Our network and its members are deepening democracy and addressing diverse issues all around the world.
Although the specific practices and processes used vary between
our members and in different contexts, we are united in that:
select participants to achieve a group that broadly reflects the diverse demographics and perspectives of the community, region, or society in question
participants access to quality, balanced information and a mix of relevant experts
participants deliberate about the issue in question and work through their differences with the help of skilled facilitators
To form a group of people that genuinely reflects the broader population. We don’t want to only hear from the loudest, most active voices, we want to hear from people from all walks of life. The easiest way it to select participants randomly.
By using stratified sampling techniques, we can ensure that participants reflect the demographics of their population, such as gender, ethnicity, age, and income. There is also growing awareness that diverse groups make better decisions.
Yes. When you give a diverse group of people access to quality, balanced information, sufficient time, and skilled facilitators, they can find common ground and make sound recommendations on even the most complex policy issues.
Everyday people in our members’ projects have weighed in intelligently on the financial plans of large cities, the location of a new hospital, and how to deal with nuclear waste.
From the very start of the process, we engage stakeholders and interest groups from all parts of policy issue in question – even those who are in direct opposition. We then invite these diverse stakeholders to vet the materials given to the participants and the experts who will present to participants, until we arrive at a process that everyone agrees is fair and impartial. We also provide skilled, independent facilitators to ensure that participants find their own way.
This has worked even with some of the most polarized policy issues, such as abortion.
Yes. Time and again our processes are well received by the public for two reasons: The process has been shown to be impartial Members of the public can see that those making the recommendation are everyday citizen just like them and have dedicated considerable time deliberating together to reach agreement.
Democracia en Red (democraciaenred.org) designs and implements innovations and digital tools to transparent, facilitate and strengthen democratic participation and to enhance cooperation between different social groups.
Along this path, they created the DemocraciaOS technology (democraciaos.org): a digital platform with five standards to enrich participatory processes between government and citizens.
(Re)founding is a conversation series on the future of democracy, hosted by Tevan Goldberg and Jesse Warren.
It features interviews with members of the Democracy R & D Network as well as local political figures and thinkers in Vermont.
(Re)surgentes involves the integration of four Climate Assemblies – mechanisms of deliberative democracy where local governments integrate under-represented citizens in conditions of climate injustice in public decision-making on climate, in accordance with the principles of deliberative democracy documented by the OECD – in cities of Mexico, Colombia, Brazil and Argentina. The assemblies will deliberate on local advocacy plans, as well as an inter-city pact for a democratic and peaceful resolution of the climate crisis in the cities of Latin America. The project will develop a digital platform for citizen deliberation and an adapted Model for climate assemblies in Latin America.
The Wuppertal suspension railway is well known in Germany. To further improve accessibility, the city considered a cable car that would connect the city centre in the valley with a school and the University Campus on the hillside. The idea was to overcome the demanding topography of the city.
The project was controversial, as the cable car would run over inhabited areas. Therefore, the mayor decided to involve citizens in decision making. Using the method of Planning Cells, 50 randomly-selected residents discussed the issue for four days and provided their recommendations in a citizens’ report.
How would sortition be implemented in a second legislative chamber? What would its powers be, how would participants be selected, and would they be paid? These and a host of other questions are answered in this paper proposing a second sortition chamber for the Scottish Parliament, published by the Sortition Foundation in collaboration with Common Weal Scotland and the newDemocracy Foundation. It gives a clear, succinct answer to the common questions regarding the practical implementation of a sortition chamber.
This research proposes a potential electoral system for the Abkhazia Autonomous Republic as a path toward sustainable conflict transformation.
The proposal includes approaches like combining elections with sortition to accommodate the multiethnic nature of Abkhazia, addressing challenges such as polarization and ethnicity-driven voting patterns. The proposed model is positioned as a crucial step towards the future possibility of peaceful, democratic and inclusive unification of Georgia.
A historic gathering of 500+ American voters who participated in a nonpartisan discussion about the major issues of the 2020 presidential election. The participants—our citizen-delegates—were an accurate, representative sample of the entire American electorate in all its political, cultural, and demographic diversity.
Their views on the issues and the relative merits of the candidates were documented and shared with the public, candidates, and policymakers, giving a clearer, more balanced, and more informed idea of the political landscape heading into the election.
