|
Conference Luigi Bobbio, University of Turim June 8th, 2010, 15:00, CES Seminar Room, Coimbra Commentary: Fernando Ruivo Free entrance – Participants will receive a certificate of participation Most deliberative democrats suggest that deliberation should be carried out in protected spaces among randomly selected citizens in order to assure a cold and reasoned approach to the matter and to guarantee that participants are representative of the larger community. On the contrary the model of the French débat public on large infrastructures is based upon open meetings and mass participation. Attendance is unbalanced. Hot confrontation tends to prevail over deliberation. Yet the device seems to be able to raise all pertinent arguments about the infrastructure (“faire le tour des arguments”) and to allow some discussion on the merit. The dilemma between hot and cold deliberation will be tackled through the analysis of the first case of «French style» public debate that was held in Italy on the project of a motorway bypass in Genoa. I will consider the features of the device on the basis of this experience: the conflict that caused the debate, the independence of the commission that had the task to run it, the organization of the process and the transparency of information, the mobilization of the local communities, the imbalance in citizens’ participation, the dilemma between the «how» and the «if» of the project, and between deliberation and confrontation, and, finally, the result of the debate. Lastly I will be discussing the pros and the cons of this mechanism in relation to mechanisms inspired to cold deliberation. Bobbio, L. (2010), “Il dibattito pubblico sulle grandi opere. Il caso dell’autostrada di Genova”, Rivista Italiana di Politiche Pubbliche, n.1. Fung, A. (2003), “Survey article: Recipes for public spheres: Eight institutional design choices and their consequences”, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 11, pp. 338-367. Fourniau, J.-M. (2001), “Information, Access to Decision-making and Public Debate in France: the Growing Demand for Deliberative Democracy”, Science and Public Policy, 28, 6, pp. 441-445. Hendriks, C. M. - Dryzek, J. S., Hunold, Ch. (2007), “Turning Up the Heat: Partisanship in Deliberative Innovation”, Political Studies, 55, pp. 362–383 > download > download |