Crowdlaw and Digital Parliament in Law-Making
Authors
-
Francisco Soto Barrientos
Universidad de Chile
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9358-5217
-
Claudio Fuentes Bravo
Universidad de Chile
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4718-4746
-
Salvador Millaleo Hernández
Universidad de Chile
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6559-4856
Abstract
The present article aims to reflect on relevant experiences of citizen deliberation in processes of open normative creation through digital media that have been carried out in Chile - as forms of digital parliament and in the processes of participation in Chilean constituent processes -, within the context of its growing worldwide development to reconnect citizens with democratic political systems. The developments in Chile, as well as in comparative experience, show the need to regulate adequate deliberation and its impact on the processes of normative creation.Keywords:
Law-making process, deliberation, crowdlaw, E-parliamentReferences
Ackerman, Bruce y James Fishkin (2003). «Deliberation Day». En James Fishkin, y Peter Laslett (editores), Debating Deliberative Democracy (pp. 7-30). Oxford: Blackwell.
Alsina, Victoria y José Martí (2018). «The Birth of the CrowdLaw Movement: Tech-Based Citizen Participation, Legitimacy and the Quality of Lawmaking». Analyse & Kritik, 40 (2): 337-358. DOI: 10.1515/auk-2018-0019.
Althaus, Scott (2003). Collective preferences in democratic politics: Opinion surveys and the will of the people. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Araya, Eduardo y Diego Barría (2009). «E-participation in the Chilean Senate: deliberative online applications?». Convergencia, 51: 186-211. Disponible en https://convergencia.uaemex.mx/article/view/1201 .
Asher, Molly, Cristina Leston-Bandeira y Viktoria Spaiser (2019). «Do Parliamentary Debates of e-Petitions Enhance Public Engagement With Parliament? An Analysis of Twitter Conversations». Policy & Internet 11 (2): 149-171. DOI: 10.1002/poi3.194.
Asuntos del sur e innovación pública 360 (2021). La próxima frontera de la participación: Legislación abierta y colaborativa. Santiago: Asuntos del Sur. Disponible en https://bit.ly/41jEWsy.
Batista, Isabele, Francisco Marqués y Camila Mont’Alverne (2016). «Como se configura a comunicação online entre representantes e representados no Brasil? Um estudo sobre as ferramentas digitais da Câmara dos Deputados». Contracampo 35 (2): 87-115. DOI: 10.22409/contracampo.v35i2.937.
Bernal, Carlos (2019). «How constitutional crowdsourcing can enhance legitimacy in constitution making». En David Landau y Hanna Lerner (editores), Comparative Constitution Making (pp. 235-256). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. DOI: 10.4337/9781785365263.00017.
Bohman , James (2012). Deliberative systems: Deliberative democracy at the large scale. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Boswell, John, Carolyn Hendrycks y Selen Ercan (2016). «Message received? Examining transmission in deliberative systems». Critical Policy Studies, 10 (3): 263-283. DOI: 10.1080/19460171.2016.1188712.
Caplan, Bryan (2011). The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Chambers , Simone (2009). Public Reason and Deliberation. Nueva York: Routledge.
Christensen, Henrik Serup, Maija Karjalainen y Laura Nurminen (2015). «Does crowdsourcing legislation increase political legitimacy? The case of Avoin Ministeriö in Finland». Policy & Internet, 7 (1): 25-45. DOI: 10.1002/poi3.80.
Coleman, Stephen e Ildiko Kaposi (2006). New Democracies New Media What’s New? A study of e-participation projects in third-wave democracies. Leeds: University of Leeds.
Comité de Sistematización (2017). Sistematización de la etapa participativa del Proceso Constituyente abierto a la ciudadanía, Informe Ejecutivo. Santiago: Comité de Sistematización.
Congreso Nacional de Chile (2017). II Plan de acción de Parlamento abierto, 2017-2018. Santiago: Congreso Nacional, Open Government Partnership y PNUD.
Coutinho, Diogo, Beatriz Kira, Marília Rolemberg Lessa y Henrique Almeida de Castro (2017). «Participatory democracy and law-making in contemporary Brazil». Theory and Practice of Legislation 5 (3): 1-19. DOI: 10.1080/20508840.2017.1407073.
Curato, Nicole, Marit Hammond y John Min (2018). Power in Deliberative Democracy. Norms, Forums, Systems. Cham: Palgrave.
