The perceived legitimacy of deliberative minipublics: taking the perspective of polarized citizens

Abstract

Deliberative minipublics are becoming increasingly popular, with both scholars and practitioners highlighting their potential to bolster public approval of political decision-making. Yet, it remains unclear whether minipublics are able to do so in contexts where the public itself is deeply divided – a concern which becomes only more relevant as levels of polarization are said to rise across the globe. In this study, we argue that polarized citizens may perceive minipublics and their outcomes as less legitimate than more moderate citizens. We use original survey data from Northern Ireland (n = 932), a highly polarized society where a minipublic was organized on the contentious issue of the region’s constitutional future. We find that higher levels of ideological polarization and, to an extent, affective polarization are associated with lower levels of perceived minipublic legitimacy among the wider public, although effects are small. This offers novel insights into the role of minipublics in polarized settings.

Deliberative Mini-Publics as a Democratic Alternative: The Normative Desirability, Technical Feasibility, and Political Viability of Sortition

“…Studies analyzing the citizens' perspective suggest that support for mini-publics is contingent upon the perception of similarity with participants (Pow et al 2020), connection to representative institutions, and trust in citizen competencies (Bedock & Pilet 2021). Furthermore, disaffection and polarization (van Dijk et al 2023;Goldberg & Bächtiger 2023;Walsh & Elkink 2021), and the assurance that results will be honored by politicians (Germann et al 2022) also play a role in determining citizen support. Mini-publics are perceived as legitimate when citizens feel similar to the participants, as descriptive representation (similar profiles) is believed to facilitate substantive representation (similar interests).…”