Ramis-Moyano, Rod igo; Smi h, G aham; Ganuza, E nes o; Pog ebinschi, Thamy
A icle — Published Ve sion
Mini-Publics and Pa y Ideology: Who Commissioned he
Delibe a i e Wa e in Eu ope?
Jou nal o Delibe a i e Democ acy
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Ramis-Moyano, Rod igo; Smi h, G aham; Ganuza, E nes o; Pog ebinschi, Thamy
(2025) : Mini-Publics and Pa y Ideology: Who Commissioned he Delibe a i e Wa e in Eu ope?,
Jou nal o Delibe a i e Democ acy, ISSN 2634-0488, Uni e si y o Wes mins e P ess, London, Vol.
21, Iss. 1, pp. 1-15,
h ps://doi.o g/10.16997/jdd.1559
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/315593
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0
Ramis-Moyano, R, e al. (2025). Mini-Publics and Pa y Ideology: Who
Commissioned he Delibe a i e Wa e in Eu ope?
Jou nal o Delibe a i e
Democ acy
,
21(1), pp. 1–15. DOI: h ps://doi.o g/10.16997/jdd.1559
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Mini-Publics and Pa y Ideology: Who Commissioned he
Delibe a i e Wa e in Eu ope?
Rod igo Ramis-Moyano*, G aham Smi h†, E nes o Ganuza‡ and Thamy Pog ebinschi§
The inc easing implemen a ion o delibe a i e mini-publics (DMPs) such as Ci izens’ Assemblies and
Ci izens’ Ju ies led he OECD o iden i y a ‘delibe a i e wa e’. The bu geoning schola ship on DMPs
has inc eased unde s anding o how hey ope a e and hei impac , bu less a en ion has been paid o
he d i e s behind his di usion. Exis ing esea ch on democ a ic inno a ions has unde lined he ole o
he go e ning pa y’s ideology as a ele an a iable in he s udy o he adop ion o o he p ocedu es
such as pa icipa o y budge ing, placing le -wing pa ies as a p ominen ac o in his p ocess. Unlike
his p e ious li e a u e, we ha e li le unde s anding o whe he mini-publics appeal equally ac oss he
ideological spec um. This pape d aws on he la ge-N OECD da abase o analyse he impac o go e ning
pa y a ilia ion on he commissioning o DMPs in Eu ope ac oss he las ou decades. Ou analysis inds
he ideological pa e n o adop ion is less clea cu compa ed o o he democ a ic inno a ions such as
pa icipa o y budge ing. Bu s onge ideological di e en ia ion eme ges when we pay close a en ion o
he design ea u es o DMPs implemen ed.
Keywo ds: delibe a i e mini-publics; poli ical pa ies; ideology; Eu ope; ci izens’ assemblies
In oduc ion
Democ a ic inno a ions ha e expanded globally o e
he las hi y yea s, becoming a ecognised p ac ice o
public adminis a ions a di e en le els o he poli y.
The mul iple c ises acing ep esen a i e democ acy
ha e igge ed g owing in e es in hese p ocedu es, no
leas because o he ways in which hey can expand he
numbe and di e si y o oices hea d in poli ical decision-
making, open new channels o ci izen in luence and os e
democ a ic skills o ci izens (Geissel & New on 2012; Smi h
2009). These p ocedu es, wi h hei many democ a ic
po en ials, p omise o inc ease he esponsi eness o
public adminis a ions, cushion esis ance o con o e sial
policy decisions, imp o e he p o ision o se ices and,
consequen ly, inc ease he legi imacy o public policies
(Wa en 2009).
The wo ldwide di usion o democ a ic inno a ions has
occu ed in o e lapping wa es, which can be ela ed o
di e en models (and heo ies) o democ acy. A ound
he u n o he cen u y, o example, we saw he global
expansion o pa icipa o y budge ing (PB) (Sin ome e
al. 2016), which was s ongly associa ed wi h he ideas
o pa icipa o y democ acy. In he las decade, we ha e
wi nessed he di usion o delibe a i e mini-publics
(DMPs), which has been closely connec ed o p inciples o
delibe a i e democ acy (Smi h & Se älä 2018). The apid
expansion o DMPs, mos ly ac oss highly indus ialized
na ions, has led he OECD (2020) o iden i y an ongoing
‘delibe a i e wa e’. While a signi ican amoun o esea ch
has been unde aken on he po en ial and limi s o DMPs
(e.g., G önlund e al. 2014; Reuchamps e al. 2023), we
ha e scan knowledge o he ac o s who p omo e hem
and, mos impo an ly, on he in luence di e en poli ical
pa ies may ha e on he commissioning o delibe a i e
p ocedu es (Ghe ghina & Jacque 2022).
The ole poli ical pa ies play in he expansion o DMPs
is c ucial o unde s and whe he he ‘delibe a i e wa e’
is he p oduc o a pa icula ideological o ien a ion.