Dassen, Nicolás y María Jarquín (2020). Congreso virtual: Más participación, más confianza, mejores leyes. Disponible en https://bit.ly/47WbHyo.
Dryzek, John y Simon Niemeyer (2008). «Discursive Representation». American Political Science Review, 102: 481-493. DOI: 10.1017/S0003055408080325.
Eisenstadt, Todd y Tofigh Maboudi (2019). «Being There is Half the Battle: Group Inclusion, Constitution-Writing and Democracy». Comparative Political Studies, 52 (13-14): 2135-2170. DOI: 10.1177/0010414019830739.
Elstub, Stephen (2014). «Mini-Publics: Issues and Cases». En Stephen Elstub y Peter McLaverty (editores), Deliberative Democracy: Issues and Cases (pp.166-188). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Elstub, Stephen, Selen Ercan y Ricardo Mendonca (2016). «The fourth generation of deliberative democracy». Critical Policy Studies, 10 (2): 139-151. DOI: 10.1080/19460171.2016.1175956.
Epstein, Dmitry, Mary Newhart y Rebecca Vernon (2014). «Not by Technology Alone: The “Analog” Aspects of Online Public Engagement in Policymaking». Government Information Quarterly, 31 (2): 337-344. DOI: 10.1016/j.giq.2014.01.001.
Farrell, David, Jane Suiter y Kevin Cunningham (2017). «Bringing People into the heart of constitutional design». En Xenophon Contiades y Alkmene Fotiadou (editores), Participatory Constitutional Change: The People as Amenders of the Constitution (pp. 132-148). Londres: Routledge.
Feddersen, Mayra y Luis Santana (2019). Senador Virtual, 16 años de crowdlaw en el Parlamento chileno. Santiago: GobLab de la Universidad Adolfo Ibañez y David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies.
Fierro, Constanza, Claudio Fuentes, Jorge Pérez y Mauricio Quezada (2017). «200K+ Crowdsourced Political Arguments for a New Chilean Constitution». En Ivan Habernal, Iryna Gurevych, Kevin Ashley, Claire Cardie, Nancy Green, Diane Litman, Georgios Petasis, Chris Reed, Noam Slonim, Vern Walker (editores), Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Argument Mining (pp. 1-10). Copenhague: Association for Computational Linguistics.
Fishkin, James (1995). The Voice of the People: Public Opinion and Democracy, New Haven: Yale University Press.
Fishkin, James. (2018). Democracy when the people are thinking: Revitalizing our politics through public deliberation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fishkin, James. (2020). Democracy when the people are thinking: Revitalizing our politics through public deliberation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fung, Arconte (2003): «Survey Article. Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and Their Consequences». Journal of Political Philosophy, 11 (3): 338-367. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9760.00181.
Fung, Arconte y Erik Olin Wright (2003). Deepening Democracy-Institutional Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance. Londres, Nueva York: Verso.
Gastil, John y Peter Levine (editores) (2005). The Deliberative Democracy Handbook: Strategies for Effective Civic Engagement in the Twenty-First Century. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Goodin, Robert (2000). «Democratic Deliberation Within». Philosophy & Public Affairs, 2: 81-109. Disponible en https://bit.ly/46Z22WP.
Grönlund, Kimmo, André Dr Bӓchtiger Maija Setälä (editores) (2014). Deliberative Mini-Publics. I Kimmo nvolving Citizens in the Democratic Process. Colchester: ECPR Press.
Gutmann, Amy y Dennis Thompson (2004). Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Habermas, Jürgen (2006). Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Horton, Chris (2018). «The Simple but Ingenious System Taiwan Uses to Crowdsource Its Laws». MIT Technology Review. Disponible en https://bit.ly/41iNArj.
Hsiao, Yu-Tang, Shu-Yang Lin, Audrey Tang, Darshana Narayanan y Claudina Sarahe (2018). «Vtaiwan: An Empirical Study of Open Consultation Process in Taiwan». SocArXiv. DOI : 10.31219/osf.io/xyhft.
Ihnen, Constanza, Salvador Millaleo y Francisco Soto (2020). «El debate constitucional sobre el derecho a la educación y su impacto en la ciudadanía». Revista de Ciencia Política, 40 (3): 699-728. DOI: 10.4067/S0718-090X2020005000122.
