Rethinking Democratic Innovations: A Look through the Kaleidoscope of Democratic Theory
| Author | Hans Asenbaum |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/14789299211052890 |
| Published date | 01 November 2022 |
| Date | 01 November 2022 |
| Subject Matter | State of the Art - Review Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/14789299211052890
Political Studies Review
2022, Vol. 20(4) 680 –690
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/14789299211052890
journals.sagepub.com/home/psrev
Rethinking Democratic
Innovations: A Look through
the Kaleidoscope of Democratic
Theory
Hans Asenbaum
Abstract
The study of democratic innovations has long been situated in the deliberative paradigm. Today,
however, a new scholarly generation conceptualizes democratic innovations from various
theoretical angles. This article reviews participatory, agonistic and transformative accounts of
democratic innovations. This multiperspectival analysis presents democratic innovations in a new
light. The term changes its meaning, going beyond institutions designed by experts to include
the remaking of the structures that govern our everyday lives. Democratic innovations interrupt
established modes of governance and create spaces for systemic transformations.
Keywords
democratic innovations, democratic theory, perspectivism, theory triangulation
Accepted: 15 September 2021
Introduction
Democratic innovations, such as citizens’ assemblies, are often seen as the real-world
incarnation of deliberative democracy. As micro-deliberative institutions, they are part of
a new generation of deliberative democracy that aims to realize the deliberative ideals of
an inclusive, reasoned dialogue (Elstub, 2010). In the context of the deliberative wave,
few scholarly accounts of democratic innovations are to be found that neither explicitly
nor implicitly situate their analyses in the deliberative paradigm. Hendriks (2019: 444)
argues that ‘When research on democratic innovations took its abundantly documented
“deliberative turn,” roughly since the early 1990s, non-deliberative innovations were sig-
nificantly less centralized’. This leads to a particular and myopic view of what constitutes
Centre for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT,
Australia
Corresponding author:
Hans Asenbaum, The University of Canberra, 11 Kirinari St, Bruce ACT 2617, Australia.
Email: hans.asenbaum@canberra.edu.au
1052890PSW0010.1177/14789299211052890Political Studies ReviewAsenbaum
research-article2021
State of the Art - Review Article
To continue reading
Request your trial