Difference between deliberative and collaborative
The careful deliberation approach emphasizes open discussion and consensus and assumes that all interests are considered honestly and thoroughly. The cooperation approach, on the other hand, focuses on identifying common values and working toward a solution that is acceptable, if not perfect, to all parties involved.
- Difference between careful deliberation and [cooperation
Q: It suggests people are willing to relax some of their standards if they feel like they are in a fair, balanced and discursive arena. A: Exactly. I wouldn’t say that we’re deliberative. The informed decision part is utopian: It assumes that people bring their interests to the table honestly, which often is not the case, even in the very deliberative Swiss referendum model, for example. We usually use the word collaborative, which means we only identify some common values, and we’re satisfied with that. It’s not really a consensus. It’s more like consent, which signals someone can live with something, not necessarily that they would sign their name to it. --- Audrey Tang from Democracy needs to evolve into a real-time system
- The “deliberative” approach to decision-making involves thorough discussion, debate, and consideration of all points of view before reaching a decision
- This is based on the idea that participants should openly share their interests and make decisions that best take into account the interests of others.
- The author notes that this model is somewhat utopian because it assumes that people honestly bring their interests to the table
- The “collaborative” approach, on the other hand, focuses on finding common values among the parties involved and aims for a solution that is acceptable to all, even if it is not necessarily the preferred choice of all involved.
- The author states that this approach focuses on getting “consent,” meaning that people can live with the decision, rather than “consensus,” meaning that everyone agrees completely.
- The text cites Taiwan’s Sandbox Law as an example of a collaborative approach.
- Innovators are given one year to test their ideas in a highly regulated area without fear of legal repercussions
- should propose alternative regulations and make all data open and transparent.
- This allows everyone to see and evaluate the innovation and decide whether to adopt it based on its merits.
relevance - Easier to agree on what has helped than what has not
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/熟議と協調の違い using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.