Itten, Anatol y Niek Mouter (2022). «When Digital Mass Participation Meets Citizen Deliberation: Combining Mini-and Maxi-Publics in Climate Policy-Making». Sustainability, 14 (8): 46-56. DOI: 10.3390/su14084656.
Knobloch, Katherine, John Gastil, Justin Reedy y Katherine Cramer Walsh (2013). «Did They Deliberate? Applying an Evaluative Model of Democratic Deliberation to the Oregon Citizens’ Initiative Review». Journal of Applied Communication Research, 41 (2): 105-125. DOI: 10.1080/00909882.2012.760746.
Konopacki, Marco (2021). Inteligência Coletiva e Democracia: Um Modelo Teórico para Analisar crowdlaw aplicado a Processos Participativos de Seis Países. Tese apresentada ao programa de pós- graduação em ciência política como requisito parcial para obtenção do título de doutor em Ciência Política. Belo Horizonte: Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais.
Koryzis, Dimitris, Apostolos Dalas, Dimitris Spiliotopoulos y Fotios Fitsilis (2021). «ParlTech: Transformation Framework for the Digital Parliament». Big Data & Cognitive Computing, 5 (1): 15-31. DOI: 10.3390/bdcc5010015.
Landemore, Hélène (2013). «Deliberation, cognitive diversity, and democratic inclusiveness: an epistemic argument for the random selection of representatives». Synthese, 190 (7): 1209-1231. DOI: 10.1007/s11229-012-0062-6.
Landemore, Hélène(2020). «When public participation matters: The 2010–2013 Icelandic constitutional process». I•CON´s International Journal of Constitutional Law, 18 (1): 179-205. DOI: 10.1093/icon/moaa004.
Langer, Katharina , Thomas Decker y Klaus Menrad (2017). «Public Participation in Wind Energy Projects Located in Germany: Which Form of Participation Is the Key to Acceptance?». Renewable Energy, 112: 63-73. DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.021.
Lazer, David, Michael Neblo, Kevin Esterling y Katy Goldschmidt (2009). Online Town Hall Meetings. Exploring Democracy in the 21st Century. Washington: Congressional Management Foundation. Disponible en http://nposoapbox.s3.amazonaws.com/cmfweb/Online-Town-Hall-Meetings-Report.pdf
Lindner, Ralf y Ulrich Riehm (2009). «Electronic Petitions and Institutional Modernization International Parliamentary E-Petition Systems in Comparative Perspective». JEDEM, eJournal of EDemocracy 1 (1): 1-11. DOI: 10.29379/jedem.v1i1.3.
Mansbridge, Jane (2012). «A systemic approach to deliberative democracy». En John Parkinson y Jane Mansbridge (editores), Deliberative systems: Deliberative democracy at the large scale (pp. 1-26). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mansbridge, Jane, James Bohman, Simone Chambers, David Estlund, Andreas Føllesdal, Archon Fung, Cristina Lafont, Bernard Manin, José luis Martí (2010). «The Place of Power and the Role of Self-Interest in Deliberative Democracy». Journal of Political Philosophy, 18 (1): 64-100. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9760.2009.00344.x.
Már, Kristinn y John Gastil (2021). «Do Voters Trust Deliberative Minipublics? Examining the Origins and Impact of Legitimacy Perceptions for the Citizens’ Initiative Review». Political Behavior, 45 (3): 975-994. DOI: 10.1007/s11109-021-09742-6.
Martí, José y Beth Noveck (2022). « Introduction to the Special Issue on Crowdlaw and Emergency Collective Intelligence». Digital Government: Research and Practice 3 (2): 1-7. DOI: 10.1145/3550083.
Neblo, Michael, Kevin Esterling, Ryan Kennedy, David Lazer y Anand Sokhey (2010). «Who Wants to Deliberate-And Why?». American Political Science Review, 104: 566-583. DOI: 10.1017/S0003055410000298.
Niemeyer, Simon y John Dryzek (2007). «The Ends of Deliberation: Meta-consensus and Inter-subjective Rationality as Ideal Outcomes». Swiss Political Science Review, 13 (4): 497-526. DOI: 10.1002/j.1662-6370.2007.tb00087.x.
Noriega, Rocío (2021). Proceso de cocreación para la regulación de la participación ciudadana en el poder legislativo: El Caso del Congreso de Chile. Washington DC: Instituto Nacional Demócrata para Asuntos Internacionales.
