 | This articlepossibly contains originalsynthesis. Source material shouldverifiably mention andrelate to the main topic. Relevant discussion may be found on thetalk page.(July 2023) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
 | This article'slead sectionmay be too short to adequatelysummarize the key points. Please consider expanding the lead toprovide an accessible overview of all important aspects of the article.(November 2025) |
Participatory democracy,participant democracy,participative democracy, orsemi-direct democracy is aform of government in whichcitizens participate individually and directly in political decisions and policies that affect their lives, rather than throughelected representatives.[1] Elements ofdirect andrepresentative democracy are combined in this model.[2]
Participatory democracy is a type ofdemocracy, which is itself a form ofgovernment. The term "democracy" is derived from theAncient Greek:δημοκρατία,romanized: dēmokratía from δῆμος/dēmos 'people' and κράτος/kratos 'rule'.[3] It has two main subtypes,direct andrepresentative democracy. In the former, the people have the authority to deliberate and decidelegislation; in the latter, they choose governingofficials to do so. While direct democracy was the original concept, its representative version is the most widespread today.[4]
Public participation, in this context, is the inclusion of the public in the activities of apolity. It can be any process that directly engages the public indecision-making and gives consideration to its input.[5] The extent to which political participation should be considered necessary or appropriate is under debate inpolitical philosophy.[6]
Joiningpolitical parties allows citizens to participate in democratic systems, but is not considered participatory democracy.
Participatory democracy is primarily concerned with ensuring that citizens have the opportunity to be involved in decision-making on matters that affect their lives.[6] It is not a new concept and has existed in various forms since theAthenian democracy. Its moderntheory was developed byJean-Jacques Rousseau in the 18th century and later promoted byJohn Stuart Mill andG. D. H. Cole, who argued that political participation is indispensable for ajust society.[7] In the early 21st century, participatory democracy has been more widely studied and experimented with, leading to various institutional reform ideas such asparticipatory budgeting.[8]
.jpg)
Democratic processes have been practiced throughout history.[9]
Probably the earliest well-documented example of large-scale democracy comes from thecity-state ofAthens duringclassical antiquity.[10][11] It was first established underCleisthenes in 508–507 BC.[12] This was a direct democracy, in which ordinary citizens wererandomly selected to fill governmentadministrative andjudicial offices, and there was alegislative assembly consisting of all Athenian citizens.[13] Athenian citizens controlled the entire political process through the assembly, theboule and thecourts, and a large proportion of citizens were involved constantly in public matters.[11] However, Athenian citizenship excluded women,slaves, foreigners (μέτοικοι/métoikoi) and youths below the age of military service.[14][15]
During the 20th century, practical implementations began to take place, mostly on a small scale, attracting considerable academic attention in the 1980s. Experiments in participatory democracy took place in various cities around the world. For example,Porto Alegre,Brazil adapted a system ofparticipatory budgeting in 1989. AWorld Bank study found that participatory democracy in these cities seemed to result in considerable improvement in thequality of life for residents.[16]
In the early 21st century, experiments in participatory democracy began to spread throughoutSouth andNorth America,China, and across theEuropean Union.[17] In aUS example, the plans to rebuildNew Orleans afterHurricane Katrina in 2005 were drafted and approved by thousands of ordinary citizens.[18]
In 2011, as a response to citizens' growing distrust in the government following the2008 financial crisis,Ireland authorised a citizens' assembly called"We the Citizens". Its task was to pilot the use of a participatory democratic body and test whether it could increasepolitical legitimacy. There was an increase in bothefficacy and interest in governmental functions, as well as significant opinion shifts on contested issues liketaxation.[19]
TheFrench government organised"le grand débat national" (the Great National Debate) in early 2019 as a response to theYellow vests movement. It consisted of 18 regional conventions, each with 100randomly selectedcitizens, that had to deliberate on issues they valued the most so that they could influence government action.[20] After the debate, a citizens' convention was created specifically to discussclimate change,"la Convention citoyenne pour le climat" (theCitizens Convention for Climate, CCC), designed to serve as a legislative body to decide how the country could reduce itsgreenhouse gas emissions withsocial justice in mind.[21] It consisted of 150 citizens selected bysortition andstratified sampling, who were sorted into five sub-groups to discuss individual topics. The members were helped by experts onsteering committees. The proceedings of the CCC garnered international attention. After nine months, the convention outlined 149 measures in a 460-page report, andPresident Macron committed to supporting 146 of them. A bill containing these was submitted to theparliament in late 2020.[20]
In recent years,social media has led to changes in the conduct of participatory democracy. Citizens with differing points of view are able to join conversations, mainly through the use ofhashtags.[22] To promote public interest and involvement,local governments have started using social media to make decisions based on public feedback.[23] Users have also organised onlinecommittees to highlight local needs and appoint budgetdelegates who work with the citizens and city agencies.[24]
Participatory democracy was a notable feature of theOccupy movement in 2011. "Occupy camps" around the world made decisions based on the outcome ofworking groups where every protester had a say. These decisions were thenaggregated by general assemblies. This process combinedequality, mass participation, anddeliberation.[25]
The most prominent argument for participatory democracy is its function of greaterdemocratization.