Poli ical pa ies wi h dis inc ideological a ilia ions –
and consequen ly di e en alues and in e p e a ions
o democ acy (Heywood 2012) – ep esen di e en
unde s andings o wha ci izen pa icipa ion is, i s
democ a ic pu poses and i s cen ali y o he unc ioning
o ep esen a i e democ acy (e.g., Ki ilson & Sca ow
2003; Ve ge 2007). Le -wing pa ies ha e adi ionally
been associa ed wi h ad oca ing a g ea e connec ion
o poli ical decision-making wi h he ci izen y (Fung &
W igh 2001), an idea ha is ein o ced by e idence ha
* Ins i u o de Es udios Sociales A anzados (IESA-CSIC) and
Uni e si y o Co doba, Có doba, Spain
† Cen e o he s udy o Democ acy (CSD), Uni e si y o
Wes mins e and KNOCA, London, Uni ed Kingdom
‡ Ins i u o de Polí icas y Bienes Públicos (IPP-CSIC), Mad id,
Spain
§ WZB Be lin Social Science Cen e , Be lin, Ge many
Co esponding au ho : Rod igo Ramis-Moyano ( [email p o ec ed].es)
Ramis-Moyano e al: Mini-Publics and Pa y Ideology
2
le is poli icians ha e a mo e a ou able a i ude owa ds
delibe a i e p ocedu es han igh -wing ones (e.g., Jacque
e al. 2022; Junius e al. 2020; Rangoni e al. 2021). Ye ,
wi h he excep ion o a ew s udies (Küble e al. 2020;
Sa adín e al. 2022), he in luence o pa y ideology on
he ac ual commissioning o DMPs has been la gely
o e looked.
The impo ance o his a iable in he di usion o
democ a ic inno a ions, howe e , has been con i med
in he expansion o PB. Resea ch on PB shows ha he
le is ideology o he go e ning pa y was c ucial in i s
eme gence and ini ial expansion, bu became less ele an
as he p ocedu e di used ac oss he globe and became
s anda dised (Pog ebinschi 2023; Ramí ez & Welp 2011).
Al hough he impo ance o pa y ideology seems o
ade o e ime, ideology has con inued o in luence he
cha ac e is ics o PBs in e ms o design (Ganuza & F ancés
2012; Sin ome e al. 2016). Whe e commissione s a e le -
wing pa ies, he p ocedu es end o ha e an ins i u ional
design ha os e s g ea e delibe a i e quali y and a
g ea e capaci y o empowe pa icipan s. Iden i ying he
e ec s o pa y ideology on DMPs hus appea s c ucial o
enhancing ou unde s anding o he de elopmen o he
‘delibe a i e wa e’. I also p o ides aluable insigh s in o
how poli ical ac o s in e ac wi h delibe a i e p ocedu es
and, mo e b oadly, democ a ic inno a ions.
This a icle in es iga es he in luence o go e ning
pa y’s ideology in he commissioning o delibe a i e mini-
publics. A e poli ical pa ies wi h pa icula ideological
a ilia ions mo e in ol ed in he commissioning o DMPs?
Does he ins i u ional design o DMPs a y acco ding o
he ideology o go e ning pa ies? To begin o answe
hese ques ions, we b ie ly e iew he exis ing li e a u e
on pa y ideology and democ a ic inno a ions, be o e
mo ing o an analysis o he OECD da ase o all known
DMPs commissioned by public au ho i ies in Eu ope
o e he las ou decades. Ou esul s, which p o ide
he i s desc ip i e insigh s o a la ge-N da ase o
DMPs, show ha he ideological pa e n o adop ion is
less clea cu compa ed o o he democ a ic inno a ions
such as pa icipa o y budge ing. Bu s onge ideological
di e en ia ion eme ges when we pay close a en ion o
he design ea u es o DMPs implemen ed.
Does Ideology Ma e ?
The poli ical will o public o icials o en comes o he
o e when he causal ac o s explaining he p omo ion
o democ a ic inno a ions a e discussed (e.g., Küble
e al. 2020; Ryan 2021). Al hough i is o en sugges ed
ha poli icians ha e s ong easons no o adop hese
p ocedu es o , a he e y leas , o dis us hem (Thompson
2019), he li e a u e on poli ical ep esen a i es’ a i udes
owa ds DMPs has shown ha hey a e no all equally
eluc an : le -wing poli icians a e mo e willing o launch
hese p ocedu es, while hose on he igh a e mo e
eluc an o do so (e.g., Jacque e al. 2022; Junius e al.
2020; Rangoni e al. 2021). This seems no only ela ed
o ideological sel -placemen . Resea ch analysing pa y
discou ses has ound equi alen esul s, wi h le -wing
pa ies being he mos ocal abou inc easing he means
o ci izen pa icipa ion in policy-making (e.g., Ki ilson
& Sca ow 2003; Ve ge 2007). Le is pa ies end o
emphasise he po en ial bene icial e ec s ha hese
p ocedu es could ha e on democ a ic goods such as
inclusi eness, popula con ol and conside ed judgemen
– in con as o he e iciency o legi imacy, which a e
mo e emphasised by igh -wing pa ies. Despi e his
e idence, e y ew s udies ha e in es iga ed he ex en
o which he ideology o poli ical pa ies in luences
ac ual commissioning o delibe a i e mini-publics. Ra e
examples include Küble and colleagues (2020) who
ound no ela ionship be ween Le /G een o e sha e in
Swi ze land and DMP commissioning. They show ha
he p e alence o DMPs is highe in con ex s wi h g ea e
pa y agmen a ion. In P ague (Czech Republic), Sa adín
e al. (2022) ind ha he commissioning o democ a ic
inno a ions (including among hem DMPs) is mo e
ela ed o he di e ences be ween adi ional and new
pa ies han o hei ideology.
