Deliberative Democracy: A Feasible Solution for Reforming Societies
By: Nikki-Lynn Marshall and Luc Shay.
Edited by: Alyssa Dizoglio.
Gianpalo Baiocchi’s paper ‘The Porto Alegre Experiment and Deliberative Democracy’ discusses the political theory of Deliberative Democracy and its proven success in the city of Porto Alegre, the capital city of Rio Grande do Sol. Deliberative Democracy, a concept first introduced by Joseph Besette, is a modern form of democracy based on public collaboration and deliberation. It differs from traditional democracy through its use of consensus-decision making and majority rule. Although this alternative political system boasts numerous advantages, many of which were seen by Porto Alegre, it is important to note that the success of such a radical system of government is limited to small cities and towns as a result the many practical issues that would arise if the model were to be implemented into a large city or nation.
Porto Alegre presents a model of how deliberative democracy can work if it is implemented properly. The city adopted the new political system in 1989 under a 10-year plan. Successful aspects of this implementation included both neighborhood-based deliberation and a parallel organization set up to operate alongside a municipal council. The system was found to produce significantly superior outcomes in comparison to traditional democracy. For example, allowing citizens to participate in political decisions lead to more fair and rational decision-making. The dispersion of political power lead to progress that reflected the public’s desires rather than those of a small group of people who maintained all of the power. Including common citizens in political decision-making led the government to discuss critical issues that may have never been discussed if it were not for including the common voice. For example, during the 10-year plan, sewer and water connections in the city increased from 75% to 98%. Similarly, the number of schools in Porto Alegre has quadrupled since 1986 (World Bank). By giving a voice to the people that are most affected by government decisions, critical issues are resolved in a way that benefits these people, as opposed to having the same issues influenced by political corruption or ploys for power. The biggest proof of success however is that, since the completion of the plan in 1999, 100 other Brazilian cities have now adopted similar political systems.
While there are many advantages of deliberative democracy, the system works best within certain parameters. If the model were implemented, for example in a much larger city or even a nation, many problems would likely arise. One problem is that the large number of opinions would make the whole deliberation process less efficient. A second problem is the issue of expertise. In traditional democracies professionals understand the realm of politics in which they must operate, they understand the different laws, regulations, and workings of the political system, and thus can at times get things done more effectively. Lastly, a disadvantage that Baiocchi points out is that, even though deliberative democracy helps to create beneficial institutions, there is no quality assurance once they have been created.
Despite the few practical disadvantages of this model, in the correct environment the system would benefit society as a whole, as well as create a more efficient, modern way of government, as has been the case in Porto Alegre. As Porto Alegre’s government continues to operate under a system of deliberative democracy it will be interesting to track the long-term results of such a system in contrast to traditional democracy as well as in contrast to other new age development theories such as charter cities.
See Also:
‘The Porto Alegre Experiment and Deliberative Democracy’- Gianpalo Baiocchi
‘New Ways of Deepening Democracy: The Deliberative Democracy’- Carmen Sacho
‘Daring democracy — Porto Alegre, Brazil’- Rebecca Abers
Discussion (5) | September 23rd, 2012 Categories: Institutions
