Deliberation, Citizen Science and Covid‐19
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 10358193 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Harry Pearse (0000-0002-8887-441X, autor correspondente) |
| Ano | 2020 |
| Volume | 91 |
| Fascículo | 3 |
| Páginas | 571-577 |
| Data de publicação | 2020-06-27 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sim |
| Open Access | Sim |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | The Political Quarterly (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 0032-3179 • E-ISSN: 1467-923X |
| Editora | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/1467-923x.12869 |
| PMID | 32836410 |
| OpenAlex | W3037025895 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citações recebidas | 15 |
Rather than aiming to produce more 'rational' or more 'other-regarding' citizen judgements (the outcome of which is uncertain), deliberative democratic exercises should be re-designed to maximise democratic participation. To do this, they must involve citizens and experts, a novel arrangement that will benefit both cohorts. For the former, a more inclusive form of deliberation will offer an opportunity to contribute to political discussion and be listened to by people with political or policy-based authority. For the latter, it will provide a venue through which expertise can be brought to bear on democratic decision making without risk of scapegoating or politicisation. More broadly, deliberation that prioritises dialogue (over, say, opinion change) affirms the principle that political decisions reflect value judgements rather than technically 'right' or technically 'wrong' answers-judgements that are legitimate if arrived at through discussion involving the people due to be affected by the resultant policy. This article sets out the advantages of this form of deliberation-which bears some similarity to certain types of citizen science-in the context of the UK government's responses to Covid-19; both the confused decision making evident to date, and the forthcoming re-opening phases that will prioritise or advantage some constituencies over others
Context (archaeology · Deliberation · Deliberative democracy · Democracy · Government (linguistics · Law and economics · Political science · Politics · Public relations · Scapegoating · Sociology · Value (mathematics · Computer Science · COVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing · COVID-19 epidemiological studies · Law · Public Administration · Zoonotic diseases and public health
Politics of Expertise and Blame during Covid-19 Quarantine in Chile
Qualitative comparative analysis of policies implemented by 26 European countries during the 2020 great lockdown
The Covid-19 Crisis and the Case for Online GeoParticipation in Spatial Planning
Introducing the Journal of Deliberative Democracy
Community perceptions of citizen science approach in pandemic preparedness and response in South and Southeast Asian countries
Citizen's preferences for urban planning priorities
Communicating Solidarity? Public Responses to UK Government Communication of Covid-19
Understanding the social–ecological systems of non-state seafood sustainability scheme in the blue economy
Deliberation under the circumstances of acute crises
Covid and Climate
The challenges of providing certainty in the face of wicked problems
Does public justification face an ‘expert problem’? Some thoughts in light of the Covid-19 pandemic
Advancing Robust Governance in Turbulent Times
Citizen Observations as Legal Obligations
Deliberación pública en el marco de la respuesta a la pandemia por Covid-19
| Obras citantes distintas | 15 |
|---|---|
| Citações por ano | 2,5 |
| Intervalo de citações | 2020 - 2025 (6) |
| Velocidade de citação | recent |
| Altamente citado | Não |
| Tipos de citação | Neutras: 15 |