The esul s o hese s udies seem o sugges he lack
o in luence o pa y ideology on he commissioning o
DMPs. Howe e , hese a e e y pa icula con ex s. Wha
would he esul s o a mo e comp ehensi e analysis look
like? Fu he mo e, he main ein o schola ship a ound
he di usion o democ a ic inno a ions – ocussed on he
s udy o PBs – has shown he in luence o he ideology o
go e ning pa ies a he han elec o al o e sha e. D awing
on he PB li e a u e allows us o build some hypo heses
abou wha we may ind o he case o he commissioning
o DMPs by ideologically di e en go e ning pa ies, while
being awa e o he po en ial di e ences ha exis be ween
di e en ‘ amilies’ o democ a ic inno a ions (Smi h
2009) and he po en ial complexi ies o he ela ionship
be ween pa y ideology and he commissioning o hese
p ocedu es ha PB schola ship exposes.
The mos well-s udied se o PB p ocedu es is hose
in B azil. Se e al schola s demons a e ha he le is
Pa ido dos T abalhado es’ (Wo ke s’ Pa y, PT) played
a c ucial ole in inc easing he adop ion o he PB a
he local le el (e.g., A i ze & Wample 2008; Spada
2014). The ela ionship be ween le is pa ies and he
commissioning o PB has also p o ed ele an in o he
La in-Ame ican coun ies (Dias 2014). Howe e , o e
a numbe o yea s, adminis a ions a ilia ed o o he
ideologies inc easingly esponded o he di usion o
PB. Acco ding o bo h Rami ez and Welp (2011) and
Pog ebinschi (2023), he le has los he ‘monopoly’ o
pa icipa o y democ acy in La in Ame ica. They show
how, since he 2000s, an inc easing numbe o poli ical
pa ies om he cen e o he igh (and wi hou majo
dis inc ions be ween Neoconse a i es and Libe als) ha e
adop ed a ious democ a ic inno a ions in he cou se
o hei adminis a ions. While ideological commi men
o pa icipa ion is ce ainly no meaningless, ime plays
a mode a ing ole on his ela ionship. In e na ional
agencies and expe s g adually joined he ‘PB wa e’,
s anda dising c i e ia o he implemen a ion o hese
p ocedu es and p omo ing hem ac oss go e nmen s o
all ideological pe suasions. Toolki s and p o essionals
who design and implemen hese p ocedu es enabled
Ramis-Moyano e al: Mini-Publics and Pa y Ideology
3
widesp ead adop ion. In such a con ex whe e
pa icipa ion is widely acili a ed by laws, in e na ional
agencies and pa icipa o y consul an s, he dissemina ion
o p ocedu es may su pass ideological commi men s
(Baiocchi & Ganuza 2017). In La in Ame ica, he ele ance
o le -wing pa ies is he e o e mo e e iden in he ini ial
s ages o PB di usion.
The adop ion o pa icipa o y budge ing in Eu ope
shows a simila pa e n. In mos Eu opean coun ies,
he i s s eps in he di usion o PB ended o be led by
le -leaning pa ies. This is he case o Spain, I aly, and
F ance, o example, whe e mos ly le is local au ho i ies
in oduced PB (Sin ome e al. 2016). Once es ablished,
ideology g adually ceases o be impo an . In I aly, le -
wing pa ies conduc ed he in oduc ion o PB in he ea ly
2000s. As hey los he subsequen municipal elec ions,
PB almos disappea ed, bu by 2009 he ideology o
municipal go e nmen s was no longe a decisi e ac o
(Alleg e i & S o one 2014). A simila end can be ound
in Spain, whe e le is pa ies in oduced PB in he ea ly
2000s, and slowly conse a i e pa ies ollowed in hei
wake (Ganuza & F ancés 2012). Excep ions o he gene al
end exis . Ge many is an ou lie : bo h Conse a i e and
Libe al local go e nmen s we e ea ly adop e s (Röcke
2014). T ansla ing hese indings o he case o delibe a i e
mini-publics, and conside ing he exis ing esea ch ha
sugges s mo e posi i e a i udes o le -wing poli icians o
hese p ocedu es (e.g., Jacque e al. 2022; Junius e al.
2020; Rangoni e al. 2021), we expec o ind a compa able
si ua ion: ha le -wing go e nmen s will ha e a g ea e
p esence in he ea ly adop ion o hese p ocedu es.
