Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T04:04:25.970Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Guest Editors’ Introduction: The Challenges and Prospects of Deliberative Democracy for Corporate Sustainability and Responsibility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2023

Dirk Ulrich Gilbert ,
Andreas Rasche ,
Maximilian J. L. Schormair  and
Abraham Singer
Dirk Ulrich Gilbert
Affiliation:
University of Hamburg
Andreas Rasche
Affiliation:
Copenhagen Business School
Maximilian J. L. Schormair
Affiliation:
Trinity College Dublin
Abraham Singer
Affiliation:
Loyola University Chicago
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This introduction argues that the use of the concept of deliberative democracy in corporate social responsibility (CSR) research needs to be theoretically extended. We review three developments that have recently occurred in deliberative democracy theory within political science and philosophy: 1) the conceptualization of deliberative systems (macro level), 2) the considerations of mini-publics (micro level), and 3) the role of online deliberation. We discuss the challenges and prospects that incorporating these three developments into future CSR-related research creates. We thereby also introduce the articles in this special issue and show how they connect to each of the three developments. On the basis of this discussion, we outline the contours for a more general program of distributed deliberative CSR that enables CSR scholars to incorporate an updated understanding of deliberative democracy theory into their future work.

Keywords

deliberationdeliberative democracycorporate social responsibility (CSR)Habermaspolitical corporate social responsibility (PCSR)
Type
Special Section
Information
Business Ethics Quarterly , Volume 33 , Issue 1 , January 2023 , pp. 1 - 25
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Society for Business Ethics

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Arenas, D., Albareda, L., & Goodman, J. 2020. Contestation in multi-stakeholder initiatives: Enhancing the democratic quality of transnational governance. Business Ethics Quarterly, 30(2): 169–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bächtiger, A., Dryzek, J. S., Mansbridge, J., & Warren, M. (Eds.). 2018. The Oxford handbook of deliberative democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bächtiger, A., & Parkinson, J. 2019. Mapping and measuring deliberation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baek, Y. M., Wojcieszak, M., & Delli Carpini, M. X. 2011. Online versus face-to-face deliberation: Who? Why? What? With what effects? New Media and Society, 14(3): 363–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bago, B., Rand, D. G., & Pennycook, G. 2020. Fake news, fast and slow: Deliberation reduces belief in false (but not true) news headlines. Journal of Experimental Psychology, General, 149(8): 1608–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Banerjee, S. B. 2014. A critical perspective on corporate social responsibility: Towards a global governance framework. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 10(1/2): 84–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banerjee, S. B. 2022. Decolonizing deliberative democracy: Perspectives from below. Journal of Business Ethics, 181(2): 283–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Battilana, J., Fuerstein, M., & Lee, M. 2018. New prospects for organizational democracy? How the joint pursuit of social and financial goals challenges traditional organizational designs. In Rangan, S. (Ed.), Capitalism beyond mutuality? Perspectives integrating philosophy and social science (1st ed.): 256–88. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Battilana, J., & Lee, M. 2014. Advancing research on hybrid organizing—insights from the study of social enterprises. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1): 397–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beccarini, I., Beunza, D., Ferraro, F., & Hoepner, A. G. F. 2023. The contingent role of conflict: Deliberative interaction and disagreement in shareholder engagement. Business Ethics Quarterly, 33(1): 26–66.Google Scholar
Bennett, M. 2022. Managerial discretion, market failure and democracy. Journal of Business Ethics. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-022-05152-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besharov, M. L., & Smith, W. K. 2014. Multiple institutional logics in organizations: Explaining their varied nature and implications. Academy of Management Review, 39(3): 364–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brand, T., Blok, V., & Verweij, M. 2020. Stakeholder dialogue as agonistic deliberation: Exploring the role of conflict and self-interest in business–NGO interaction. Business Ethics Quarterly, 30(1): 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J., & Dillard, J. 2015. Dialogic accountings for stakeholders: On opening up and closing down participatory governance. Journal of Management Studies, 52(7): 961–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J., & Forster, W. 2013. CSR and stakeholder theory: A tale of Adam Smith. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(2): 301–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buhmann, A., & Fieseler, C. 2023. Deep learning meets deep democracy: Deliberative governance and responsible innovation in artificial intelligence. Business Ethics Quarterly, 33(1): 146–79.Google Scholar