Noveck, Beth (2018). «Crowdlaw: Collective Intelligence and Lawmaking». Analyse & Kritik, 40 (2): 359-380. DOI : 10.1515/auk-2018-0020.
Noveck, Beth. (2020). Testimony of Beth Simone Noveck in Hearing. «Fake It till They Make It: How Bad Actors Use Astroturfing to Manipulate Regulators, Disenfranchise Consumers, and Subvert the Rulemaking Process. Washington DC: U.S. House Committee on Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.
Noveck, Beth. (2020). crowdlaw for Congress, Strategies for 21st Century Lawmaking. Washington DC: Democracy Fund.
Parkinson, John y Jane Mansbridge (2012). Deliberative systems: Deliberative democracy at the large scale. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
PNUD (2014). Auditoría a la Democracia, Más y Mejor Democracia. Santiago: PNUD.
PNUD (2017a). La participación de la Sociedad Civil en el Proceso Legislativo Chileno. Santiago: PNUD.
PNUD (2017b). Sistematización de las opiniones ciudadanas expresadas en la etapa participativa del proceso constituyente abierto a la ciudadanía. Informe final, proyecto número 93915. Santiago: PNUD.
Raveau, María, Juan Pablo Couyoumdjian y Claudio Fuentes-Bravo (2022). «Mapping the complexity of political ideology using emergent networks: the Chilean case». Applied Network Science, 7 (1): 1-23. DOI: 10.1007/s41109-022-00459-x.
Raveau, María, Juan Pablo Couyoumdjian, Claudio Fuentes-Bravo, Carlos Rodriguez-Sickert, Cristian Candia (2022). «Citizens at the forefront of the constitutional debate: Participation determinants and emergent content in Chile». Plos One, 17 (6): e0267443. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267443.
Russon, Hollie (2022). «Building Civic Power in Crisis». Digital Government: Research and Practice, 3 (2): 1-14. DOI: 10.1145/3529164.
Sears, David (1993). «Symbolic Politics: A Socio-Psychological Theory». En Shanto Iyengar y William James Mcguire (editores), Explorations in Political Psychology (pp. 113-149). Durham, NC: Duke University Press. DOI: 10.1515/9780822396697-007.
Secretaría de Participación Popular (2022). Incidencia de las Iniciativas Populares de Norma en el borrador de la Nueva Constitución. Cuarto Informe de Incidencia, 26 de mayo de 2022. Santiago: Convención Constitucional.
Setälä, Maija (2017). «Connecting Deliberative Mini-Publics to Representative Decision Making». European Journal of Political Research, 56 (4): 846-863. DOI: 10.1111/1475-6765.12207.
Sirup, Henrik (2015). «Process or Outcome? How the Citizens' Initiative to Ban Fur Farming affected Political Trust among Users of Avoin Ministeriö ». Research of Finnish Society, 8: 61-71. DOI: 10.51815/fjsr.110733.
Soares de Faria, Cristiano Ferri (2013). El Parlamento abierto en la era de la Internet, ¿Puede el pueblo colaborar con el Legislativo en la elaboración de las leyes? Brasilia: Centro de Documentación e Información Edições Câmara.
Somin, Ilya (2016). Democracy and political ignorance: Why smaller government is smarter. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Soto, Francisco (2017). «Mecanismos de participación ciudadana en el proceso legislativo, los desafíos de su recepción en Chile». Oñati Socio-Legal Series, 7 (5): 1.144-1.159. Disponible en https://bit.ly/48e7SEt.
Soto, Francisco y Yanina Welp (2017). Los diálogos ciudadanos, Chile ante el giro deliberativo. Santiago: Lom.
Soto, Francisco. (2021). «Digital participation in Chilean “Citizenry dialogues” (2015)». International Journal of Electronic Governance, 13 (2): 192-207. DOI: 10.1504/IJEG.2021.116899.
Suárez Antón, Orestes (2019). La iniciativa de agenda en América Latina y la Unión Europea. Valencia: Tirant Lo Blanch.
Sunstein, Cass (2001). Designing Democracy. What Constitutions do. Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
Warren, Mark y John Gastil (2015). «Can deliberative minipublics address the cognitive challenges of democratic citizenship? ». The Journal of Politics, 77 (2): 562-574. DOI: 10.1086/680078.
