1. dialogue & deliberation Oliver Escobar University of Edinburgh & What Works Scotland St Andrews, 21 st March 2015

2. Outline Context: study /practice of participatory & deliberative democracy, governance and co- production Mixing communication studies and political science Conceptual approach to D+D Applications: courses and cases

3. Normative context In participatory democracy… “…citizens govern themselves directly, not necessarily at every level and in every instance, but frequently enough and in particular when basic policies are being decided and when significant power is being deployed. This is carried out through institutions designed to facilitate ongoing civic participation in agenda-setting, deliberation, legislation, and policy implementation…” Benjamin R. Barber, Strong democracy, 1984

4. Society as a web of communication patterns Different patterns of communication create different interpersonal contexts Communication is not only instrumental, but also consequential: Importance of what gets done (results, outputs) but also what gets made (relationships, contexts) and how it gets made (through what communication patterns; with what consequences)

5. Communication patterns “emergent functions that, once developed, maintain their boundaries and resist change by actively attracting episodes that share their central characteristics and repelling those that differ or would change them” (Pearce 2007:158) A facilitator fosters desirable patterns AND detects and alters undesirable patterns

6.  Exchanging monologues  Pre-packaged arguments  Dominant voices  Posturing  Specialised jargon  Avoidance  Polarisation and oversimplification  Confrontational exchanges Communication patterns in public discourse: common rituals + pitfalls

7. Contrasting approaches to interpersonal communication DebateDialogueDeliberation Seeks to promote opinions and gain majority support Seeks to build understanding and relationships Seeks common ground in order to solve problems Participants argue, express, persuade and compete Participants listen, exchange, reach across, reflect Participants frame and weigh options, and make choices Outcome: win/lose Outcome: no decision Outcome: win/win

8. Debate Dominant pattern: ADVOCACY Confrontational forms of communication Certainty Professional expertise as superior knowledge Outcome orientated Communication as message-transmission Dialogue Dominant pattern: INQUIRY Collaborative forms of communication Curiosity / Openness Multiple forms of knowledge (e.g. local, experiential) Process orientated Communication as co- creation of meaning and relationships Communication / contrasting ideal types

9. Dialogue (Escobar 2011) A form of non-polarised discourse that focuses on building understanding and relationships Creation of safe spaces Suspension of assumptions and automatic response (assimilation/opposition) Finding common ground / exploring differences Co-creation of shared meanings and language Collaborative inquiry Storytelling Understanding the contribution of emotions

10. Deliberation Making informed and reasoned decisions Seeking agreement or consensus Re-examining and (perhaps) changing preferences Giving (and taking) public reasons Mapping and evaluating alternatives Information, evidence

11. Why combine dialogue and deliberation? Some critiques of deliberation: Internal exclusion (Young 2001): emphasis on reasoned/articulated exchanges privileges certain participants and excludes other forms of expression (eg, testimony, storytelling) Often dominated by ‘debate’ – advocacy dynamics. Risk of not exploring issues and perspectives in depth Overly ‘rational’: No room for emotions When designing participatory processes and forums, a dialogue phase before the deliberative phase can help to address these weaknesses (see Escobar 2011 Chapter 6)

12. In practice the challenge is to facilitate communication dynamics that balance advocacy and inquiry

13. Dialogue and Deliberation

14. PIN diagram (Andrew Acland) Positions Interest & values Needs & fears Win-Win Win-Lose visibility line

15. applications courses and cases

16. Beacons for Public Engagement – funded by the UK funding councils, Research Councils UK and the Wellcome Trust Embedding a culture of public engagement in Higher Education Institutions (HEI’s). Edinburgh Beltane Beacon North-East Manchester Wales Beacon CUE East UCL The National Coordinating Centre

18. . D+D course with researchers, academics, public engagement practitioners, science communicators, knowledge brokers, policy workers, community activists, scientists… Pilot: 2009 Current programme delivered 20 times since 2010 Over 250 participants + MSc module version

19. Brain Imaging Deliberative Dialogue 2010

20. Deliberative workshops - COSLA Commission on Strengthening Local Democracy 2014: -Community Councils -Third Sector -Faith Groups

21. Deliberative Dialogue process with Third Sector Interfaces / VAS 2015

22. Citizens’ Juries on wind farm developme nt 2014- 2015

23. dialogue and deliberation seek to disrupt communication patterns that 1) perpetuate power inequalities 2) and prevent public participation in democracy from becoming meaningful and consequential A concluding note on ‘creating artificial conversations’

24. Thank you! to get in touch: oliver.escobar@ed.ac.uk @OliverEscobar