Button, M., & Mattson, K. 1999. Deliberative democracy in practice: Challenges and prospects for civic deliberation. Polity, 31(4): 609–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cappella, J. N., Price, V., & Nir, L. 2002. Argument repertoire as a reliable and valid measure of opinion quality: Electronic dialogue during campaign 2000. Political Communication, 19(1): 73–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castellas, E. I., Stubbs, W., & Ambrosini, V. 2019. Responding to value pluralism in hybrid organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 159(3): 635–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castelló, I., & Lopez-Berzosa, D. 2023. Affects in online stakeholder engagement: A dissensus perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly, 33(1): 180–215.Google Scholar
Chambers, S. 2009. Rhetoric and the public sphere: Has deliberative democracy abandoned mass democracy? Political Theory, 37(3): 323–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, L. T., Kärreman, D., & Rasche, A. 2019. Bullshit and organization studies. Organization Studies, 40(10): 1587–1600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curato, N., Dryzek, J. S., Ercan, S. A., Hendriks, C. M., & Niemeyer, S. 2017. Twelve key findings in deliberative democracy research. Daedalus, 146(3): 28–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, C. 2015. Agonistic pluralism and stakeholder engagement. Business Ethics Quarterly, 25(1): 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, C. E. 2022. Varieties of deliberation: Framing plurality in political CSR. Business Ethics Quarterly, 32(3): 374–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Bakker, F. G. A., Rasche, A., & Ponte, S. 2019. Multi-stakeholder initiatives on sustainability: A cross-disciplinary review and research agenda for business ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 29(3): 343–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Brasi, L., & Gutierrez, C. 2020. Anonymity and asynchronicity as key design dimensions for the reciprocity of online democratic deliberation. International Journal of Applied Philosophy, 34(2): 183–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delli Carpini, M. X., Cook, F. L., & Jacobs, L. R. 2004. Public deliberations, discursive participation and citizen engagement: A review of the empirical literature. Annual Review of Political Science, 7(1): 315–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devaney, L., Torney, D., Brereton, P., & Coleman, M. 2020. Ireland’s citizens’ assembly on climate change: Lessons for deliberative public engagement and communication. Environmental Communication, 14(2): 141–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dryzek, J. S., Bächtiger, A., Chambers, S., Cohen, J., Druckman, J. N., Felicetti, A., Fishkin, J. S., Farrell, D. M., Fung, A., Gutmann, A., Landemore, H., Mansbridge, J., Marien, S., Neblo, M. A., Niemeyer, S., Setälä, M., Slothuus, R., Suiter, J., Thompson, D., & Warren, M. E. 2019. The crisis of democracy and the science of deliberation. Science, 363(6432): 1144–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ehrnström-Fuentes, M. 2016. Delinking legitimacies: A pluriversal perspective on political CSR. Journal of Management Studies, 53(3): 433–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elstub, S., Ercan, S., & Mendonça, R. F. 2016. Editorial introduction: The fourth generation of deliberative democracy. Critical Policy Studies, 10(2): 139–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esau, K., Friess, D., & Eilders, C. 2017. Design matters! An empirical analysis of online deliberation on different news platforms. Policy and Internet, 9(3): 321–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forestal, J. 2022. Designing for democracy: How to build community in digital environments. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friess, D., & Eilders, C. 2015. A systematic review of online deliberation research. Policy and Internet, 7(3): 319–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frynas, J. G., & Stephens, S. 2015. Political corporate social responsibility: Reviewing theories and setting new agendas. International Journal of Management Reviews, 17(4): 483–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fung, A. 2007. Minipublics: Deliberative designs and their consequences. In Rosenberg, S. W. (Ed.), Deliberation, participation and democracy: 159–83. