Poorly designed deliberation: explaining the banlieues’ non-involvement in the Great Debate

Abstract

In 2019, the French Government organized a wide public consultation named the Great Debate. Promoted as a deliberative practice that could bring together various segments of society, it was characterized by feeble involvement of the people living in the banlieues – densely populated, economically marginalized, socially deprived and ethno-culturally different peripheral areas of large cities. This article aims to explain the reasons for which people in the banlieues of Paris did not participate in the Great Debate. Drawing on in-depth interviews and one focus group conducted in the spring of 2019, we distinguish between four main causes of non-participation: the re-legitimation function of the debate, its lack of inclusiveness, mismatch of demands, and format of the deliberative setting.

Keywords:

• Deliberation
• involvement
• periphery
• inclusiveness
• France

Disclosure statement

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

Additional information

Funding

This article is based upon work from COST Action “Constitution-making and deliberative democracy” (CA17135), supported by COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology).

Notes on contributors

Sergiu Miscoiu

Sergiu Mișcoiu is Professor of Political Science at the Faculty of European Studies, Babes-Bolyai University Cluj-Napoca, Romania. His research interests are the constructivist and the alternative theories applied to nation building, populism and political transition.

Sergiu Gherghina

Sergiu Gherghina is an Associate Professor in Comparative Politics, Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Glasgow. His research interests lie in party politics, legislative and voting behavior, democratization, and direct democracy.