Table 5 Coding scheme

From: Designing international organizations for debate? A factor analysis

component element description
Agenda setting AS_except_meetings It is possible to call exceptional meetings
AS_state_participation member states can participate in agenda-setting
AS_change_agenda It is possible to change the agenda once a meeting has started
AS_discuss_agenda There is a discussion on the agenda
Negotiation N_order_speakers Exceptions to order of speakers are possible (e.g., some speakers have precedence or speakers can give way)
N_chair_speakers Chair has the right to accord the right to speak to participants
N_chair_right_of_reply Delegates have a right of reply, irrespective whether the List of speakers is already closed
N_make_proposals It is possible to make proposals/amendments
N_no_secondment_ proposals A single state can make proposals/amendments
(N_timing_exceptions_proposals It is possible to make exceptions concerning the timing of proposals
N_reintroduce_proposals Withdrawn proposals can be reintroduced by other states
(N_reconsider_proposals It is possible to reconsider rejected/adopted proposals
N_discuss_close_debate A discussion is required before closing the debate on an item
N_discuss_close_ meeting A discussion is required before closing the meeting
Decision-making D_quorum there is a required quorum for taking decisions
D_consensus consensus/unanimity is required to take decisions
(D_one_state_one_vote one state one vote
Frame-work conditions (FRAME_transparency It is possible to make initial public meetings private (or the other way round) according to the delegates’ wishes
(FRAME_advisors delegations can bring advisors/experts
FRAME_translation Translation is organized by IO
(FRAME_access_ externals Other actors (NGOs, other IOs, observers, etc.) have access to meetings
FRAME_speaking_ externals Other actors can voice their opinion in meetings
  1. The coding scheme of deliberative elements in IO institutional design was developed by following a mixture of deductive and inductive practices. In a first step, we collected a list of design elements potentially inducing deliberation based on deliberation, discourse and negotiation literatures. In a second step, we used the very detailed and extensive institutional rules of the UNGA to compare our coding scheme with a real-world example and enhanced it by elements we, to this point, have not thought of. In a third step, we applied the coding scheme to a larger subsample of IOs to identify those design elements, which do not only appear in the particularly detailed institutional provisions of the UNGA, but were mentioned in other IOs as well. We arrived at the final coding scheme, by re-formulating the elements and descriptions in a manner applicable to all IOs. For instance, several items relate to the role of chairs, that are called differently in different IOs (e.g., secretary general, president, chairperson, etc.) but perform similar tasks concerning the management of debate in different stages of the policy cycle. Thus, we ended up with a scheme of 22 design elements, listed below