Uncertainty and Participatory Democracy
Uncertainty and Participatory Democracy
复制标题
不确定性和参与性民主
DOI：
10.1177/096327190301200204
复制
发表时间：
2003
影响因子：
2.2
通讯作者：
L. Pellizzoni
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
L. Pellizzoni
本文讨论了彻底的不确定性对参与式民主的一些影响，更准确地说是对参与式技术评估（PTA）的影响。讨论了 PTA 的两种主要形式。一是旨在让普通公民参与并突出民意。另一个是针对利益相关者团体和组织，不仅涉及利益调解，还包括他们对问题的见解。极端的不确定性使许多环境和技术问题变得“棘手”，并使传统和新的政策制定方法受到质疑。从新科学、协商民主和网络治理的角度探讨其后果。彻底的不确定性要求重新思考公共审议的目标，并重新解释以观点为导向的 PTA 和以立场为导向的 PTA 之间的分歧。寻求被理解为共同原则观点的公众意见可能会产生误导，就像以通常的方式思考利益相关者参与安排一样。当事实和价值观重叠且存在深刻争议时，相互理解的唯一机会可能是根据不同的立场见解寻找实用的“本地”答案。此外，彻底的不确定性也会影响利益的决定和追求，并可能增加联合、包容性、非战略性问题定义和解决方案的机会。这种公共协商的愿景与网络治理的理念是一致的。然而，碎片化会影响参与政策的有效性和合法性。正如许多人所暗示的那样，试图从顶部解决碎片化问题不太可能成功。一个更有前途的努力是培育协商性环境，虽然定位在“本地”层面并且常常是偶然的网络和共性，但开放地包括“他者”——其他背景、其他问题定义、其他关注点。
The article deals with some implications of radical uncertainty for participatory democracy, and more precisely for Participatory Technology Assessment (PTA). Two main forms of PTA are discussed. One is aimed at involving lay citizens and highlighting public opinion. The other is addressed to stakeholder groups and organisations, not only in terms of interest mediation but also of inclusion of their insight into a problem. Radical uncertainty makes ‘intractable’ many environmental and technological issues and brings into question traditional and new approaches to policy-making. Its consequences are explored from the viewpoint of new science, deliberative democracy, and network governance. Radical uncertainty calls for a rethinking of the aims of public deliberation, and a reinterpretation of the divide between opinion- and position-oriented PTA. To look for a public opinion, understood as a shared principled view, can prove misleading, as can thinking of stakeholder participatory arrangements in the usual way. When facts and values overlap, and are deeply controversial, the only opportunity for mutual understanding may be to look for practical, ‘local’ answers, based on different positional insights. Moreover, radical uncertainty also affects interest determination and pursuit, and may enhance the opportunity of joint, inclusive, non-strategic issue definition and solution-devising. This vision of public deliberation is consistent with the idea of network governance. However, fragmentation can affect the effectiveness and legitimacy of participatory policies. Trying to handle fragmentation from the top, as many suggest, is unlikely to be successful. A more promising endeavour is to foster deliberative settings which, although positioned at the level of ‘local’ and often contingent networks and commonalities, are open to include ‘Otherness’ – other contexts, other problem definitions, other concerns.