Citizens’ Assembly in the little Sardinian village of Bulzi deliberating on “how to prevent the village from depopulation and emigration and save Bulzi”.
Since 2006, when it was tested for the first time, more than 50 so-called Civic Councils have been established on the local, regional and state level in Vorarlberg.
In 2013, the Vorarlberg state government has anchored the approach of a participatory democracy in its State Constitution and since that time, one to two state-wide Civic Councils are held each year, with the aim to include the population more intensely in major questions of state development.
In 2018, Citizens Juries c.i.c. was commissioned by local health authorities to design and run a Citizens’ Jury to recommend the location of the new community hospital for the Forest of Dean. 18 members of the Citizens’ Jury were recruited from across the Forest of Dean District. It was observed by members of the public, with local TV and newspaper coverage.
The Jury recommended Cinderford as the location of the new hospital. Gloucestershire Care Services NHS Trust Board and NHS Gloucestershire Clinical Commissioning Group Governing Body unanimously decided to back the jury’s recommendation.
The method of Citizen Deliberation Meeting (CDM)is based on the Planning Cell from Germany. Randomly selected people are invited to participate in deliberations on policy issues. After the first CDM in 2006, a number of CDMs were held at the municipal level.
Toyoyama Town is a small town with 15,000 residents that continues to select 2,000 residents for a CDM every year since 2011. As a result, a large number of residents of the town are veteran participants and have organized themselves as Community Development Supporters. Some veteran participants even started to help with future CDMs.
The City of Copenhagen has decided to engage its citizens in a consultation process to obtain knowledge about wishes and needs in relation to car traffic in the Medieval City Center, as well as inputs from citizens on how the urban space could be used if car traffic and parking spaces are reduced.
Citizens, residents, the business sector and other stakeholders were therefore convened for a Citizen’s Assembly.
The Citizens’ Assembly on Social Care was the first citizens’ assembly ever commissioned by the UK Parliament. It brought together 47 randomly-selected citizens from England to give recommendations on how to fund adult social care sustainably in the future.
Through 28 hours of learning, deliberation and decision-making, spread over two weekends, the Assembly Members developed a clear and consistent set of recommendations that heavily influenced the findings of a joint inquiry by two Parliamentary Select Committees.
Proposals of recommendations (appx. $140 million on 102 government businesses divided into four sectors: administrative, welfare, social, economic) were made by 300 citizens and reviewed by ministries. After intensive learning and discussions, the group narrowed down to 39 (appx. $68 million) for final approval by the National Assembly.
By participating directly in budgeting procedures, citizens enhanced transparency and responsibility of the budgeting system while contributing to Deliberative Democracy as well. It was decided it should be repeated every year since then.
The User’s Manual, laying out plans for how the Convention would work in practice. This design has been developed with support from deliberative experts, with input and feedback from politicians, campaign groups, academics and citizens – and is still in consultation phase.
Inspired by the positive experience with the Citizens’ Assembly in Ireland, Mehr Demokratie and the Schöpflin Foundation, together with the independent process support institutes Nexus and IFOK, are organizing a Citizens’ Council for Democracy in 2019.
With this pilot project, which is unique at the federal level, they want to develop proposals to strengthen and further develop Germany’s democracy in close connection with politics. The recommendations of the Citizens’ Council are to be submitted to a Commission of Experts on Democracy and to the Bundestag for consultation.
“The Citizens’ Economic Council was a programme designed to give citizens a say on national economic policy, and influence over the future of the UK economy. It was part of a broader effort to build a stronger economic democracy in the UK through informed engagement and discussion.
The Council itself consisted of 54 citizens and was overseen by an independent advisory group. Participants undertook a journey of economic inquiry to deliberate and innovate on economic policy and regain a sense of control over the economic decisions that affect their lives.”
To conduct the CIR, a panel of randomly-selected and demographically-balanced registered voters are brought together from across the state or region for four consecutive days to thoroughly study and fairly evaluate the ballot measure(s).
The citizen panel hears directly from advocates both for and against the ballot measure, as well as a range of policy experts. On the final day, the panel drafts a one-page Citizens Statement highlighting the most important findings about the ballot measure as a resource for their fellow voters.
Get to know our Living Guidebooks
We created three comprehensive and situationally-relevant living guidebooks on institutionalization, the Global South, and difficult issues
Discover Our Living Guide 2
The living guidebook is an innovative tool designed to foster mutual learning within the Democracy R&D.