BRED OR WILD PARTICIPATION?
The development of the participation proposal for French citizens leads us to examine whether state organized participatory democracy hinders social change. The taking over of deliberation and participation functions by state and corporate bodies through regulations and initiatives such as participatory devices seems to both stimulate and channel citizen participation in decision making processes. More and more scholars study these institutional devices, criticizing the “procedural tropism” [Mazeaud, 2011] observed in the literature. Indeed, the proceduralization of citizen par¬ticipation over the last years, embodied in established and standardized devices which are controlled by a public or administrative institution, is of great social significance. Those standardized forms of debate, conceived in a top down approach by state and public bodies are also becoming compulsory in different fields of public action. Environmental law recent developments in France for instance are increasingly calling for citizens’ inclusion, as well as urban planning [Barbier et Larrue, 2011]. This institutionalization process produces at least two main types of consequences. Accord¬ing to Fourniau and Blondiaux [2011] it “coincides first of all with a renunciation of a large-scale social change”. These participative settings multiply and are often localized and time limited. They are aimed at what Fung [2003] calls the “mini public”. They do not allow sufficiently broad and concrete deliberative structures which enable real citizen expression. At the same time proceduralization usually gives control over participation to the authorities who organize it. The way in which they frame power, stage public meetings and animation choices reduces the margin of uncertainty which maintains openness and freedom of speech at debates. We have already highlighted this institutional issue and its political consequences for public debate [Revel, 2007]. Can we suggest that the shape of the participatory devices contributes to defining the form of justifiable public participation? The opposing argument about public debate proposed by Mermet [2007] lies in between “wild democracy” and “bred democracy”.
More...