A theoretically reflected and empirically valid measurement of nation states’ democratic quality must include an assessment of polities’ deliberativeness. This article examines the assessment of deliberativeness suggested by two sophisticated contemporary measurements of democratic quality, that is, the Democracy Barometer and the Varieties of Democracy-project. We feature two sets of challenges, each measurement of deliberativeness must meet: First, it must address the methodological challenges arising in the course of conceptualizing, operationalizing, and aggregating complex concepts (see Munck and Verkuilen, 2002). Second, attempts to measure nation states’ deliberativeness are confronted with specific conceptual and systematic challenges which we derive from recent deliberative democracy scholarship. We argue that both Democracy Barometer and Varieties of Democracy-project provide highly sophisticated assessments of democratic quality, but ultimately fail to capture nation states “deliberativeness” in a theoretically reflected and methodologically sound manner. We examine the methodological, pragmatic, and systematic reasons for these shortcomings. The crucial task for measurements of nation states’ deliberativeness consists in providing a conceptual approach and methodological framework for “upscaling” existing meso-level measurements (such as the DQI). The concluding section presents conceptual and methodological strategies that can enable researchers to meet these challenges and to provide a theoretically grounded and empirically valid measurement of nation states’ deliberativeness.
BächtigerAParkinsonJ (2019) Mapping and Measuring Deliberation: Towards a New Deliberative Quality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3.
Bertelsmann Foundation (2018) Transformation Index BTI 2018: Governance in International Comparison. Gütersloh: Verlag Bertelsmann Stiftung.
4.
BesteS (2016) ‘Legislative Frame Representation’: Towards an Empirical Account of the Deliberative Systems Approach. The Journal of Legislative Studies22 (3): 295–328.
BühlmannMMerkelWMüllerL, et al. (2008) Wie lässt sich Demokratie am besten messen? Zum Forumsbeitrag von Thomas Müller Und Susanne Pickel. Politische Vierteljahresschrift49 (1): 114–122.
7.
BühlmannMMerkelWMüllerL, et al. (2012) Demokratiebarometer: Ein neues Instrument zur Messung von Demokratiequalität. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft6 (S1): 115–159.
8.
CaluwaertsDReuchampsM (2015) Strengthening Democracy through Bottom-Up Deliberation: An Assessment of the Internal Legitimacy of the G1000 Project. Acta Politica50 (2): 151–170.
9.
ChambersS (2003) Deliberative Democratic Theory. Annual Review of Political Science6 (1): 307–326.
10.
CohenJ (1989) Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy. In: PettitPHamlinA (eds) The Good Polity: Normative Analysis of the State. Oxford: Polity Press, pp.17–34.
11.
CoppedgeMGerringJAltmanD, et al. (2011) Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy: A New Approach. Perspectives on Politics9 (2): 247–267.
12.
CoppedgeMGerringJLindbergSI, et al. (2016a) V-Dem Codebook. v6. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project. Available at: https://www.v-dem.net/ (accessed 18 April 2017).
13.
CoppedgeMGerringJLindbergSI, et al. (2016b) V-Dem Methodology. v6. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project. Available at: https://www.v-dem.net/ (accessed 18 April 2017).
14.
CoppedgeMGerringJLindbergSI, et al. (2018a) V-Dem Codebook. v8. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project. Available at: https://www.v-dem.net/ (accessed 26 November 2018).
15.
CoppedgeMGerringJLindbergSI, et al. (2018b) V-Dem Methodology. v8. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project. Available at: https://www.v-dem.net/ (accessed 26 November 2018).
16.
CoppedgeMGerringJLindbergSI, et al. (2019) V-Dem Codebook. v9. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project. Available at: https://www.v-dem.net/ (accessed 10 July 2019).
17.
CoppedgeMLindbergSISkaaningS, et al. (2015) Measuring High Level Democratic Principles Using the V-Dem Data, Working Paper Series 6, The Varieties of Democracy Institute. Available at: https://www.v-dem.net/ (accessed 19 April 2017).
18.
CoppedgeMLindbergSISkaaningS-E, et al. (2016c) V-Dem Comparisons and Contrasts with Other Measurement Projects. V-Dem Varieties of Democracy. Available at: https://www.v-dem.net/ (accessed 19 April 2017).
19.
DahlRA (1971) Polyarchie; Participation and Opposition. New Haven, CT; London: Yale University Press.
20.
DryzekJS (2000) Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21.
DryzekJS (2015) Deliberative Engagement: The Forum in the System. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences5 (4): 750–754.
22.