Li e a u e on PB also shows us ha i is no enough
o simply look a he ideological posi ion o he pa ies
d i ing di usion o a named democ a ic inno a ion; i is
also necessa y o look a he speci ic ins i u ional design
cha ac e is ics o commissioned p ocedu es. E en wi h
inc easing s anda disa ion o implemen a ion (Baiocchi &
Ganuza 2017), Sin ome and colleagues (2016) highligh
di e ences in he PB models implemen ed in Eu ope and
he di e en ial ole ha poli ical amilies ha e had in
hei commissioning. They iden i y six ‘ideal- ypes’, each
o which di e in e ms o o igin, he o ganisa ion o
mee ings, he na u e o delibe a ion and he weigh o ci il
socie y in he p ocedu e. In hei analysis, hey ind ha
he ‘pa icipa o y democ acy’ model is clea ly linked o le -
wing go e nmen s, bo h Social-Democ a ic and New Le .
This model is cha ac e ised by openness o all ci izens, wi h
a s ong ole o hem in decision-making and an emphasis
on good-quali y delibe a ion. The model aims o build
links be ween con en ional and non-con en ional poli ics
o enhance poli ical impac and o help build a s ong and
au onomous ci il socie y. The emaining models ha e been
implemen ed almos equally among he di e en poli ical
amilies. These end o ha e a mo e ‘adminis a i e’ oca ion
– ci izens a e concei ed o as consume s and pa icipa ion
as a way o scoping hei p e e ences, wi h li le oppo uni y
o mobilise ci il socie y. Hence, beyond i s in luence on
he g ea e o lesse adop ion o democ a ic inno a ions,
he ideology o go e ning pa y can also in luence he
design cha ac e is ics o he p ocedu es implemen ed.
This is c ucial in e ms o he democ a ic goods o hese
p ocedu es and o analysing DMPs’ po en ial impac on
he unc ioning o ou democ acies. Unlike in he case
o PB, no s udies exis ha ha e add essed how ideology
in luences he democ a ic cha ac e is ics o implemen ed
DMPs.
O e all, we can hus say ha he le seems mo e
inclined o expe imen wi h new p ocedu es such as PB,
while pa ies on he igh o he poli ical spec um end
o eplica e hose (success ul) democ a ic inno a ions.
Once a gi en democ a ic inno a ion is es ablished and i s
ela i e success makes i an a ac i e go e nance op ion,
i s adop ion ends o be less in luenced by ideological
posi ions. As o he ea u es o democ a ic inno a ions,
ollowing he e idence om PB esea ch, he le appea s
o be mo e ocussed on hose p ocedu es ha ha e a high
delibe a i e quali y and a clea e impac on public policies;
on hose p ocedu es ha ealise he democ a ic goods o
conside ed judgemen and popula con ol (Smi h 2009).
Gi en he pauci y o exis ing knowledge, his pape
akes he signi ican s ep o o e ing he i s la ge-N
s udy on he in luence o go e ning pa y’s ideology in
he commissioning and ins i u ional design o DMPs.
Depa ing om he insigh s p o ided by he schola ship
on PB, and awa e o di e ences in con ex and design
o he wo democ a ic inno a ions, we seek o explo e
whe he le -leaning pa ies ac oss Eu ope in luence
DMPs’ commissioning, a leas in he i s s age o i s
di usion, and whe he pa y ideology a ec s he ea u es
o Eu opean delibe a i e p ocedu es.
Da a and Me hodological App oach
To examine he ole pa y ideology plays in he
commissioning o delibe a i e mini-publics, we d aw on
da a om he OECD’s ‘DelibWa e’ da abase – upda ed
in No embe 2021. This da ase has been used o in o m
he in luen ial epo Inno a i e Ci izen Pa icipa ion and
New Democ a ic Ins i u ions: Ca ching he Delibe a i e
Wa e (OECD 2020) and subsequen OECD publica ions.
This is he mos comp ehensi e empi ical eposi o y o
DMPs commissioned by public au ho i ies, p o iding
compa a i e da a since 1979 o all OECD coun ies.1 As
de ined by he OECD (2020), a DMP (o ‘ ep esen a i e
delibe a i e p ocess’) is:
A andomly selec ed g oup o people who a e
b oadly ep esen a i e o a communi y spend-
ing signi ican ime lea ning and collabo a ing
h ough acili a ed delibe a ion o o m collec i e
ecommenda ions o policy make s. (OECD 2020:
Reade ’s guide)
Th ee c i e ia de ine a case in he OECD s udy e lec ing
b oade de ini ions o DMPs (Escoba & Els ub 2017;
Smi h & Se älä 2018):
1. Delibe a ion: h ough a long, ca e ul, and acili a ed
discussion o e , a leas , one ull day.
2. Rep esen a i eness: h ough ‘so i ion’ as ec ui -
men p ocess and demog aphic s a i ica ion.
Ramis-Moyano e al: Mini-Publics and Pa y Ideology
4
3. Impac : being commissioned by a public au ho i y,
hus excluding academic, expe imen al, o ci il soci-
e y commissioned p ocedu es.
The OECD epo shows ha public au ho i ies a ound
he wo ld a e inc easingly using delibe a i e p ocedu es
o in ol e ci izens a all go e nmen le els and on di e se
policy ques ions. Fo ou pu pose, we will look only a
Eu opean cases, as i is he single egion whe e mos DMPs
ha e been implemen ed (OECD 2020); un il 2005, indeed,
almos all mini-publics ga he ed in he da ase we e
commissioned in Eu ope (Figu e 1).2 Fu he mo e, his
sample o coun ies is much mo e compa able in cul u al,
economic, and poli ical e ms han he whole uni e se o
cases, and i enables us o mo e con iden ly iden i y he
ideological posi ions o poli ical pa ies wi h a deg ee o
ce ain y ha allows o compa a i e analysis.