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geuss, R. 2008. Philosophy and real politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, D. U., & Behnam, M. 2009. Advancing integrative social contracts theory: A Habermasian perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(2): 215–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, D. U., & Rasche, A. 2007. Discourse ethics and social accountability: The ethics of SA 8000. Business Ethics Quarterly, 17(2): 187–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, D. U., & Rasche, A. 2008. Opportunities and problems of standardized ethics initiatives—a stakeholder theory perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(3): 755–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, D. U., Rasche, A., & Waddock, S. 2011. Accountability in a global economy: The emergence of international accountability standards. Business Ethics Quarterly, 21(1): 23–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodin, R. E., & Dryzek, J. S. 2006. Deliberative impacts: The macro-political uptake of mini-publics. Politics and Society, 34(2): 219–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, J., & Arenas, D. 2015. Engaging ethically: A discourse ethics perspective on social shareholder engagement. Business Ethics Quarterly, 25(2): 163–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, J. 1984. The theory of communicative action. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1987. The theory of communicative action. Vol. 2, Lifeworld and system: A critique of functionalist reason. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1990. Moral consciousness and communicative action. Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1992. Postmetaphysical thinking: Philosophical essays. Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1996. Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy . Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1999. The inclusion of the other: Studies in political theory. Oxford: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 2021. Überlegungen und Hypothesen zu einem erneuten Strukturwandel der politischen Öffentlichkeit. In Seeliger, M. & Sevignani, S. (Eds.), Ein neuer Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit?: 470–500. Baden-Baden, Germany: Nomos.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, J. S., & Freeman, R. E. 2004. Special topic: Democracy in and around organizations. Academy of Management Perspectives, 18(3): 49–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hielscher, S., Beckmann, M., & Pies, I. 2014. Participation versus consent: Should corporations be run according to democratic principles? Business Ethics Quarterly, 24(4): 533–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hussain, W., & Moriarty, J. 2018. Accountable to whom? Rethinking the role of corporations in political CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 149: 519–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janssen, D., & Kies, R. 2005. Online forums and deliberative democracy. Acta Politica, 40(3): 317–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khmara, Y., & Kronenberg, J. 2018. Degrowth in business: An oxymoron or a viable business model for sustainability? Journal of Cleaner Production, 177: 721–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohn, M. 2000. Language, power, and persuasion: Toward a critique of deliberative democracy. Constellations, 7(3): 408–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krüger, A. 2023. Islands of deliberative capacity in an ocean of authoritarian control? The deliberative potential of self-organised teams in firms. Business Ethics Quarterly, 33(1): 67–101.Google Scholar
Kuyper, J. 2015. Democratic deliberation in the modern world: The systemic turn. Critical Review, 27(1): 49–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lafont, C. 2015. Deliberation, participation, and democratic legitimacy: Should deliberative mini-publics shape public policy? Journal of Political Philosophy, 23(1): 40–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lafont, C. 2019. Democracy without shortcuts: A participatory conception of deliberative democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landemore, H., & Ferreras, I. 2015. In defense of workplace democracy: Towards a justification of the firm–state analogy. Political Theory, 44(1): 53–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landemore, H., & Page, S. E. 2014. Deliberation and disagreement: Problem solving, prediction, and positive dissensus. Politics, Philosophy, and Economics, 14(3): 229–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maier, A.-L., & Gilbert, D. U. 2022. Deliberating with the autocrats? A case study on the limitations and potential of political CSR in a non-democratic context. Journal of Business Ethics. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-022-05139-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manosevitch, I. 2014. The design of online deliberation: Implications for practice, theory and democratic citizenship. Journal of Public Deliberation, 10(1): 9.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, J. 2007. “Deliberative democracy” or “democratic deliberation.” In Rosenberg, S. W. (Ed.), Deliberation, participation and democracy: 251–71. