Meaningful, but effective? A critical evaluation of Ireland’s citizens’ dialogues on the future of Europe
| Author | Anthony Costello |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0263395721991483 |
| Published date | 01 November 2022 |
| Date | 01 November 2022 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/0263395721991483
Politics
2022, Vol. 42(4) 464 –479
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0263395721991483
journals.sagepub.com/home/pol
Meaningful, but effective?
A critical evaluation of
Ireland’s citizens’ dialogues
on the future of Europe
Anthony Costello
Liverpool Hope University, UK
Abstract
On the 25 March 2017, leaders of the EU27 and European Union (EU) institutions ratified the
Rome Declaration. They committed to invite citizens to discuss Europe’s future and to provide
recommendations that would facilitate their decision-makers in shaping their national positions on
Europe. In response, citizens’ dialogues on the future of Europe were instituted across the Union to
facilitate public participation in shaping Europe. This paper explores Ireland’s set of dialogues which
took place during 2018. Although event organisers in Ireland applied a relatively atypical and more
systematic and participatory approach to their dialogues, evidence suggests that Irelands’ dialogues
were reminiscent of a public relations exercise which showcased the country’s commitment to
incorporating citizens into the debate on Europe while avoiding a deliberative design which could
have strengthened the quality of public discourse and the quality of public recommendations. Due
to an absence of elite political will for a deliberative process, as well as structural weaknesses
in design, participants’ recommendations lacked any clear and prescriptive direction which could
shape Ireland’s national position on the future of Europe in any constructive or meaningful way.
Keywords
citizens’ dialogues, deliberative democracy, European Union, future of Europe, mini publics,
participation
Received: 26th June 2020; Revised version received: 24th November 2020; Accepted: 19th December 2020
Introduction
In 2018, citizens’ dialogues on the future of Europe (FoE) were organised across the
European Union (EU). These mini publics were instituted in response to formal commit-
ments made by the EU27 and EU institutions in Rome on the 25 March 2017. The Rome
Declaration committed to listen to European citizens and incorporate their recommenda-
tions in shaping Europe’s future direction in line with key policy areas outlined in the
Corresponding author:
Anthony Costello, History, Politics, and IR, School of Humanities, Liverpool Hope University, Hope Park,
Liverpool L16 9JD, UK.
Email: costelt@hope.ac.uk
991483POL0010.1177/0263395721991483PoliticsCostello
research-article2021
Article
Costello 465
2016 Bratislava Declaration. The Rome declaration was born in response to a continent
experiencing growing Euroscepticism and potential fragmentation in the face of inward
migration and the reverberations of the most recent global financial crisis. It coincided
with the activation of Article 50 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
(the Lisbon Treaty) which launched the Brexit negotiation process.
Ireland’s set of citizens’ dialogues were organised by European Movement Ireland
(EMI) on behalf of Ireland’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFaT).
Organisers suggested that public recommendations collated during the events would
feed into a national report which would facilitate decision-makers in formulating the
national position on Europe’s future. These dialogues were an opportunity to commu-
nicate Europe to citizens, enhance their understandings of the EU, encourage participa-
tion in the conversation, and strengthen citizens’ relationship with Europe through the
process of consultation. As rapporteur during the events, one had unique observational
access to the organisation and development of the dialogues. That access provided a
basis for this critical evaluation. The central claim of this paper is that despite a unique
attempt at systematising citizens’ dialogues, Ireland’s design hindered the full potential
of participants to make a meaningful contribution to Ireland’s national position on the
FoE. Designed with some of the (theoretical) ingredients associated with the generation
of public deliberation, a deliberative democratic exercise was not intended for the
events and design structures were weak. As participants at Ireland’s dialogues were not
expected to engage in critical deliberation, they were not expected to provide critically
generated prescriptive recommendations to policymakers. In turn, the quality of dis-
course was weak and this affected the quality of citizens’ contributions to Ireland’s
national report.1 Evidence collated from research interviews with individuals close to
the coordination of the dialogues suggests that the events represented a box-ticking
exercise in public relations on behalf of the DFaT at a time when Europe (and Ireland)
was at political crossroads.2 The weaknesses in design is attributed to the fact that
organisers never intended citizens to steer policymakers in shaping Ireland’s national
position on the FoE in any concrete prescriptive fashion but rather use these events to
primarily showcase the Irish governments efforts in communicating with and listening
to the people during times of great uncertainty in Europe. Therefore, while the Irish
government outwardly fulfilled its commitments to incorporate citizens in shaping
Europe’s future, its dialogues were designed in such a way that citizens’ preferences
lacked any concrete empowerment and subsequent influence over the Irish govern-
ment’s national position on Europe.
The Rome declaration
The Rome Declaration was signed on the 25 March 2017, four days prior to the United
Kingdom’s invocation of Article 50 which initiated the Brexit process (see European
Council, 2017). In Rome, EU leaders committed to incorporating citizens into the debate on
Europe’s future integration trajectory in key policy areas outlined in the 2016 Bratislava
Declaration and Roadmap (European Council, 2016). These areas included migration and
borders, security and defence, economic and social development, and youth opportunities.
These were rather contentious policy areas which populist forces have capitalised upon in
developing their Eurosceptic narratives particularly within Southern and South-Eastern EU
member-states. Several months after the United Kingdom’s June 2016 Brexit Referendum,
the standard Eurobarometer 86 report showed that there was a general trend of optimism
To continue reading
Request your trial