Ope a ionalisa ion o pa y ideology
To he da a a ailable in he ‘DelibWa e’ da abase we added
in o ma ion on pa y ideology. The ideological a ilia ion
o poli ical pa ies was iden i ied h ough a web sea ch
o he go e ning pa y o he la ges pa y in a coali ion
o he go e nmen a he le el commissioning each o he
Eu opean cases in he OECD da ase . To code he poli ical
ideology o he go e ning pa y we ely on he widely
used Mani es o P ojec da ase (Volkens e al. 2021), one
o he mos ecognised da ase s on his subjec . Fi e main
pa y amilies eme ge om his coding (Table 1): Social-
Democ a s and Ch is ian-Democ a s (bo h wi h a ound
70% o he cases in ou sample), Libe al, Conse a i es,
and New-Le /G eens.3 He ea e we p esen he analysis
o ou esul s based on hese ca ego ies.
Ou ope a ionalisa ion o poli ical ideology has
limi a ions. Fi s , we code only he la ges go e ning pa y.
We canno cap u e di e ences in ideological complexions
o coali ions as such da a does no exis sys ema ically
o he pe iod unde conside a ion ac oss all coun ies
a all ele an go e ning le els. Second, me hodological
di icul ies emain in di e en ia ing be ween le and
igh -wing pa ies using he pa y amily app oach. The
no ion o he pa y ‘ amily’ can p esen sho comings o
a compa a i e and longi udinal analysis. Al hough pa y
amilies can be posi ioned in agg ega e e ms on he le -
igh con inuum (Klingemann e al. 2006), dispa i ies may
appea as we look mo e g anula ly. E en hough i is he
mos common app oach, i assumes c oss-pa y simila i ies
ha a e no necessa ily o mally s uc u ed o could be
e ined wi h u he cha ac e isa ion. Pa ies labelled as
Libe als can be nea e o some Conse a i e pa ies and
o he s o Ch is ian-Democ a ic o Social-Democ a ic
pa ies, and ideological pa y changes appea o e ime
(Mai & Mudde 1998). Again, an app oach p ima ily
c ea ed o iden i y na ion-wide pa ies, may lose some o
i s ele ance when coding local pa ies. Tha said, he le -
igh con inuum is e enly dis ibu ed in Eu ope, and pa y
amilies ac oss go e nance le els ha e his o ically ela ed
o i in a ela i ely homogeneous way (Camia & Ca amani
2009). The poli ical amily emains he bes p oxy we ha e
Table 1: Numbe o DMPs commissioned in Eu ope by
pa y amily (1979–2021).
Pa y amily Numbe
o DMPs
%
Social-Democ a s 95 42.04
Ch is ian-Democ a s 69 30.53
Libe al 37 16.37
Conse a i es 15 6.64
New-Le /G eens 10 4.42
To al 226 100
Sou ce: Own elabo a ion wi h da a om OECD Da abase o
Rep esen a i e Delibe a i e P ocesses and Ins i u ions (2021)
and om Mani es o P ojec da ase (2021).
Figu e 1: Time e olu ion o DMPs commissioning (OECD s. Eu ope).
Sou ce: Own elabo a ion wi h da a om OECD Da abase o Rep esen a i e Delibe a i e P ocesses and Ins i u ions
(2021).
Ramis-Moyano e al: Mini-Publics and Pa y Ideology
5
o compe ing ideological jus i ica ions (Gu h & Nelsen
2019; Keman & Pennings 2006).
Speci ying delibe a i e mini-publics
We adop an explo a o y app oach o add ess ou wo
esea ch ques ions. Fi s , we pay pa icula a en ion o
how he in ol emen o di e en poli ical amilies in
he commissioning o DMPs has e ol ed o e he las
o y yea s in Eu ope. Since di e ences in indi idual
coun ies can be dilu ed by agg ega ing cases om se e al
coun ies, we complemen his accoun by de ailing wha
has happened in ou o hem: Ge many, Denma k, Aus ia
and he Uni ed Kingdom. These a e he coun ies ha
concen a e mos o he DMPs in ou da abase, wi h mo e
han hi y cases each. Second, we mo e on o analyse
how pa y ideology has in luenced he ins i u ional
design o Eu opean delibe a i e p ocedu es. Al hough
he p ocedu es labelled as DMPs sha e co e cha ac e is ics
(so i ion and delibe a ion), amily esemblances obscu e
di e ences in ins i u ional design be ween cases, making
possible iden i ica ion o di e en sub- ypes acco ding
o he numbe o ci izens ha pa icipa e, he amoun o
days spen oge he , and hei ou pu (Escoba & Els ub
2017; Smi h & Se älä 2018). The OECD (2020) iden i ied
as many as wel e models a ound he wo ld.4 To ake
hese design di e ences in o accoun in ou analysis o
ideological di e ences, and gi en he di e si y o exis ing
sub- ypes, we adop wo complimen a y s a egies he e.
