Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Framing a Deliberation. Deliberative Democracy and the Challenge of Framing Processes
View through CrossRef
Among both scholars and practioners, the critical importance of framing processes in the realm of deliberative democracy has been neither formally acknowledged nor adequately studied so far. The purpose of this theoretical article is to craft and define the analytical concepts and methodological tools necessary to shed light on this complex relationship. After introducing the notion of ‘deliberative frame’, which is examined across two distinct framing processes – ‘primary’ and ‘derivative’ (or secondary) – this article presents ‘deliberative frame analysis’ (DFA) as a qualitative method which can uncover the ‘meta-frame’ and the specific issue framings (or the deliberative ‘frames’) within a deliberation. This is achieved by examining selected elements both of the organizational context and information materials, and will be illustrated by the example of a famous deliberative poll carried out at European level. Finally, the introduction of authentically competing frames (i.e. ‘counterframes’ and not merely counterarguments) into the deliberative setting, along with the structural possibility for ‘reframing’ in the course of the deliberation, is indicated as a substantive precondition for neutralizing the overall framing effects and thus avoiding a heavily biased deliberation outcome. The article therefore offers a more comprehensive understanding of framing processes as a key challenge for deliberative politics, particularly as regards the legitimacy claims of its various experiments and practices, which are increasingly common in most established democracies.
Title: Framing a Deliberation. Deliberative Democracy and the Challenge of Framing Processes
Description:
Among both scholars and practioners, the critical importance of framing processes in the realm of deliberative democracy has been neither formally acknowledged nor adequately studied so far.
The purpose of this theoretical article is to craft and define the analytical concepts and methodological tools necessary to shed light on this complex relationship.
After introducing the notion of ‘deliberative frame’, which is examined across two distinct framing processes – ‘primary’ and ‘derivative’ (or secondary) – this article presents ‘deliberative frame analysis’ (DFA) as a qualitative method which can uncover the ‘meta-frame’ and the specific issue framings (or the deliberative ‘frames’) within a deliberation.
This is achieved by examining selected elements both of the organizational context and information materials, and will be illustrated by the example of a famous deliberative poll carried out at European level.
Finally, the introduction of authentically competing frames (i.
e.
‘counterframes’ and not merely counterarguments) into the deliberative setting, along with the structural possibility for ‘reframing’ in the course of the deliberation, is indicated as a substantive precondition for neutralizing the overall framing effects and thus avoiding a heavily biased deliberation outcome.
The article therefore offers a more comprehensive understanding of framing processes as a key challenge for deliberative politics, particularly as regards the legitimacy claims of its various experiments and practices, which are increasingly common in most established democracies.
Related Results
Deliberative Democracy Without Deliberation
Deliberative Democracy Without Deliberation
Proponents and critics of deliberative democracy alike often interpret the theory as revolving around the implementation of a practice of deliberation as modelled on the idealistic...
Progressivism as Communitarian Democracy
Progressivism as Communitarian Democracy
This article formulates a progressive conception of communitarian democracy which rests upon the distinction between deliberative and dedicated conceptions of community. Deliberati...
The Discursive Functions of Deliberative Voting
The Discursive Functions of Deliberative Voting
This study aims to build on Moore and O'Doherty's (2014) proposal to integrate deliberative voting procedures into deliberative processes. Deliberative voting has been proposed to ...
Look Who's Talking: Deliberation and Social Influence
Look Who's Talking: Deliberation and Social Influence
Deliberative democracy has become increasingly popular in recent years, both in theory and in practice. In theory, many argue that deliberation is vital to our democracy (Fishkin, ...
Integrative Democracy: Mary Parker Follett’s Integration and Deliberative Democracy
Integrative Democracy: Mary Parker Follett’s Integration and Deliberative Democracy
In recent years there has been a resurgence of interest in the work of Mary Parker Follett by scholars of management and public administration, but the acute relevance of Follett’s...
Failures of Partisan Deliberation
Failures of Partisan Deliberation
AbstractAlthough the picture of intra-party deliberation that emerges in Chapters 4 and 5 is generally very positive, it is important to note that some of the party groups that wer...
With Habermas against Habermas. Deliberation without Consensus
With Habermas against Habermas. Deliberation without Consensus
Habermas’s conception of deliberative democracy combines two concepts—deliberation and consensus—which, I argue, draw his theory in two opposite directions. While deliberation and ...

