Public deliberation and policy crisis: the moderating effects of deliberation on policy support determinants

Abstract

This study investigates the moderating effects of public deliberation on policy support determinants: self-interests, symbolic attitudes and sociotropic perceptions. It explores how individual attitudes and policy preferences evolve during deliberation, focusing on Gyeonggi Province’s basic income policy held in 2020 in South Korea. The paper reveals that while public deliberation, through information and group discussions, reduces the influence of material self-interests on policy preferences, it has a relatively limited effect on symbolic attitudes and sociotropic perceptions.

Keywords:

• public deliberation
• policy support
• self-interest
• symbolic attitude
• sociotropic perception

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 公論政治, which translates to ‘public opinion politics’ or ‘politics of public discourse’ in English, finds its origins and conceptual underpinnings in traditional Confucian texts. This concept emphasizes the role of public discourse, open debate, and the collective opinion of the citizenry in influencing and guiding political actions and policies. For the semantic multiplicity of ‘public deliberation’(公論化) circulating in Korean society, refer to Eun (2022, Chapter 2).

2 The concept of ‘Mini-Publics’ draws its origins from Dahl's notion of ‘mini-populus’ (Dahl 1989, 340). In this context, ‘mini’ signifies a microcosm of society as a whole. It's important to note that a microcosm of society isn't merely characterized by its small size but rather by its ability to represent the entire society. This representation is achieved through the selection of citizens via methods like lotteries, ensuring demographic representativeness. Dahl proposed that these selected citizens should be provided with opportunities to acquire knowledge and engage in deliberation on a specific issue over a defined period. The resulting opinions and insights can then be communicated to decision-makers, serving as a more precise and rational foundation for shaping public policies. This form of deliberation was coined by Dahl as ‘Mini-populus.’

3 In his seminal analysis of American voting behavior, Downs (1957) presented a critical inquiry into voter engagement. Central to his investigation was a pivotal dilemma: the apparent reluctance of voters to invest significant time and effort into a thorough understanding and evaluation of political candidates. Downs emphasized the tendency of voters to eschew extensive efforts in acquiring political knowledge and scrutinizing candidates. He posited that this reluctance stems from a cost-benefit analysis where the perceived costs of educating oneself about political issues to a level sufficient for making informed decisions notably exceed any potential gains from such an endeavor. Consequently, voters often opt for what Downs describes as ‘rational ignorance,’ a deliberate choice to remain uninformed, relying instead on predetermined benchmarks and established norms to assess political figures. This concept of ‘rational ignorance’ emerged as a cornerstone in Downs' exploration of voter behavior, encapsulating the calculated judgment by the electorate to prioritize existing knowledge frameworks over extensive political inquiry.

4 Kumlin (2004, 163) distinguishes sociotropic perceptions into two categories: perceptions of public services and perceptions of the economic conditions facing the community. However, due to constraints in available data, this study primarily centers on trust in government as a marker of public awareness regarding governmental services, aligning with the framework established by Kumlin. Previous research suggests that high levels of trust in government are likely to have a positive impact on policy support. The measurement of trust in government utilized survey items querying trust in Gyeonggi-do Provincial Government.

5 Exploratory factor analysis in this study involved the utilization of principal component analysis in conjunction with varimax rotation. The primary objective was to discern underlying patterns and relationships within the data. Initially, a set of 13 questions was employed to gauge respondents' sentiments regarding government trust, information, and satisfaction with deliberation (group discussion). During the initial exploratory factor analysis, one question exhibited a factor loading value below the threshold of 0.5, and its alignment with the theoretical framework was tenuous. Consequently, this particular item was identified as challenging to interpret effectively. Subsequently, a refined exploratory factor analysis was conducted on the remaining 11 items, excluding the two problematic ones. This analysis revealed that all items achieved factor loadings of 0.5 or higher, and the significance probability of the chi-square value in the KMO (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin) and Bartlett’s sphericity test met the established criteria. This outcome underscored the validity of the items in effectively measuring each variable. Furthermore, to ascertain the reliability of the three factors derived from the factor analysis—namely, government trust, satisfaction with information, and satisfaction with deliberation (group discussion)—a Cronbach's α value assessment was conducted. The results indicated that all three factors exhibited Cronbach's α values exceeding 0.6, thereby meeting the standard criteria commonly expected in social science research.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Jaeho Eun

Jaeho Eun is Senior Research Fellow at the Korea Institute of Public Administration and Adjunct professor at the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology. His teaching, research, and service activities focus on conflict prevention & resolution, public governance and leadership.