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansbridge, J. 2015. A minimalist definition of deliberation. In Heller, P. & Rao, V. (Eds.), Deliberation and development: Rethinking the role of voice and collective action in unequal societies: 27–50. Washington, DC: World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansbridge, J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S., Christiano, T., Fung, A., Parkinson, J., Thompson, D. F., & Warren, M. E. 2012. A systemic approach to deliberative democracy. In Parkinson, J. & Mansbridge, J. J. (Eds.), Deliberative systems: Deliberative democracy at the large scale: 1–26. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Marti, E., & Scherer, A. G 2016. Financial regulation and social welfare: The critical contribution of management theory. Academy of Management Review, 41(2): 298–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mena, S., & Palazzo, G. 2012. Input and output legitimacy of multi-stakeholder initiatives. Business Ethics Quarterly, 22(3): 527–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Min, S.-J. 2007. Online vs. face-to-face deliberation: Effects on civic engagement. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4): 1369–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, R. K., Weaver, G. R., Agle, B. R., Bailey, A. D., & Carlson, J. 2016. Stakeholder agency and social welfare: Pluralism and decision making in the multi-objective corporation. Academy of Management Review, 41(2): 252–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitzinneck, B. C., & Besharov, M. L. 2019. Managing value tensions in collective social entrepreneurship: The role of temporal, structural, and collaborative compromise. Journal of Business Ethics, 159(2): 381–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moog, S., Spicer, A., & Böhm, S. 2015. The politics of multi-stakeholder initiatives: The crisis of the Forest Stewardship Council. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(3): 469–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mouffe, C. 1999. Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism? Social Research, 66(3): 745–58.Google Scholar
MSI Integrity. 2020. Not fit-for-purpose: The grand experiment of multi-stakeholder initiatives in corporate accountability, human rights and global governance. https://www.msi-integrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/MSI_Not_Fit_For_Purpose_FORWEBSITE.FINAL_.pdf.Google Scholar
Nyberg, D. 2021. Corporations, politics, and democracy: Corporate political activities as political corruption. Organization Theory, 2(1): 2631787720982618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen, D., & Smith, G. 2015. Survey article: Deliberation, democracy, and the systemic turn. Journal of Political Philosophy, 23(2): 213–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palazzo, G., & Scherer, A. G. 2006. Corporate legitimacy as deliberation: A communicative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 66(1): 71–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parkinson, J. 2018. Deliberative systems. In Bächtiger, A., Dryzek, J. S., Mansbridge, J., & Warren, M. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of deliberative democracy: 431–46. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Parkinson, J., de Laile, S., & Franco-Guillén, N. 2022. Mapping deliberative systems with big data: The case of the Scottish independence referendum. Political Studies, 70(3): 543–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parkinson, J., & Mansbridge, J. J. (Eds.). 2012. Deliberative systems: Deliberative democracy at the large scale. Theories of Institutional Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patzer, M., Voegtlin, C., & Scherer, A. G. 2018. The normative justification of integrative stakeholder engagement: A Habermasian view on responsible leadership. Business Ethics Quarterly, 28(3): 325–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pek, S., Mena, S., & Lyons, B. 2023. The role of deliberative mini-publics in improving the deliberative capacity of multi-stakeholder initiatives. Business Ethics Quarterly, 33(1): 102–45.Google Scholar
Price, V. 2015. Citizens deliberating online: Theory and some evidence. In Davies, T. & Gangadharan, S. P. (Eds.), Online deliberation: Design, research, and practice: 37–58. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Reinecke, J., & Donaghey, J. 2021. Political CSR at the coalface—the roles and contradictions of multinational corporations in developing workplace dialogue. Journal of Management Studies, 58(2): 457–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinecke, J., & Donaghey, J. 2022. Transnational representation in global labour governance and the politics of input legitimacy. Business Ethics Quarterly, 32(3): 438–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, M., & Smith, A. 2014. Deliberative mini-publics: Involving citizens in the democratic process. In Grönlund, K., Bächtiger, A., & Setälä, M. (Eds.), Deliberative mini-publics: Involving citizens in the democratic process: 9–26. Colchester, UK: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
