From consensus to domination: inductive theorizing of the mechanisms of mini-publics deliberation on climate change

Abstract

Mini-publics, including citizen panels, assemblies, and juries are increasingly being used as a way to build a bridge between elite level politics and ordinary citizens, especially on divisive and complex issues such as climate change. While previous studies have illustrated the effectiveness and usefulness of these settings in political deliberation, much less attention has been paid to how outcomes are formed within these settings. We seek to fill this gap by inductively theorizing the process of deliberation within mini-publics. Building on the Citizen-Expert Panels that we organized in three Czech cities, we identified six types of processes that advance specific outcomes within mini-publics: consensus-building, discussion, balance of power, imposition, dissent, and domination. We show that there are two key factors around which these processes materialize: emotions and leadership. Identifying the modalities of mini-publics allows us to observe a wider range of interaction patterns beyond the usual dichotomy of consensus and conflict and contributes to the growing interest in mini-publics as a form of political deliberation.