The i s o hese s a egies has been o ely on he
OECD’s dis inc ion o he pu pose o hese ins i u ions
be ween DMPs designed o gene a e ‘In o med ci izen
ecommenda ions on policy ques ions’ and hose
designed o gene a e ‘Ci izen opinion on policy ques ions’
(OECD 2020) (see Table 2). The i s g oup o p ocedu es
– in o med ci izen ecommenda ions – end o las longe ,
gi ing mo e space and esou ces o pa icipan s o p oduce
de ailed and conside ed ecommenda ions on complex
issues. This model is he mos p e alen in Eu ope, wi h 149
cases egis e ed (ou o he o al 226 cases). P ocedu es in
he second g oup – ci izen opinion – end o ake less ime
and esul in less de ailed ou pu s han hose in he i s
g oup, as hey a e p ima ily in ended o p o ide decision-
make s wi h a as e o ci izens’ conside ed opinions on a
gi en issue. Ci izens a e no expec ed o collabo a e on
p oducing well de ined ecommenda ions. The dis inc ion
es ablished by he OECD is e y use ul o ou analysis, as
i p o ides a heo y-d i en classi ica ion ha helps us o
iden i y – in a pa simonious way – DMPs wi h a di e en
p ocedu al na u e.
Classi ying hese p ocedu es based on he name
adop ed by commissione s – as he OECD dis inc ion
does – has i s limi a ions, no leas ha he same name
is o en used o p ocedu es wi h di e en ea u es
because o na ional idiosync asies o changing ends. Fo
example, o iginally he e m Ci izens’ Assembly was used
o signi ican na ional p ocedu es ha ackled majo
cons i u ional issues such as he Ci izens’ Assemblies on
Elec o al Re o m in B i ish Columbia and On a io in he
i s decade o he cen u y (Smi h 2009) and hen he I ish
Ci izens’ Assembly 2016–2018 ha amously deal wi h
he cons i u ional s a us o abo ion (Fa ell e al. 2019).
The success o he I ish Assembly mean ha he e m
Ci izens’ Assembly ended o be app op ia ed by a numbe
o di e en DMP designs. As p e ious wo k has shown,
ac ual expe iences end o de ia e om he ‘ideal’ model
(D yzek & Tucke 2008) o o e lap wi h he cha ac e is ics
o o he models (V ydagh e al. 2020). Nomencla u e is a
om s able.
Recognising his di e si y o use, ins ead o elying solely
on ou i s s a egy, we also conside wo o he a iables
ha cap u e key design ea u es o delibe a i e p ocedu es
and unde lie he OECD’s ca ego isa ion: he numbe o
pa icipan s and ime spen oge he (Smi h & Se älä 2018)
(Table 3). Fo ad oca es o DMPs, la ge numbe s a e o en
Table 2: Models o Delibe a i e Mini-Publics.5
A e age
Nº o
pa icipan s
pe panel
A e age
leng h o
mee ings
Numbe
o
Eu opean
cases
Resul s
Pu pose In o med ci izen
ecommenda ions
Ci izens’ Assembly 90 18.8 days 20 De ailed collec i e
ecommenda ions
Ci izens’ Ju y 34 4.1 days 55 Collec i e ecommenda ions
Consensus Con e ence 16 4 days 20 Collec i e ecommenda ions
Planning Cell 24 3.2 days 54 Collec i e posi ion/ ci izens’
epo
Ci izen opinion G1000 346 1.7 days 12 Vo es on p oposals
Ci izens’ Council 15 1.7 days 32 Collec i e ecommenda ions
Ci izens’ Dialogues 148 2.1 days 28 B oad ideas/ ecommenda ions
Delibe a i e Poll 226 1.6 days 5 Su ey opinions and opinion
changes
Sou ce: Inno a i e Ci izen Pa icipa ion and New Democ a ic Ins i u ions: Ca ching he Delibe a i e Wa e (Chap e 2) (OECD 2020)
(N = 226).
Ramis-Moyano e al: Mini-Publics and Pa y Ideology
6
deemed impo an o help secu e desc ip i e ep esen a ion
and/o poli ical salience in he eyes o decision-make s o
he gene al public. We cap u e size dis inc ions be ween
smalle , medium and la ge-sized DMPs. Time is a c i ical
ac o in enabling deepe lea ning and delibe a ion,
along wi h collabo a i e w i ing o ecommenda ions.
The du a ion dis inc ion we make cap u es he di e ence
be ween hose p ocedu es ha un o mo e o less han
one weekend. Longe p ocedu es p o ide he necessa y
ime o highe -quali y delibe a ion (Smi h & Se älä 2018).
