INSPIRE - Intersectional Spaces of Participation: Inclusive, Resilient, Embedded

协商民主和协商民主（PDD）进程一方面因其通过深化公众参与解决政治不信任和两极分化的潜力而受到赞扬。另一方面，它们往往被指责为是对根深蒂固的问题的表面解决办法，继续排斥已经丧失权力的群体（沿着社会经济、性别、种族、身体和精神能力线）。INSPIRE旨在通过以下参与性空间促进跨部门平等来解决这些指控和失败：包容性，从边缘化群体的需求和资产开始;适应政府变革，在现有基层工作的基础上发展，以支持社区复原力;嵌入更广泛的公共领域，与决策机构建立富有成效的关系（Bussu等人，2022 a; Escobar 2022）。我们采用了三个关键思想：参与的政治经济学，共同设计和装配理论。我们强调影响人们参与能力的社会经济因素，或参与的政治经济学。我们使用一系列基于艺术的、数字化的和创造性的方法，与参与者共同设计包容性的参与空间，超越以谈话为中心的审议，这可能会加剧现有的不平等。为了分析和促进项目设计司内部的交叉平等，我们需要克服线性和过于简单化，这种线性和过于简单化有时会妨碍该领域的方法，这种方法往往忽视参与的动态性、复杂性和混乱性。集合的概念有助于我们审视不同的参与性做法如何在地方、国家和跨国各级共存、互动和变化。利用这些理论和分析工具，我们可以更清楚地追踪加剧不平等的进程和权力动态，我们可以通过多种形式和做法加强民主和包容性参与。

Participatory and deliberative democracy (PDD) processes have on the one hand been celebrated for their potential in addressing political distrust and polarisation by deepening public engagement. On the other hand, they are often accused of being cosmetic solutions to deep-seated problems that continue to exclude already disempowered groups (along socioeconomic, gender, racial, physical and mental ability lines). INSPIRE aims to tackle these accusations and failures by fostering intersectional equality, through participatory spaces that are: inclusive and start from the needs and assets of marginalised groups; resilient to changes in government and developing upon existing grassroots work to support community resilience; and embedded within the wider public sphere and in productive relationships with policymaking institutions (Bussu et al 2022a; Escobar 2022). We employ three key ideas: the political economy of participation, co-design, and assemblage theory. We place emphasis on socioeconomic factors that affect people’s capabilities to participate, or the political economy of participation. We use a range of arts-based, digital and creative methods to co-design with participants inclusive participatory spaces that move beyond just talk-centric deliberation, which can exacerbate existing inequalities. To analyse and foster intersectional equality within PDD we need to overcome the linearity and oversimplification that sometimes characterise methodological approaches in the field, which tend to overlook the dynamism, complexity, and messiness of participation. The concept of assemblage helps us look at how different participatory practices coexist, interact and change across local, national and transnational levels. Using these theoretical and analytical tools we can trace more clearly processes and power dynamics that exacerbate inequalities, and we can strengthen democratic and inclusive participation through its many forms and practices.