Deliberation in the wilderness : transforming policy preferences through discourse

Abstract

This research examines the formation of policy preferences under conditions approaching the ideal of deliberative democracy. These scenarios specifically relate to complex and controversial environmental issues. The objective is to explore the possibilities for deliberative democracy and its implications for the policy process. The Far North Queensland Citizens' Jury (FNQCJ) was conducted over four days in January 2000, deliberating policy options for the Bloomfield Track, a controversial road within World Heritage listed rainforest. Policy preferences of participants were surveyed before and after deliberation using rank orderings of five policy options. 'Subjectivity' (beliefs and values) was also studied at three points using Q methodology. Analysis of the results reveals changes in subjectivity, which although comparatively small, has had a dramatic impact on policy preferences. The mechanism whereby policy preferences were transformed appears to involve the deactivation of symbolic assertions by interest groups and the activation of subjective states pertaining to common goods. Pre-deliberative policy preferences tended to reflect polarised (symbolic) discourses that dominated the issue publicly. Deliberation dissipated the distorting influence of symbolic politics and induced convergence toward a shared policy position appreciating the complexities of the issue for which deliberators sought integrated policy solutions, rather than juggling seemingly irreconcilable symbolic claims. Although this did not lead to absolute consensus, the differences in opinion among deliberators were readily accommodated in the formulation of policies. This appears to be a possible outcome of deliberation so long as outcomes are sensitive to the underlying reasons for particular positions. These findings suggest that policy preferences cannot be divorced from political context, including institutional arrangements. Under the status quo, citizens tend to be unduly influenced by the strategic arguments of interests, despite their capacity for better judgement. Without active citizen participation, policy discourses are shaped by dominant political actors, This results in a failure of policy preferences to reflect substantive dimensions of issues, perpetuating symbolic issues in public decision-making. By contrast, it appears that the deliberative process helps to reconstruct policy preferences according to theoretical ideals - peeling away the layers of confusion created by symbolic politics, which can result in poorly considered preferences. As such, it is concluded that deliberation serves to shape policy preferences to reflect community aspirations, which are consistent with the provision of common goods such as environmental protection, rather than individual concerns and prejudices.