7 Committee Governance in Consensus Cultures: An Exploration of Best Practice Cases in Germany and Norway

Abstract

In consensual democracies deliberation partly takes place outside the public sphere, for example institutionalized in public committees where scientists, civil servants and interest representatives participate. Committees of this kind usually contribute advice in the early stages of the policy-making process, that is, before the government puts concrete policy proposals on the table (Christensen & Holst, 2017). Accordingly, they have-at their best-been regarded as vibrant examples of 'input democracy' (Goodin, 2004). In the following, two such committees, one German and one Norwegian, are selected for closer scrutiny. Albeit different in a range of respects, they both, in distinctive ways, illustrate dilemmas and tensions in achieving best practice committee governance in consensus democratic cultures.

Studying the Relation Between Stakeholder Input and Higher Education Policy

“…There is a long tradition in Norwegian public administration for carrying out formal, text-based hearings prior to developing green and white papers, long-term plans, and new legal frameworks (Arter, 2004;Krick and Holst 2018;Olsen, 1988). These hearings are regulated in the Public Administration Act, stating that institutions and organisations that are affected by the regulation "shall be given an opportunity to express their opinions before the regulations are issued, amended or repealed" (2019, § 37).…”

Demokratisierung durch Partizipation? Die Mehrebenenbeteiligung an der Endlagersuche in Deutschland

“…Dies betrifft die De-facto-Berücksichtigung aller Teilnehmenden an der kollektiven Entscheidung der Arena, die durch zahlreiche Ausschlussmechanismen eingeschränkt werden kann. Dazu zählen etwa Entscheidungsregeln, die einzelne Stimmen marginalisieren oder der Ausschluss bestimmter Themen von der Agenda (siehe auch Fung 2006;Krick 2013;Krick und Holst 2018;Mansbridge et al 2012;Young 2000). Eine Schlüsselrolle bei der inklusiven Gestaltung der Interaktion kommt in deliberativen Foren dem Vorsitzenden oder Moderator zu (Krick 2013, S. 234-240).…”