Information, access to decision-making and public debate in France: the growing demand for deliberative democracy

Abstract

Debate (NCPD) is becoming the French reference in matters of participatory democracy. This article highlights the rules of procedure which distinguish the forums opened by the NCPD from the consultative committees set up in other areas of environmental policy-making. The public discussion of the projects expresses first and foremost a change in the nature of the conflicts, which concern today as much the legitimacy of the projects as the manner in which they are implemented. The experience of the first debates organised by the NCPD underlines the great potential of a really open forum to encourage the participation of the public. The four deliberative rules embodied in the independent Commission responsible for organising the debate constitute the originality of the procedure, by which a contradictory, pluralistic and egalitarian dialogue can take place between the participants. This gives a sense of democracy to the decision-making process as a whole.

Designing effective public participation

“…Some of these arrangements have arisen from a political choice, such as the participatory budget, introduced in Porto Alegre in the late eighties, which had clear redistributive aims (Baiocchi, 2003;Fedozzi, 1999;Gret & Sintomer, 2005). It then spread, although with several adjustments, all over the world (Sintomer, Herzberg, Allegretti, & RöCke, 2010), including influencing the public debate (débat public) on infrastructures introduced in France through a national law in 1995 (Fourniau, 2001;Marshall, 2016). Other devices have had a more academic origin: this is the case of the use of Deliberative Polls (Fishkin, 1991(Fishkin, , 1995 and Search Conferences, for example Greenwood & Morten) 1998).…”

How public participation could improve public decisions on rail investments?

“…The National Commission on Public Debate (NCPD) is becoming the French reference in matters of participatory democracy. Fourniau () highlights the rules of procedure which distinguish the forums opened by the NCPD from the consultative committees set up in other areas of environmental policy‐making. The public discussion of the projects represent a change in the nature of the conflicts, which concern today as much the legitimacy of the projects as the manner in which they are implemented.…”

Entre o reflexo e a proposição: dilemas sobre o encerramento dos fóruns deliberativos

“…Após o debate público, o presidente da Comissão elabora um relatório do qual constam os argumentos a favor e contra coletados ao longo dos quatro meses. No prazo de três meses a partir da publicação do relatório, o proponente da obra deve informar de sua intenção de seguir com o projeto, alterá-lo ou retirá-lo (Fourniau 2001, Revel et al, 2007.…”