Between October and December 2010, the first deliberative field experiment in Swiss direct democracy was conducted. The issue of the online experiment was the expulsion initiative („Ausschaffungsinitiative”) of the Swiss People’s Party (SVP) and the counterproposal of the government and parliament. The expulsion initiative was an emotionally charged issue with a populist dimension, and as such perhaps not well suited for reasoned discussion. At the same time, it is precisely this kind of direct democratic vote where deliberation is perhaps most needed.
Community Planning (CP) is a statutory framework in Scotland which seeks to engage citizens and communities in local-level political decision-making processes, while at the same time improving coordination and collaboration between elected and unelected bodies that provide public services. Statutory guidance issued by the Scottish Government (then the Scottish Executive) in 2004 stipulated that CP’s two core goals are:
In the late 2000s Northumberland Hills Hospital experienced repeated budget deficits. The hospital's board needed to cut the hospital's services in order to balance the budget. Ontario's Local Health System Integration Act, 2006, required the hospital to seek public input before changing services. Accordingly, the hospital's board developed a plan, called a collaborative budget strategy -- formally entitled "Shared Challenge, Shared Solution" -- to elicit this public input.
Note: This article is in need of assistance with editing and content. Please help us complete it.
This case study features a citizens' deliberation on the renovation of a public square in Italy. Many meetings and workshops were organized to take many different stakeholders' perspectives into account, including those of minorities and disabled individuals. The result was a successful, participatory decision to make some major construction modifications to the square.
Contrary to popular perception, the Inner Belt opposition movement was far from unified. While opponents to the highway were united in their objectives, their motivations and strategies were as varied as the group itself. Even residents of the same community differed in their reasons for criticizing the highway.
Principal sources of the Inner Belt controversy included the highway’s potential effects on: