Skip to content

DEMORESET

PHASE 2

IDENTIFY THE WALLS OF DELIBERATIVE DEMOCRACY IN THE GLOBAL SOUTH.

OF OBSTACLES AND CHALLENGES REGARDING DELIBERATIVE DEMOCRACY.

The second phase of the project recognizes the impact of the first phase, reinforcing the thematic subgroups of deliberation previously created. In each thematic subgroup, a needs assessment has been carried out: evaluating the main obstacles, challenges, methodological and technical issues.

The rest of the phase has focus on developing answers and prototyped solutions to the problems previously identified. To this end, 30 professionals have been invited to participate in a co-creation laboratory to work collectively on solving both their problems and those of other subgroups.

ACTIVITY ONE

Demo.Reset/Lab

GOAL

Identify, confirm and validate the needs, challenges and barriers faced by deliberative democracy initiatives in the South in order to co-create solutions to solve and overcome them.

We implemented a model of collective creation that has brought together the experience of 35 organizations from the global south participating in the project and who have put them in constant dialogue with creators, artists, programmers, designers, experts in behavioral sciences, among others.

The laboratory methodology motivated participants to generate creative circles of innovative ideas where the expertise of each of them is valued and encourages, in turn, diverse participation, the collective generation of knowledge and the creation of practical tools

METHO-DOLOGY

MODALITY

DURATION: 15 DAYS
presential 100%

Participants have worked for 5 hours a day, in six different groups, to design and create a prototype solution.

Outcome

Barrier
Participation mechanisms: are those that condition the right to organize and dialogue, deliberate and influence the management of a public interest. They emphatically address the inclusion of actors, contexts, interests and objectives. 

Challenge
How small landowners, historically marginalized, can be part of the dialogue on the development of agriculture and the guarantee of their rights.

Prototype
Farming democracy, harvesting sustainability.
Citizen assembly capable of incorporating small farmers in the decision-making process on agricultural development and claiming the rights they hold.

Barrier
Cultural barriers: these correspond strictly to the social, environmental, political, security and/or economic environment that may have hindered or determined the development of an initiative.

Challenge
How to re-establish relationships of trust between communities and elected representatives/decision-makers in the face of socio-environmental conflicts, in order to reconcile environmental remediation solutions and achieve the satisfaction of the yearning for justice?

Prototype
Strengthen!
A methodology for empowerment, trust restoration and deliberation in socio-environmental conflicts with affected communities.

Barrier
Barriers to participation mechanisms: these are those that condition the right to organize and dialogue, deliberate and influence the management of a public interest. They emphatically address the inclusion of actors, contexts, interests and objectives.

Challenge
There are no inclusive and neutral platforms created for deliberation that allow the inclusion of people with limited access to public forums. Due to barriers of distance, cost, language or information, inflexible scheduling (restricted time from engagement) and segmented decision making (some cultures limit certain groups to speak at the public meeting).”

Prototype
SAUTI YA VIJANA PLATFORM IN KENYA 
Multimedia platform (digital platform + community radios) to ensure effective participation in the public finance management process. 

Barrier
Knowledge management barriers: correspond to the management, systematization, analysis and processing of information or collective knowledge of the deliberation process and the communication of results.

Challenge
Government Ministries, Departments and Agencies are unable to proactively disclose procurement information that is accessible to all citizens. This has further discouraged civic participation in the procurement process and has affected accountability in the value for money of project delivery. This has resulted in insufficient citizen engagement, participation and feedback in public budget execution.  

Prototype
Data People
Citizen deliberation and training process for the active use of open data in Nigeria.

Barrier
Barriers in decision-making: among the deliberative processes, this is recognized as the most difficult moment, since the decision-making exercise requires prioritizing and/or discarding arguments and exposed needs, so these barriers address issues of coherence, inclusiveness, controversy closure, among others. 

Challenge
Lack of incentives or counterweights for public institutions to understand the democratic and practical value of deliberative democracy, including compliance and follow-up of deliberations or decisions made by citizens derived from democratic innovation and deliberative democracy mechanisms.

Prototype
Deliberation for the crisis. Advocacy and incentive strategy to strengthen the understanding, compliance and commitment of public institutions with deliberative democracy mechanisms.

Barrier
Knowledge management barriers: correspond to the management, systematization, analysis and processing of information or collective knowledge of the deliberation process and the communication of results.

Challenge
There are no collaborative spaces between organizations and/or practitioners of deliberative democracy in the Global South that allow for effective knowledge management of their projects.

Prototype
DemoReset
Matchmaking platform that allows users to match knowledge and/or support needs with the resources and expertise of other users. 

ACTIVITY Two

INTERACTIVE DELIBERATION MAP

GOAL

Create a digital and interactive repository of deliberative experiences, methodologies, practices, learning, strategies, actors, etc.

Extituto is developing a platform where Global South practitioners and organizations, making part of the project, can update the material and the knowledge related to deliberative democracy, previously generated from the Global South and the results produced in previous activities.

Susan Lee

Susan is a student and democracy practitioner from Seoul, South Korea. In 2020, she co-founded the World Citizens’ Assembly, a prototype for a global citizen’s assembly based on iterative pilot testing, with Yago Bermejo Abati. In 2021, Deliberativa began co-incubating the Global Assembly, the first sortition-selected global citizens’ assembly in the lead-up to COP26. Deliberativa coordinated the delivery of pilot tests on multilingual virtual deliberation to inform the final Assembly design. As part of the Implementation Circle, Susan supported the recruitment and management of 100+ global partners to implement a decentralized sortition and train local hosts of Assembly participants. In the fall of 2021, she co-designed and implemented the deliberative process and output consolidation methodology. Susan has been the main spokesperson for the GA since the project launched; you can see some of Susan’s media work here and here. Susan is interested in imagining participative models of global governance, decolonizing deliberative democracy, and placing youth at the front of the deliberative wave.

Maria Paulina Ibarra

Executive Director of Fundación Multitudes, a non-profit organization based in Chile. She has global experience in transparency, citizen participation and accountability, having worked with organizations such as Open Government Partnership and the World Bank. She holds a BA in Communication from Marymount University, and an MA in Communication from Georgetown University.

Andre Noel Roth

He is a Political Scientist (1990), Master in Political Science (1994) and Doctor in Economic and Social Sciences, mention in Political Science (1999) from the Université de Genève-Switzerland. He has been professor of public policy analysis in Switzerland and in several universities in Colombia and Latin America. Since 2006, he is a Research Professor (currently tenured) attached to the Department of Political Science of the Faculty of Law, Political and Social Sciences (FDCPyS) of the National University of Colombia, Bogotá. He has held the positions of Coordinator of the Doctorate in Political Studies and International Relations, Director of the journal Ciencia Política, Director of the Instituto de Investigación Socio-jurídica UNIJUS and Vice-Dean of Research and Extension of the FDCPyS. He is also Director of the Research Group “Analysis of Public Policies and Public Management”. Public Policy and Public Management Analysis” (APPGP) (category B Colciencias 2021), Coordinator of the Innovation in Governance Innovation in Governance Laboratory (GobLab) of the FDCPyS, Co-coordinator of the group Comparative Public Policy group of ALACIP and Co-editor of the journal Mundos Plurales (FLACSO-Ecuador). Ecuador). He has published several books and dozens of chapters and articles on public policy and administration. administration.