In 2006, the Danish Parliament organized its second Deliberative Poll on the Euro (Europahøring). This time, the agenda was wider and not directly connected to a referendum; across 2 days, 419 citizens debated topics such as EU borders, the role of the EU, and policy tasks.
Problems and Purpose
The Danish Parliament decided to organize a public debate with Danish citizens on the relationship to the EU, and on what direction Danish citizens want the EU to go. Citizens debated issues such as the borders of the EU, the main policy tasks that the EU should implemented, and the EU role on issues such environment, terrorism, research, and social security. [1]
Background History and Context
In 2000, the Danish Parliament had organized a deliberative poll on the euro, in the month before the referendum on Denmark joining the Euro. The Danish Parliament wanted to re-do the same kind of experience. The agenda was however wider, and not directly connected to a referendum. [1]
Organizing, Supporting, and Funding Entities
Know who organized or funded this initiative? Help us complete this section!
Participant Recruitment and Selection
A very large sample of the national population was drawn randomly. In total, 4884 citizens were contacted to join the deliberative poll. 1255 of them replied to the phone calls, and after several contacts and reminders, 419 took part to the meeting. The final sample was rather representative of the Danish population in terms of gender, age, education, region of residence, occupation, interest for politics and voting intention for the referendum. There were some small differences (for example, overrepresentation of men, citizens aged between 40-60, university degree holders, interest in politics, and yes vote) but they were not corrected at any stage. The quality of the sample was based on the initially random selection, on the many phone contacts to convince citizens to join, and on the large N. [1]
Methods and Tools Used
What Went On: Process, Interaction, and Participation
Know how people participated or what public interaction looked like? Help us complete this section!
Influence, Outcomes, and Effects
In this case (compared to the deliberative poll in 2000), the deliberative poll was not associated with a specific referendum. Therefore, the goal of improving public awareness was a bit less salient, and it was more about public authorities willing to obtain fine-grained information on what Danes think about the EU, its role and its prerogatives. A scientific report and publication by Kasper Hansen studied participants’ preferences regarding European integration and specific policies of the EU. [1]
Analysis and Lessons Learned
Want to contribute an analysis of this initiative? Help us complete this section!
See Also
References
External Links
Notes
This entry is based on the POLITICIZE dataset. More information can be found at the following links:
[1] Paulis, Emilien; Pilet, Jean-Benoit; Panel, Sophie; Vittori, Davide; Close, Caroline, 2020, "POLITICIZE Dataset", https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/Z7X6GT, Harvard Dataverse, V1
[2] Pilet J-B, Paulis E, Panel S.,Vitori D & Close C. 202X The POLITICIZE Dataset: an inventory of Deliberative Mini-Publics (DMPs) in Europe. European Political Science.