Anticipating Transnational Publics

• Date: 01 September 2013
• Published date: 01 September 2013
• Author: William Smith
• DOI: 10.1177/0032329213493748
• Subject Matter: Articles

Politics & Society

41(3) 461 –484

© 2013 SAGE Publications

Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0032329213493748

pas.sagepub.com

Article

Anticipating Transnational

Publics: On the Use of

Mini-Publics in Transnational

Governance

William Smith

The Chinese University of Hong Kong

Abstract

This article evaluates mini-publics as a potential means of realizing deliberative

democratic values in transnational contexts. A mini-public is a group of citizens that is

chosen by random or near-random selection to debate matters of public concern in a

suitably structured deliberative environment. The argument of the article is that mini-

publics can be an important deliberative resource, but only as supplements to rather

than replacements for alternative means of reforming transnational institutions. These

forums can be used to prefigure transnational publics, but entrenched institutional

assumptions about the delineation and definition of these publics must be subject

to critical scrutiny by other elements of a transnational deliberative system. This

argument is developed through a critical engagement with the literature on mini-

publics, an analysis of a prominent example of a transnational mini-public, and a

defense of the role of civil society as a resource for counteracting the shortcomings

of mini-publics.

Keywords

civil society, deliberative democracy, deliberative polls, mini-publics, transnational

governance

Corresponding Author:

William Smith, Department of Government & Public Administration, The Chinese University of Hong

Kong, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong.

Email: wjcsmith@cuhk.edu.hk

493748PAS41310.1177/0032329213493748Politics & SocietySmith

research-article2013

462 Politics & Society 41(3)

Introduction

The study of deliberative democracy has developed into an empirically informed

research agenda geared toward normative evaluation of consultative mechanisms and

decision-making institutions.1 This agenda aims to combine the goals of increasing the

inclusiveness and thoughtfulness of political debate.2 A notable development in recent

years has been the emergence of “mini-publics” as a focal point of analysis and inves-

tigation.3 A mini-public is comprised of a small sample of citizens, drawn from a larger

public, to discuss and make recommendations about particular areas of public policy.4

The inclusivity of a mini-public is achieved through its method of selecting partici-

pants, which involves random or near random sampling techniques designed to ensure

appropriate representation of all salient social perspectives.5 The thoughtfulness of a

mini-public is secured through the structure of its internal deliberations, which involves

a regulated process of dialogue between participants that is responsive to information

and expert testimony relevant to the topic under discussion. The appeal of such forums,

according to Robert Goodin, “is that deliberation in these mini-publics is representa-

tive of—and hence can substitute for—deliberation among mass publics that simply

cannot deliberate together in the same ways.”6

The literature on mini-publics has, for the most part, focused on their use at domes-

tic levels, as complements to the established institutions and practices of liberal

democracy.7 There are signs, however, that researchers are becoming increasingly

aware of the potential to introduce mini-publics at transnational levels.8 These

researchers identify mini-publics as at least one part of a solution to the long-standing

problem of the deficiencies of institutions—such as the European Union (EU), the

World Trade Organization (WTO), and the United Nations (UN)—that exercise a sig-

nificant degree of power beyond the regulatory level of the nation-state. These institu-

tions have pervasive impacts on persons and societies but provide few effective

opportunities to influence their deliberations and decisions.9 This problem is com-

pounded because the sheer scale of these institutions—coupled with the complexity of

the issues they address—renders it difficult to imagine how individuals could take

advantage of any such opportunities should they become available.10 The turn to mini-

publics is motivated by the hope that it might be possible to use deliberative demo-

cratic mechanisms to improve the inclusiveness and thoughtfulness of transnational

governance. As in domestic contexts, the deliberations of a mini-public might repre-

sent and substitute for that of a larger—multinational and perhaps even global—public

that cannot deliberate together in the same way.

This paper offers a critical analysis of the nascent research agenda surrounding the

use of micro-deliberative forums beyond the nation. The argument is that mini-publics

have a role to play in realizing deliberative democratic values in transnational con-

texts, but that these forums must be conceptualized as supplements to, rather than

replacements for, additional means of addressing the deficiencies of transnational

institutions. The reason is that mini-publics tend to replicate, rather than resolve, a

serious flaw in current arrangements: the power of transnational institutions to define

and delineate the public(s) that they address. This limitation of mini-publics illustrates