Discussion structures as tools for public deliberation

Eugen Octav Popa*, Vincent Blok, Renate Wesselink

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

We propose the use of discussion structures as tools for analyzing policy debates in a way that enables the increased participation of lay stakeholders. Discussion structures are argumentation-theoretical tools that can be employed to tackle three barriers that separate lay stakeholders from policy debates: difficulty, magnitude, and complexity. We exemplify the use of these tools on a debate in research policy on the question of responsibility. By making use of discussion structures, we focus on the argumentative moves performed by the parties involved in this debate. We conclude by discussing advantages and limitations of discussion structures and we trace several opportunities for further research on these instruments.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)76-93
JournalPublic Understanding of Science
Volume29
Issue number1
Early online date18 Oct 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2020

Fingerprint

deliberation
stakeholder
Research
research policy
argumentation
responsibility
participation
Public Deliberation
Stakeholders

Keywords

  • analysis of policy discussions
  • discussion structures
  • public engagement in policy debates
  • responsible research and innovation

Cite this

@article{639976da1e324d2292064b6a9755206e,
title = "Discussion structures as tools for public deliberation",
abstract = "We propose the use of discussion structures as tools for analyzing policy debates in a way that enables the increased participation of lay stakeholders. Discussion structures are argumentation-theoretical tools that can be employed to tackle three barriers that separate lay stakeholders from policy debates: difficulty, magnitude, and complexity. We exemplify the use of these tools on a debate in research policy on the question of responsibility. By making use of discussion structures, we focus on the argumentative moves performed by the parties involved in this debate. We conclude by discussing advantages and limitations of discussion structures and we trace several opportunities for further research on these instruments.",
keywords = "analysis of policy discussions, discussion structures, public engagement in policy debates, responsible research and innovation",
author = "Popa, {Eugen Octav} and Vincent Blok and Renate Wesselink",
year = "2020",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0963662519880675",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "76--93",
journal = "Public Understanding of Science",
issn = "0963-6625",
publisher = "SAGE Publications",
number = "1",

}

Discussion structures as tools for public deliberation. / Popa, Eugen Octav; Blok, Vincent; Wesselink, Renate.

In: Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 29, No. 1, 01.2020, p. 76-93.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Discussion structures as tools for public deliberation

AU - Popa, Eugen Octav

AU - Blok, Vincent

AU - Wesselink, Renate

PY - 2020/1

Y1 - 2020/1

N2 - We propose the use of discussion structures as tools for analyzing policy debates in a way that enables the increased participation of lay stakeholders. Discussion structures are argumentation-theoretical tools that can be employed to tackle three barriers that separate lay stakeholders from policy debates: difficulty, magnitude, and complexity. We exemplify the use of these tools on a debate in research policy on the question of responsibility. By making use of discussion structures, we focus on the argumentative moves performed by the parties involved in this debate. We conclude by discussing advantages and limitations of discussion structures and we trace several opportunities for further research on these instruments.

AB - We propose the use of discussion structures as tools for analyzing policy debates in a way that enables the increased participation of lay stakeholders. Discussion structures are argumentation-theoretical tools that can be employed to tackle three barriers that separate lay stakeholders from policy debates: difficulty, magnitude, and complexity. We exemplify the use of these tools on a debate in research policy on the question of responsibility. By making use of discussion structures, we focus on the argumentative moves performed by the parties involved in this debate. We conclude by discussing advantages and limitations of discussion structures and we trace several opportunities for further research on these instruments.

KW - analysis of policy discussions

KW - discussion structures

KW - public engagement in policy debates

KW - responsible research and innovation

U2 - 10.1177/0963662519880675

DO - 10.1177/0963662519880675

M3 - Article

VL - 29

SP - 76

EP - 93

JO - Public Understanding of Science

JF - Public Understanding of Science

SN - 0963-6625

IS - 1

ER -