[T]he argument is about changes that will make our own social and political life more democratic, that will provide opportunities for individuals to participate in decision-making in their everyday lives as well as in the wider political system. It is about democratizing democracy.
— Carole Pateman, Participatory Democracy Revisited, Perspectives on Politics. 10 (1): 7–19, 2012
With participatory democracy, individuals or groups can realistically achieve their interests, "[providing] the means to a morejust and rewarding society, not a strategy for preserving thestatus quo."[7]
Participatory democracy may also have an educational effect. Greater political participation can help increase itsefficacy and depth: "the more individuals participate the better able they become to do so",[7] an idea already promoted byRousseau,Mill, andCole.[8] Pateman emphasises this potential as it counteracts the widespread lack of faith in the capacity and capability of citizens to meaningfully participate, especially in societies with complex organisations.[8] Joel D. Wolfe asserts his confidence that such models could be implemented even in large organizations, progressively diminishingstate intervention.[7]
Criticisms of participatory democracy can overlap withcriticism of democracy.[citation needed]
Some reject the feasibility of participatory models due to disbelief in citizens' capabilities to bear the greater responsibility. Critics conclude that the citizenry is disinterested and leader-dependent, making the mechanism for participatory democracy inherently incompatible with advanced societies.[26]Jason Brennan advocates in bookAgainst Democracy for a less participatory system because of theirrationality of voters in arepresentative democracy. He proposes several mechanisms to reduce participation, presented with the assumption that a vote-based system of electoral representation is maintained.[27] Brennan proposes a system in which all citizens haveequal rights to vote or otherwise participate in government, but decisions made by the elected representatives are scrutinized by an epistocratic council. This council could not make law, only "unmake" it, and would likely be composed of individuals who pass rigorous competency exams.[27]
Other concerns are whether participatory democracy can be managed and turned into effective output. David Plotke[who?] highlights that the institutional adjustments needed to make greater political participation possible would require a representative element. Consequently, both direct and participatory democracy must rely on some type of representation to sustain a stable system. He also states that achieving equal direct participation in large and heavily populated regions is hardly possible, and ultimately argues in favor of representation over participation, calling for a hybrid between participatory and representative models.[28]
Some forms or participatory democracy can violate the hard-won concept ofpolitical egalitarianism (One Man, One Vote).[29] Town meetings can have lowturnout and an over-representation of seniors.[30]
In case of citizens' assemblies and sortition,Roslyn Fuller criticizes that the small chance of being randomly selected to participate results in lack of representation or participation for most citizens.[31][32] Fuller criticizes that deliberative democracy generally limits decisions to small, externally controllable groups while ignoring the plethora of e-democracy tools available which allow for unfiltered mass participation and deliberation while maintaining political representativeness.[31][33]
Scholars have recently proposed several mechanisms to increase citizen participation in democratic systems. These methods intend to increase theagenda-setting anddecision-making powers of the people by giving citizens more direct ways to contribute to politics.[34]
Also called mini-publics, citizens' assemblies arerepresentative samples of a population that meet to createlegislation or advise legislative bodies. When citizens are chosen to participate bystratified sampling, the assemblies are more representative of the population than elected legislatures.[35] Assemblies chosen bysortition provide average citizens with the opportunity to exercise substantive agenda-setting and/or decision-making power. Over the course of the assembly, citizens are helped by experts and discussionfacilitators, and the results are either put to areferendum or sent in areport to thegovernment.
In studying the perceived legitimacy of citizens' assemblies,political scientist Daan Jacobs finds that the perceived legitimacy of assemblies is higher than that of system with no participation, but not any higher than that of any system involving self-selection.[36] Regardless, the use of citizens' assemblies has grown throughout the early 21st century and they have often been used in constitutional reforms, such as inBritish Columbia'sCitizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform in 2004 and theIrishConstitutional Convention in 2012.[37]
Trademarked byStanford professorJames S. Fishkin,deliberative opinion polls allow citizens to develop informed opinions before voting throughdeliberation. Deliberative polling begins with surveying arandomrepresentative sample of citizens to gauge their opinion.[38] The same individuals are then invited to deliberate for a weekend in the presence of political leaders, experts, and moderators. At the end, the group is surveyed again, and the final opinions are taken to be the conclusion the public would have reached if they had the opportunity to engage with the issue more deeply.[38] PhilosopherCristina Lafont, a critic of deliberative opinion polling, argues that the "filtered" (informed) opinion reached at the end of a poll is too far removed from the opinion of the citizenry, delegitimizing the actions based on them.[39]
Public consultation surveys are surveys on policy proposals or positions that have been put forward by legislators, government officials, or other policy leaders. The entirety of the deliberative process takes place within the survey. For each issue, respondents are provided relevant briefing materials and arguments for and against various proposals. Respondents then provide their final recommendation. Public consultation surveys are primarily done with large representative samples, usually several thousand nationally and several hundred in subnational jurisdictions.