Sabadoz, C., & Singer, A. 2017. Talk ain’t cheap: Political CSR and the challenges of corporate deliberation. Business Ethics Quarterly, 27(2): 183–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, L. 1997. Against deliberation. Political Theory, 25(3): 347–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schäfer, S., Müller, P., & Ziegele, M. 2022. The double-edged sword of online deliberation: How evidence-based user comments both decrease and increase discussion participation intentions on social media. New Media and Society. DOI: 10.1177/14614448211073059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherer, A. G. 2015. Can hypernorms be justified? Insights from a discourse–ethical perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly, 25(04): 489–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. 2007. Toward a political conception of corporate responsibility: Business and society seen from a Habermasian perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32(4): 1096–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. 2011. The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy. Journal of Management Studies, 48(4): 899–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherer, A. G., Rasche, A., Palazzo, G., & Spicer, A. 2016. Managing for political corporate social responsibility: New challenges and directions for PCSR 2.0. Journal of Management Studies, 53(3): 273–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, A., & Scherer, A. G. 2015. Corporate governance in a risk society. Journal of Business Ethics, 126(2): 309–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schormair, M. J. L., & Gilbert, D. U. 2021. Creating value by sharing values: Managing stakeholder value conflict in the face of pluralism through discursive justification. Business Ethics Quarterly, 31(1): 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seele, P., & Lock, I. 2015. Instrumental and/or deliberative? A typology of CSR communication tools. Journal of Business Ethics, 131(2): 401–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Setälä, M. 2017. Connecting deliberative mini-publics to representative decision making. European Journal of Political Research, 56(4): 846–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Setälä, M., & Smith, G. 2018. Mini-publics and deliberative democracy. In Bächtiger, A., Dryzek, J. S., Mansbridge, J., & Warren, M. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of deliberative democracy: 300–314. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Shortall, R., Itten, A., van der Meer, M., Murukannaia, P., & Jinker, C. 2022. Reason against the machine? Future directions for mass online deliberation. Frontiers in Political Science. DOI: 10.3389/fpos.2022.946589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, A., & Ron, A. 2020. Prioritizing democracy: A commentary on Smith’s presidential address to the Society for Business Ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 30(1): 139–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, A., & Ron, A. 2022. The social subcontract: Business ethics as democratic theory. Political Research Quarterly. DOI: 10.1177/10659129221108353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stansbury, J. 2009. Reasoned moral agreement: Applying discourse ethics within organizations. Business Ethics Quarterly, 19(1): 33–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strandberg, K., & Grönlund, K. 2018. Online deliberation. In Bächtiger, A., Dryzek, J. S., Mansbridge, J., & Warren, M. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of deliberative democracy: 365–77. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Towne, W. B., & Herbsleb, J. D. 2012. Design considerations for online deliberation systems. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 9(1): 97–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulrich, P. 2008. Integrative economic ethics: Foundations of a civilized market economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, M. E. 2017. A problem-based approach to democratic theory. American Political Science Review, 111(1): 39–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, M. E., & Gastil, J. 2015. Can deliberative mini-publics address the cognitive challenges of democratic citizenship? Journal of Politics, 77(2): 562–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, M., & Mansbridge, J. 2013. Deliberative negotiation. In Mansbridge, J. & Martin, C. J. (Eds.), Negotiating agreement in politics: 86–120. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association.Google Scholar
Williams, M. 2000. The uneasy alliance of group representation and deliberative democracy. In Kymlicka, W. & Norman, W. (Eds.), Citizenship in diverse societies: 124–52. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, S., & Street, J. 2007. Democracy, deliberation and design: The case of online discussion forums. New Media and Society, 9(5): 849–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, I. M. 1996. Communication and the other: Beyond deliberative democracy. In Benhabib, S. (Ed.), Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political: 120–35. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, I. M. 2001. Activist challenges to deliberative democracy. Political Theory, 29(5): 670–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar