Criteria for a Deliberative Process - Revision history

Kennywong: /* Criteria for a Deliberative Process */

2008-05-12T13:58:25Z

‎Criteria for a Deliberative Process

Kennywong: /* Criteria for a Deliberative Process */

2008-05-12T13:58:16Z

‎Criteria for a Deliberative Process

Kennywong: /* Criteria for a Deliberative Process */

2008-05-12T13:57:31Z

‎Criteria for a Deliberative Process

Kennywong: /* Criteria for a Deliberative Process */

2008-05-12T13:56:43Z

‎Criteria for a Deliberative Process

Kennywong: New page: ==Criteria for a Deliberative Process== Ned Crosby (1996) suggests that in more complicated and diverse societies we must seek to consciously build institutions that can elicit an authent...

2008-05-12T13:54:26Z

New page: ==Criteria for a Deliberative Process== Ned Crosby (1996) suggests that in more complicated and diverse societies we must seek to consciously build institutions that can elicit an authent...

New page

==Criteria for a Deliberative Process==

Ned Crosby (1996) suggests that in more complicated and diverse societies we must seek to consciously build institutions that can elicit an authentic voice of the people. Although there is any number of ways in which an institution might be created, Crosby suggests that there are five criteria that cover most of the main attempts to do so. These criteria are illustrated in Figure I (below):

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ==Criteria for a Deliberative Process==
-Ned Crosby (1996) <ref> Crosby, N. (1996) a paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest political </ref>suggests that in more complicated and diverse societies we must seek to consciously build institutions that can elicit an authentic voice of the people. Although there is any number of ways in which an institution might be created, Crosby suggests that there are five criteria that cover most of the main attempts to do so.  These criteria are illustrated in Figure I (below):
+Ned Crosby (1996) <ref> Crosby, N. (1996) a paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest political </ref> suggests that in more complicated and diverse societies we must seek to consciously build institutions that can elicit an authentic voice of the people. Although there is any number of ways in which an institution might be created, Crosby suggests that there are five criteria that cover most of the main attempts to do so.  These criteria are illustrated in Figure I (below):
 [[Image:Deliberativeprocess.JPG|thumbnail|690px|center|Figure I: Criteria for a Deliberative Process]]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ==Criteria for a Deliberative Process==
-Ned Crosby (1996) suggests that in more complicated and diverse societies we must seek to consciously build institutions that can elicit an authentic voice of the people. Although there is any number of ways in which an institution might be created, Crosby suggests that there are five criteria that cover most of the main attempts to do so.  These criteria are illustrated in Figure I (below):
+Ned Crosby (1996) <ref> Crosby, N. (1996) a paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest political </ref>suggests that in more complicated and diverse societies we must seek to consciously build institutions that can elicit an authentic voice of the people. Although there is any number of ways in which an institution might be created, Crosby suggests that there are five criteria that cover most of the main attempts to do so.  These criteria are illustrated in Figure I (below):
 [[Image:Deliberativeprocess.JPG|thumbnail|690px|center|Figure I: Criteria for a Deliberative Process]]
 Whilst the majority of Crosby’s points are agreeable, point 4 fails to recognise the unique capacities that ICTs have which can create a favourable environment for deliberation.  His point that a good climate for deliberation requires ‘face to face’ interaction is testable.  With reference to Point Five, the question is why and how much politics is based on creating a balance between competing selfish interests.  Arguably then this should be treated as interest based negotiation rather than position based as in Crosby’s other two points.

←Older revision		Revision as of 13:57, 12 May 2008
Line 4:		Line 4:

	[[Image:Deliberativeprocess.JPG\|thumbnail\|690px\|center\|Figure I: Criteria for a Deliberative Process]]		[[Image:Deliberativeprocess.JPG\|thumbnail\|690px\|center\|Figure I: Criteria for a Deliberative Process]]
		+
		+	Whilst the majority of Crosby’s points are agreeable, point 4 fails to recognise the unique capacities that ICTs have which can create a favourable environment for deliberation. His point that a good climate for deliberation requires ‘face to face’ interaction is testable. With reference to Point Five, the question is why and how much politics is based on creating a balance between competing selfish interests. Arguably then this should be treated as interest based negotiation rather than position based as in Crosby’s other two points.

←Older revision		Revision as of 13:56, 12 May 2008
Line 2:		Line 2:

	Ned Crosby (1996) suggests that in more complicated and diverse societies we must seek to consciously build institutions that can elicit an authentic voice of the people. Although there is any number of ways in which an institution might be created, Crosby suggests that there are five criteria that cover most of the main attempts to do so. These criteria are illustrated in Figure I (below):		Ned Crosby (1996) suggests that in more complicated and diverse societies we must seek to consciously build institutions that can elicit an authentic voice of the people. Although there is any number of ways in which an institution might be created, Crosby suggests that there are five criteria that cover most of the main attempts to do so. These criteria are illustrated in Figure I (below):
		+
		+	[[Image:Deliberativeprocess.JPG\|thumbnail\|690px\|center\|Figure I: Criteria for a Deliberative Process]]