts for peace. Most recently the ‘forest peace process’ culminated in the 2012 Tasmanian Forest Agreement (TFA). We evaluate the peace process that led to the TFA, and its subsequent dismantling, from the perspective of deliberative democracy, which promises to achieve democratically legitimate outcomes in the toughest conflicts. Using normative criteria to evaluate the deliberative democratic quality of the process, our analysis shows that trades-offs were needed, and not all normative criteria could be achieved equally and simultaneously. Despite its shortcomings, and short-lived life, the peace process illustrates the possibility of achieving meta-consensus in deep value conflicts, and the crucial role of this consensus for sustaining deliberation.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Books by Selen AYIRTMAN ERCAN
Journal Articles by Selen AYIRTMAN ERCAN
The chapter argues for the ongoing importance and contribution of qualitative methods for generating data and analysis in political science. It provides a selective overview of methods used to analyse qualitatively generated data. We also argue that the collection of data and subsequent analysis in qualitative methods is a dynamic field in political science. We highlight several new and emerging qualitative research strategies that have been adopted in our field in recent years, partly as a way of capturing recent developments and changes in contemporary practices of politics itself. These include changes such as the rise of digital technologies which have significantly shaped the way politics is enacted and the rising awareness about the politics of knowledge production in our field. We conclude by reflecting on the bright future of qualitative methods in political science research.
The report, Building Democratic Resilience offers a framework for examining and improving the public sphere responses to violent extremism. It develops the concept of ‘democratic resilience’ drawing on the theory of deliberative democracy, and empirical research on countering violent extremism (CVE) in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. It explains how ‘democratic resilience’ differs from and supplements ‘community resilience’, which is the current resilience framework used by the NSW Government. The report offers key insights for academics, public servants, policy makers and the journalists working to develop strategies for tackling violent extremism.