当前位置: X-MOL 学术Policy Sciences › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Expert hearings in mini-publics: How does the field of expertise influence deliberation and its outcomes?
Policy Sciences ( IF 5.121 ) Pub Date : 2022-08-06 , DOI: 10.1007/s11077-022-09465-3
Mikko Leino 1 , Katariina Kulha 1 , Maija Setälä 1 , Juha Ylisalo 1
Affiliation  

One of key goals of deliberative mini-publics is to counteract expert domination in policymaking. Mini-publics can be expected to democratize expertise by providing citizens with good opportunities for weighing expert information. Yet, there are concerns about undue influence of experts even within mini-publics. We test these expectations by analysing data from an online mini-public organized in Finland in March 2021. The topic of deliberation was measures taken to contain the COVID-19 pandemic. We examine whether experts’ field of specialization and the order of expert hearings had an impact on how participants’ views developed. We find that neither the field of expertise nor the order of hearings had systematic effects on participants’ perceptions on containment measures. The results suggest that interactive modes of expert hearings in mini-publics seem not to be prone to domination by experts.



中文翻译:

小型公众专家听证会:专业领域如何影响审议及其结果?

协商性小公众的主要目标之一是抵制专家在决策中的统治。可以期望小公众通过为公民提供权衡专家信息的良好机会来使专业知识民主化。然而,即使在小公众中,也有人担心专家的不当影响。我们通过分析 2021 年 3 月在芬兰组织的在线小型公众的数据来测试这些预期。审议的主题是为遏制 COVID-19 大流行而采取的措施。我们研究了专家的专业领域和专家听证会的顺序是否对参与者观点的发展产生了影响。我们发现,专业领域和听证会的顺序都没有对参与者对遏制措施的看法产生系统性影响。

更新日期:2022-08-06
down
wechat
bug