To a ce ain ex en , hese wo dimensions can be
mapped on o he abo e-men ioned OECD ca ego ies
o pu pose and hei dis inc p ocedu al na u e. DMPs
c ea ed o gene a e ci izen opinion end o p io i ise
numbe o pa icipan s. And la ge numbe s o pa icipan s
mean ha i is mo e di icul o o ganise p ocedu es o e
a la ge numbe o days. La ge DMPs end o be one o
wo days. Whe e ime o delibe a e is deemed signi ican ,
p ocedu es end o in ol e smalle numbe s. These a e
endencies as he e a e DMP models ha buck hese
ends. Fo example, small Planning Cells ha e been un
in se ies o pa allel so ha he en i e p ojec in ol es la ge
numbe s o pa icipan s. Simila ly, Ci izens’ Assemblies o
be ween 100–150 people ha e been un a na ional le el
o e a numbe o weekends.
The wo s a egies desc ibed he e a e complemen a y
and allow us o con as how pa y ideology in luences
he ins i u ional design o DMPs. In o de o highligh any
po en ial ideological di e ences, we un Z- es s o iden i y
any s a is ically signi ican di e ences (a he 0.05 le el o
below) in he ela ionship be ween poli ical amilies and
design cha ac e is ics o DMPs.
Resul s
Pa y ideology and ime
How has he commissioning o delibe a i e mini-publics
been in luenced by pa y ideology o e ime? Figu e 2
p o ides a gene al desc ip i e pic u e. No only ha e mos
o hese p ocedu es been commissioned – in agg ega e
e ms – unde Social-Democ a ic go e nmen s (as also
seen in Table 1), bu ea ly commissioning also appea s o
be in luenced by go e ning pa y. Un il he 2000s, mos
DMPs we e clea ly de eloped unde Social-Democ a ic
go e nmen s (26 agains he 16 de eloped by Ch is ian-
Table 3: Numbe o DMPs commissioned in Eu ope by i s ea u es.
Du a ion o mee ings (in days)
2 days o less 3 days o mo e To al
Numbe o
pa icipan s
50 and below 40 67 107
Be ween 51 and 200 28 53 81
Abo e 200 12 12 24
To al 80 132 212
Sou ce: Own elabo a ion wi h da a om OECD Da abase o Rep esen a i e Delibe a i e P ocesses and Ins i u ions (2021).
Figu e 2: Commissioning o DMPs in Eu ope by pa y amily and yea .
Sou ce: Own elabo a ion wi h da a om OECD Da abase o Rep esen a i e Delibe a i e P ocesses and Ins i u ions
(2021) (N = 226).
Ramis-Moyano e al: Mini-Publics and Pa y Ideology
7
Democ a s), e en mo e han he sum o all o he poli ical
amilies. While a la ge numbe o DMPs ha e also been
commissioned unde Ch is ian-Democ a ic go e nmen s,
in mos yea s hei numbe is lowe compa ed o ha
o Social-Democ a s. The excep ion lies in he pe iod
2001–2010 (Figu e 3). This ela i e inc ease o Ch is ian-
Democ a s cases appea s o be mo e ela ed o a lack o
commissioning on he pa o he Social-Democ a s han
o an inc ease by Ch is ian-Democ a ic go e nmen s.
Figu e 3 sugges s h ee main pe iods o commissioning
o DMPs in ela ion o pa y ideology.6 Fi s , be ween
1979 and 2000, Social-Democ a ic go e nmen s in
pa icula and Ch is ian-Democ a ic ones o a lesse
ex en domina e he ield o ac i i y, wi h almos all DMPs
commissioned unde hei ule. Second, be ween 2001
and 2015, Social-Democ a s lose weigh in ela i e e ms,
wi h he appea ance o he Libe als (wi h mos cases
concen a ed be ween 2001 and 2005). Finally, om 2016
onwa ds, Social-Democ a s gain weigh again, bu wi h
Libe als su passing Ch is ian-Democ a s as he second
highes pa y amily and cases unde New-Le /G een and
Conse a i e ule g owing om a low base.
Pa y ideology and ime: Coun y speci ici ies
Bu a close look a he coun y le el e eals he
pa icula i ies o he di usion p ocess in di e en con ex s.
We show his by ocusing on ou coun ies: Ge many,
Denma k, Aus ia and he Uni ed Kingdom. Bo h Ge many
and Denma k ook he lead in he i s Eu opean ‘wa e’ o
commissioning (1979–2005, Figu e 1), wi h 37 and 14
(ou o 68) cases, espec i ely. Aus ia and he UK bo h
de eloped DMPs a a la e s age. Delibe a i e p ocedu es
ha e no been de eloped a he same pace o a he same
ime e e ywhe e. To in e oga e hese na ional pa e ns
and how hey a e in luenced by pa y ideology, we look in
mo e de ail a hese ou coun ies.7
In Ge many (Figu e 4), we ind a mixed pic u e, wi h
almos he same numbe o DMPs de eloped unde bo h
Social-Democ a ic and Ch is ian-Democ a ic go e nmen s
(28 s. 27 espec i ely). Be o e 2005, commissioning was
highe among Ch is ian-Democ a ic go e nmen s (21
cases) compa ed o Social-Democ a s (15). All hese cases
a e Planning Cells, designed by sociologis Pe e Dienel
a he Uni e si y o Wuppe al (Hend iks 2005). A e
2005, he numbe s a e in e ed, as mos DMPs we e
Figu e 4: DMPs commissioning pe yea and pa y amily: Ge many (N = 61).
Figu e 3: E olu ion o DMPs commissioning (pa y amily ela i e weigh by 5-yea pe iods).