Public consultation surveys have been used since the 1990s in the US. The American Talks Issue Foundation led by Alan Kay played a pioneering role.[40] The largest such program is the Program for Public Consultation at theUniversity of Maryland's School of Public Policy, directed bySteven Kull, conducting public consultation surveys on the national level, as well as in states and congressional districts. They have gathered public opinion data on over 300 policy proposals that have been put forward by Members of Congress and the Executive Branch, in a variety of areas.[41] Such surveys conducted in particular Congressional districts have also been used as the basis for face-to-face forums in congressional districts, in which survey participants and House Congressional Representative discuss the policy proposals and the results of the survey.[42]
The questionnaires used in the surveys by the Program for Public Consultation, which they call “policymaking simulations”, have also been made available for public use, as educational and advocacy tools.[43] Members of the public can take the policymaking simulations to better understand the proposal, and are given the option to send their policy recommendations to their elected officials in Congress.
E-democracy is an umbrella term describing a variety of proposals to increase participation through technology.[44] Open discussion forums provide citizens the opportunity to debatepolicy online whilefacilitators guide discussion. These forums usually serve agenda-setting purposes or are sometimes used to provide legislators with additionaltestimony. Closed forums may be used to discuss more sensitive information: in theUnited Kingdom, one was used to enabledomestic violence survivors to testify to the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Domestic Violence and Abuse while preserving theiranonymity.
Another e-democratic mechanism isonline deliberative polling, a system in which citizens deliberate withpeers virtually before answering a poll. The results ofdeliberative opinion polls are more likely to reflect the considered judgments of the people and encourage increased citizen awareness of civic issues.[44]
In a hybrid betweendirect andrepresentative democracy,liquid democracy permits individuals to either vote on issues themselves or to select issue-competentdelegates to vote on their behalf.[45]Political scientists Christian Blum and Christina Isabel Zuber suggest that liquid democracy has the potential to improve a legislature's performance through bringing together delegates with a greater awareness on a specific issue, taking advantage of knowledge within the population. To make liquid democracy more deliberative, atrustee model of delegation may be implemented, in which the delegates vote after deliberation with other representatives.
Some concerns have been raised about the implementation of liquid democracy. Blum and Zuber, for example, find that it produces two classes of voters: individuals with one vote and delegates with two or more.[45] They also worry that policies produced in issue-specific legislatures will lackcohesiveness. Liquid democracy is utilized byPirate Parties for intra-party decision-making.
Inbinding referendums, citizens vote onlaws and/orconstitutional amendments proposed by alegislative body.[46] Referendums afford citizens greaterdecision-making power by giving them the ultimate decision, and they may also use referendums foragenda-setting if they are allowed to draftproposals to be put to referendums in efforts calledpopular initiatives.Compulsory voting can further increase participation. Political theoristHélène Landemore raises the concern that referendums may fail to be sufficiently deliberative as people are unable to engage in discussions and debates that would enhance their decision-making abilities.[35]
Switzerland currently uses a rigorous system of referendums, under which all laws the legislature proposes go to referendums. Swiss citizens may also startpopular initiatives, a process in which citizens put forward a constitutional amendment or propose the removal of an existing provision. Any proposal must receive the signature of 100,000 citizens to go to aballot.[47]
In local participatory democracy,town meetings provide all residents with legislative power.[48] Practiced in theUnited States, particularly inNew England, since the 17th century, they assure that local policy decisions are made directly by the public. Local democracy is often seen as the first step towards a participatory system.[49] Theorist Graham Smith, however, notes the limited impact of town meetings that cannot lead to action on national issues. He also suggests that town meetings are not representative as they disproportionately represent individuals withfree time, including theelderly and theaffluent.
Participatory budgeting allows citizens to make decisions on the allocation of apublic budget.[48] Originating inPorto Alegre, Brazil, the general procedure involves the creation of a concretefinancial plan that then serves as a recommendation to elected representatives.Neighbourhoods are given the authority to design budgets for the greater region and local proposals are brought to elected regional forums. This system lead to a decrease inclientelism andcorruption and an increase in participation, particularly amongstmarginalized andpoorer residents. Theorist Graham Smith observes that participatory budgeting still has some barriers to entry for the poorest members of the population.[50]
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link){{cite journal}}:Cite journal requires|journal= (help){{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Other | |
