Village governance and deliberative democracy: Examining empowered deliberative forums in rural villages, Indonesia

Abstract

Several countries across the Global South have embraced the idea of reorganising village governance structures and empowering deliberative forums in rural areas. Yet, most studies of deliberative democracy are based in contexts from the Global North. To date, most deliberative democracy studies have focused on deliberation processes, largely bypassing developmental outcomes and insufficiently taking into account the role of social, power and accountability relations. Consequently, this thesis addresses the need to (1) extend studies of deliberative democracy to rural contexts in the Global South, (2) consider policy reforms informed by deliberative democracy theory to improve developmental outcomes and (3) highlight the role of embedded social, power and accountability relations in shaping deliberation processes. This thesis is based on qualitative and ethnographic fieldwork, applying a comparative case study approach involving prolonged engagement within decision-making processes in three Javanese villages. It considers three questions: (1) What are the predominant patterns that emerge in village decision-making and deliberation processes? (2) Why do these patterns emerge and what shapes them? (3) What outcomes are associated with the patterns and how is this linked to the intention of the deliberative village reforms? To answer these questions, the thesis develops a comprehensive analytical framework applying deliberative democracy theory to assess deliberation processes and outcomes in the structural and cultural context of rural Java, considering the social, power and accountability relations that shape village deliberation. The thesis advances four arguments. First, more authentic forms of deliberation emerge when village leaders use deliberative processes with the explicit intention of achieving legitimate decisions, involving broader actors and responding to pressures from below. Authentic deliberation requires participant selection to be inclusive, participants' views and interests to be convergent and deliberators to be held accountable by communities. Second, ritual deliberation is the prevalent pattern. This is an exclusive decision-making style, dominated by actors with high social status. Third, reflecting on the cases analysed in this research, decision-making and deliberative processes are highly varied. While it is true that elite domination and exclusion are prevalent, in many cases, elite control is used for altruistic purposes by village leaders, and informal forms of accountability attenuate elite capture. Last, with respect to the policy narrative that envisages empowering deliberative forums to improve decision-making, the promises of the village government reforms inspired by deliberative democracy have only partially been fulfilled. Village deliberative processes create conducive spaces for authentic deliberation only in specific circumstances. As in other examples from the Global South, structures and practices that exclude ordinary villagers weaken reforms intended to empower deliberative forums. Reducing power inequalities, strengthening accountability mechanisms and encouraging communities to be actively engaged in deliberation is required to enhance the quality of decision-making and implementation processes, and to increase the legitimacy of decisions. Show more