Participation and Trust: Conditions and Constraints on Democratic Deliberation

  • Susan DoddsEmail author
Part of the The International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology book series (ELTE, volume 16)


Public engagement in policy making is on mechanism used in an effort to improve the legitimacy of policy decisions surrounding ethically contentious health policy or medical technologies. Citizens’ trust in the process and in the medical, science and democratic institutions surrounding the policy is vital to the success of efforts to engage publics in deliberative processes. This paper explores the nature and role of trust in deliberative democracy, as well as effects of misplaced and abused trust on the legitimacy of specific policies and the overall project of inclusive participation of citizens in public policy deliberation.


Participation Trust Deliberative democracy 



This research was supported by the Australian Research Council Discovery Grant “Big Picture Bioethics: Policy-Making and Liberal Democracy” (DP0556068), the ARC Centre of Excellence for Materials Science (CE0561616), and the University of Tasmania. It is a revised version of a chapter entitled “Trust accountability and participation: conditions and constraints on ‘new’ democratic models” published in Public Engagement and Emerging Technologies, ed. Edna Einsiedel and Kieran O’Doherty: UBC Press, 2013, 69–79, Vancouver. Reprinted with the permission of UBC Press.


  1. Anderson, J., and A. Honneth. 2005. Autonomy, vulnerability, recognition and justice. In Autonomy and the challenges to liberalism, ed. J. Christman and A. Anderson, 127–149. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baier, A. 1994. Trust and its vulnerabilities. In Moral prejudices: Essays on ethics, ed. A. Baier, 130–151. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bohman, J. 1999. Democracy as inquiry, inquiry as democratic: Pragmatism, social science and the cognitive division of labor. American Journal of Political Science 44(2): 590–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chambers, S. 2003. Deliberative democratic theory. Annual Review of Political Science 6: 307–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dagger, R. 1997. Civic virtues: Rights, citizenship and republican liberalism. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Delli Carpini, M.X., F.L. Cook, and L.R. Jacobs. 2004. Public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: A review of the empirical literature. American Review of Political Science 7: 315–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dryzek, J.S. 2000. Deliberative democracy and beyond: Liberals, critics, contestations. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Elster, J. 1998. Introduction. In Deliberative democracy, ed. J. Elster, 1–18. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Estlund, D.M. 2008. Democratic authority: A philosophical framework. Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Festenstein, M. 2005. Dewey’s political philosophy. In The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, Spring 2009 ed, ed. Edward N. Zalta.
  11. Fishkin, J.S. 1995. The voice of the people: Public opinion and democracy. New Haven/London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Gastil, J. 2000. By popular demand: Revitalizing representative democracy through deliberative elections. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  13. Gaus, G.F. 1996. Justificatory liberalism: An essay on epistemology and political theory. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Goodin, R.E. 2003. Reflective democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Govier, T. 1997. Social trust and human communities. Montreal/Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Gutmann, A., and D. Thompson. 1996. Democracy and disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Gutmann, A., and D. Thompson. 2003. Deliberative democracy beyond process. In Debating deliberative democracy, ed. J.S. Fishkin and P. Laslett, 31–53. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Habermas, J. 1996. Three normative models of democracy. In Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political, ed. S. Benhabib, 21–30. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hardin, R. 1999. Do we want trust in government? In Democracy and trust, ed. M. Warren, 22–41. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hookway, C. 2008. Pragmatism. In The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy,Spring 2010 ed, ed. Edward N. Zalta. .
  21. Irwin, A. 1995. Citizen science: A study of people, expertise and sustainable development. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Irwin, A. 2006. The politics of talk: Coming to terms with the ‘New’ scientific governance. Social Studies of Science 36: 299–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Irwin, A., and B. Wynne (eds.). 1996. Misunderstanding science? The public reconstruction of science and technology. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Jasanoff, S. 2005. Designs on nature: Science and democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jones, K. 1996. Trust as an affective attitude. Ethics 107: 4–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Macleod, C. 2006. Trust. In The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy,Spring 2011 ed, ed. Edward N. Zalta. .
  27. McGeer, V. 2008. Trust, hope and empowerment. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 86(2): 237–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Warren, M. 1999. Democratic theory and trust. In Democracy and trust, ed. M. Warren, 310–345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wynne, B. 2006. Public engagement as a means of restoring public trust in science—Hitting the notes, but missing the music? Community Genetics 9: 211–220.Google Scholar
  30. Young, I.M. 2000. Inclusion and democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Arts and Social SciencesUNSW AustraliaSydneyAustralia
  2. 2.School of HumanitiesUniversity of TasmaniaHobartAustralia

Personalised recommendations