Yes, minister: the impact of decision-making rules on geographically targeted particularistic spending

This paper tests a number of hypotheses which have been used to explain particularistic political spending. Using constituency level data we can better evaluate the competing merits of theories predicting whether parties reward their voters or target floating or swing voters to maximise the party’s electoral return. We also test the hypothesis that the spending decision-making rule is most important and may determine which of the loyal or marginal voters are targeted, or indeed whether another group might be rewarded. We find that the decision rule is indeed most important, and the unusual level of discretion to ministers in Ireland will determine where these monies go. This finding adds greatly to our theoretical knowledge of geographically targeted spending and is consistent with empirical findings in other countries

Best and worst practice: a case study of qualitative gender balance in Irish broadcasting

This article focuses on the gender of voices chosen as sources and presenters of radio news coverage in Ireland. The study examines the best and worst case studies across public and private sector broadcasters and argues that the question of gender balance in broadcasting goes beyond the simple issue of quantitatively proportionate participation to require a more complex and qualitatively fair and balanced presentation of women within news programming. We find a very clear gender bias with male-dominated coverage in both public and private sectors but with greater stereotyping by the latter

Lessons from Ireland's recent referendums: how deliberation helps inform voters

Ireland's 2015 referendum on equal marriage and its 2018 one on abortion both had their origins in deliberative assemblies. But did such processes influence the result? The evidence suggests that the information and debate that came with these assemblies had an impact both on vote choice and turnout, writes Jane Suiter

Assessing the impact of deliberation and information on opinion change: a quasi-experiment in public deliberation

Deliberative democracy has become fashionable for many and it has been used in some places to solve real-world policy problems. However measuring the ‘success’ of deliberative democracy is not clearly achievable. For most ‘success’ is measured in terms of opinion change, but these are only rarely measured against control groups, and in particular there is no way of knowing if the opinion change took place because of the deliberation or because of information they received through the deliberation process. Exercises in deliberation seem to represent one big treatment. But we would want to separate out the component parts of the treatment. This paper outlines the results of an experiment in which deliberation took place in a pilot Citizens’ Assembly in Ireland. As part of this we measured the impact using pre and post-test controls, including a control group given the information the CA participants received, but without the deliberation. The results of the experiment reveal that there is a deliberation effect separate to the information effect

‘Systematizing’ constitutional deliberation: the 2016–18 citizens’ assembly in Ireland

Ireland has become something of a trail-blazer in the use of deliberative methods in the process of constitutional review. It is the first case in which the process has been employed a second time: the Irish Citizens’ Assembly (2016–18) followed upon the Convention on the Constitution (2012–14). The creation of two mini-publics in quick succession and their significant role in supporting key referendums for constitutional change that followed (marriage equality in 2015 and abortion in 2018) suggests a degree of ‘systemization’ of deliberation in the Irish process of constitutional review. This report sets out the basic details of the most recent Citizens’ Assembly – how it was set up, its agenda, its manner of operation, and its outcomes. We conclude with a brief discussion of the recent Irish experience of constitutional mini-publics and the degree to which they speak to a process of systematizing deliberation in the Irish policy process

Does social media use matter? A case study of the 2018 Irish Abortion Referendum

The role of social media at electoral events is much speculated upon. Wide-ranging effects, and often critical evaluations, are attributed to commentary, discussions, and advertising on Facebook, Twitter, Telegram, and many other platforms. But the specific effects of these social media during campaigns, especially referendum campaigns, remain under-studied. This thematic issue is a very valuable contribution for precisely this reason. Using the 2018 abortion referendum in Ireland as an illustrative case, this commentary argues for greater research on social media at referendum campaigns, more critical evaluation of the claims and counterclaims about social media effects, often aired widely without substantive evidence, and, finally, for robust, coordinated cross-national regulation of all digital platforms in line with global democratic norms

Evaluation of public consultations and citizens' participation in 2015 Better Regulation Agenda of the EU and the need for a deliberative e-rulemaking initiative in the EU

This paper connects and disentangles three interrelated concepts: citizens’ participation; erulemaking (in a deliberative environment) and effective policymaking at the EU level. We critically evaluate public participation under the revamped 2015 ‘Better Regulation Agenda’ by focusing on the public consultations tool; examining it through the lens of deliberative democratic legitimacy; and assessing its potential to be more deliberative following the legitimacy evaluation framework of Schmidt (2013). The paper employs an innovative theoretical approach, which blends deliberative democracy, e-rulemaking with EU studies insights. Furthermore, it introduces a new legitimacy criterion we call ‘functional legitimacy’ which refers to an overarching principle and evaluative framework that should govern erulemaking initiatives from their design through implementation and evaluation. We examine the preconditions for e-rulemaking at the EU level on the principles of transparency, inclusiveness and evidence-based policy making

Assessing democracy in vitro, in vivo, and in actu and the role of democratic theory today

How can we define democracy today given the continuous changes that modern societies are undergoing?What is the role of a democratic theorist? This paper articulates a threefold argument in responding to these questions by analyzing the term of democracy in vitro, in vivo, and in actu. The first step is tosecure a democratic minimum and the core principles of democracy. The second step involves studying democracy as an ongoing project and examininghow the principles of this democratic minimum are encoded. In thethird stepwe deploy the basic premises of discourse theory of Laclau and Mouffe when evaluating a specific discourse of democracy, as this approachencompasses both discursive and non discursive practices.Utilizing this three-level evaluative framework for democratic theory will allow us to not only articulate normative principles but also evaluate them according to their mode of implementation. Keywords: democratic minimum, democratic theory, democracy, representatio