Search

This article argues that deliberative theory provides an important contribution in the debate about the legitimacy of an Islamic influence within the British education system. The contribution is a timely one, in light of the tendency to view issues involving Islam and Muslims through the distorting prism of Islamophobia. The contribution of deliberative theory is developed and explained through a constructive comparison with two positions within debates about the legitimacy of religion and the accommodation of minority claims within education: ethical liberalism and ethical pluralism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While the scholarship on online deliberation has recently witnessed remarkable growth, most studies have focused on different parts of deliberation, thus neglecting other parts of the theorized process. This paper presents a case study of online deliberation in academia using a framework including three analytical parts: a design fostering deliberation (institutional inputs), the quality of the communication process (communicative throughput), and the expected benefits of deliberation (productive outcomes). Each level addressed in the framework is both rooted in deliberative theory and complemented by empirical findings. Applying the framework to a case study on online deliberation about new PhD guidelines in a German science faculty demonstrates that the framework is viable for empirical research. In analyzing 435 comments and an online survey completed by 230 participants, the case study reveals that if deliberative standards at the institutional input level are met there is considerable deliberative quality at the level of communicative throughput, and expected outcomes could thus emerge. This example makes a case for further online deliberation initiatives in similar contexts such as parties or organizations that must decide on important issues or legally binding norms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reviews the potential contribution of deliberative theory and actor-network theory to the practice of social impact assessment (SIA). With reference to a case study of the World Commission on Dams, it argues for an approach to SIA that goes beyond documenting social change and that (1) targets consensus building among those impacted by planned interventions as a basic starting point for social scientific investigation; (2) places greater emphasis on the ways in which peoples' values, aspirations, perceived interests, and political coalitions change throughout the life of a proposal and shape their experience of project outcomes; (3) seeks to unravel the often unstated assumptions about who and what is important that are built into social data and stakeholder representative structures; and (4) challenges the separation of the "social" and the "natural" by fostering a more productive engagement between scientific and lay knowledges about the processes and impacts of change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]