Sou ce: Own elabo a ion wi h da a om OECD Da abase o Rep esen a i e Delibe a i e P ocesses and Ins i u ions
(2021) (N = 226).
Ramis-Moyano e al: Mini-Publics and Pa y Ideology
8
commissioned by Social-Democ a s, wi h New-Le /G een
go e nmen s commissioning equal numbe s o Ch is ian-
Democ a s (6). Du ing he en i e pe iod analysed, all
DMPs commissioned unde Social-Democ a ic ule we e
Planning Cells, while Ch is ian-Democ a s expe imen ed
wi h o he models a e 2005 (e.g., Ci izens’ Dialogues
and Ci izens’ Assemblies). New-Le /G eens ha e also
expe imen ed wi h di e se designs (e.g., Ci izens’ Ju ies
and Planning Cells). None heless, mos DMPs de eloped
in Ge many we e Planning Cells (53 ou o 61), despi e
some di e si ica ion in he second pe iod.
The o he ea ly adop e , Denma k, shows a clea
in luence o Social-Democ a commissioning. This is ue
when conside ing ea ly-commissioning and he whole
pe iod s udied (19 cases, 63%) (Figu e 5). Libe als a e
p esen h oughou bu wi h less weigh . The Danish case
is simila o he Ge man in ha almos all p ocedu es
commissioned be o e 2005 co espond o a speci ic
DMP model de eloped in ha coun y: in his case, he
Consensus Con e ence in en ed by he Danish Boa d o
Technology (Hend iks 2005). Mos Consensus Con e ences
ha e been commissioned unde Social-Democ a ic ule
(10 ou o 14). A e ha pe iod, Ci izens’ Dialogues
gained mo e p esence, wi h Libe al go e nmen s behind
ea ly cases o his sub- ype o DMP. Conse a i e uling
pa ies a e ela ed o only one Consensus Con e ence and
one Ci izens’ Dialogue, bu in bo h cases, hey ep esen
he i s adop ion o each model in Denma k.
In Aus ia (Figu e 6), a di e en pa e n o adop ion
eme ges, wi h Ch is ian-Democ a ic go e nmen s comm-
issioning he majo i y o DMPs du ing he en i e pe iod.
The mos equen model implemen ed in he coun y is
Ci izens’ Councils (28 ou o 30) – a model also known as
Wisdom Councils, which we e de eloped by Jim Rough in
he US and hen expo ed o Aus ia (Asenbaum 2016).
The UK is a la e adop e (Figu e 7). Al hough h ee DMPs
we e commissioned unde di e en go e ning pa ies
be ween 1999 and 2006, almos all p ocedu es ha e
Figu e 7: DMPs commissioning pe yea and pa y amily: Uni ed Kingdom (N = 31).
Figu e 6: DMPs commissioning pe yea and pa y amily: Aus ia (N = 34).
Figu e 5: DMPs commissioning pe yea and pa y amily: Denma k (N = 30).
Ramis-Moyano e al: Mini-Publics and Pa y Ideology
15
Ve ge, T. (2007). Modelos al e na i os de pa icipación
ciudadana en los pa idos polí icos españoles:
un es udio del PSOE, el PP e IU. Re is a Española
de Ciencia Polí ica, 17, 155–177. Re ie ed om:
h ps:// ecy . ecy .es/index.php/ ecp/a icle/ iew/
37451
Volkens, A., e al. (2021) The Mani es o Da a Collec ion.
Mani es o P ojec (MRG/CMP/MARPOR). Ve sion
2021a. Be lin: Wissenscha szen um Be lin ü
Sozial o schung (WZB). DOI: h ps://doi.o g/10.2552
2/mani es o.mpds.2021a
V ydagh, J., De ille s, S., Talukde , D., e al. (2020).
Les mini-publics en Belgique (2001–2018): expé iences
de panels ci oyens délibé a i s. B ussels: CRISP. DOI:
h ps://doi.o g/10.3917/c is.2477.0005
Wa en, M. (2009). Go e nance-d i en democ a iza ion.
C i ical Policy S udies, 3(1), 3–13. DOI: h ps://doi.
o g/10.1080/19460170903158040
How o ci e his a icle: Ramis-Moyano, R., Smi h, G., Ganuza, E. and Pog ebinschi, T. (2025). Mini-Publics and Pa y Ideology:
Who Commissioned he Delibe a i e Wa e in Eu ope?
Jou nal o Delibe a i e Democ acy
, 21(1), pp. 1–15. DOI: h ps://doi.
o g/10.16997/jdd.1559
Submi ed: 20 Decembe 2023 Accep ed: 01 Decembe 2024 Published: 12 Feb ua y 2025
Copy igh : © 2025 The Au ho (s). This is an open-access a icle dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion
4.0 In e na ional License (CC-BY 4.0), which pe mi s un es ic ed use, dis ibu ion, and ep oduc ion in any medium, p o ided he
o iginal au ho and sou ce a e c edi ed. See h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/.
Jou nal o Delibe a i e Democ acy
is a pee - e iewed open access jou nal published
by Uni e si y o Wes mins e P ess.