DryzekJSNiemeyerS (2010) Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23.
ElstubS (2010) The Third Generation of Deliberative Democracy. Political Studies Review8 (3): 291–307.
24.
ElstubS (2015) A Genealogy of Deliberative Democracy. Democratic Theory2 (1): 1–19.
25.
EsauKFleußDNienhausS-M (in press) Different Arenas, Different Deliberative Quality? Using a Systemic Framework for Evaluating Online Deliberation on Immigration Policy in Germany. Policy & Internet, Special Issue “Political Online Participation and its Effects”.
26.
FishkinJS (2018) Democracy When the People Are Thinking: Revitalizing Our Politics through Public Deliberation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27.
FleußDHelbigKSchaalGS (2018) Four Parameters for Measuring Democratic Deliberation: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges and How to Respond. Politics and Governance6 (1): 11–21.
FuchsDRollerE (2009) Die Konzeptualisierung der Qualität von Demokratie. Eine kritische Diskussion aktueller Ansätze. In: BrodoczALlanqueMSchaalGS (eds) Bedrohungen der Demokratie. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, pp.77–96.
GerberM (2015) Equal Partners in Dialogue? Participation Equality in a Transnational Deliberative Poll (Europolis). Political Studies63: 110–130.
32.
GerberMBächtigerAShikanoS, et al. (2018) Deliberative Abilities and Influence in a Transnational Deliberative Poll (EuroPolis). British Journal of Political Science48 (4): 1093–1118.
33.
GoodinRE (2018) If Deliberation Is Everything, Maybe It’s Nothing. In: BächtigerADryzekJSMansbridgeJ, et al. (eds) Oxford Deliberative Democracy Handbook. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.883–899.
34.
HabermasJ (1996) Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.
35.
JäckleSUweWBauschkeR (2012) Das Demokratiebarometer: “basically Theory Driven”?Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft6 (1): 99–125.
36.
LockeJ (2016) Second Treatise of Government and A Letter Concerning Toleration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
37.
MøllerJSkaaningS-E (2012) Concept-Measure Inconsistency in Contemporary Studies of Democracy. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft6: 233–251.
38.
MansbridgeJ (1999) Everyday Talk in the Deliberative System. In: StephenM (ed.) Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement. Oxford: University Press, pp.211–238.
39.
MansbridgeJBohmanJChambersS, et al. (2012) A Systemic Approach to Deliberative Democracy. In: ParkinsonJMansbridgeJ (eds) Deliberative Systems, Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp.1–26.
40.
MarshallMJaggersK (2018) Polity IV Project: Dataset Users’ Manual (Polity IV Data Computer File, Version P4v2004, Center for International Development and Conflict Management, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland). Center for Global Policy, George Mason University. Available at: www.systemicpeace.org/polityproject.html (accessed 10 June 2019).
41.
MerkelWCroissantA (2003) Liberale und defekte Demokratien. In: KarlS (ed.) Herausforderungen der Repräsentativen Demokratie. Baden-Baden: Nomos, pp.55–88.
42.
MerkelWBochslerDBousbahK, et al. (2016a) Democracy Barometer: Codebook, version 5. Aarau: Zentrum für Demokratie.
43.
MerkelWBochslerDBousbahK, et al. (2016b) Democracy Barometer: Methodology, version 5. Aarau: Zentrum für Demokratie.
44.
MunckGL (2009) Measuring Democracy: A Bridge between Scholarship and Politics. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
45.
MunckGLVerkuilenJ (2002) Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy: Evaluating Alternative Indices. Comparative Political Studies35 (1): 5–34.
OwenDSmithG (2015) Survey Article: Deliberation, Democracy, and the Systemic Turn. Journal of Political Philosophy23 (2): 213–234.
48.
PedriniS (2014) Deliberative Capacity in the Political and Civic Sphere. Swiss Political Science Review20 (2): 263–286.
49.
PickelSPickelG (2007) Politische Kultur- und Demokratieforschung. Wiesbaden: Springer-Verlag.
50.
PickelSStarkTBreustedtW (2015) Assessing the Quality of Quality Measures of Democracy: A Theoretical Framework and Its Empirical Application. European Political Science14 (4): 496–520.
51.
RawlsJ (2011) Political Liberalism: Expanded Edition. New York: Columbia University Press.
SteenbergenMRBächtigerASpörndliM, et al. (2003) Measuring Political Deliberation: A Discourse Quality Index. Comparative European Politics1: 21–48.
54.
SundströmAPaxtonPWangY, et al. (2015) Women’s Political Empowerment: A New Global Index, 1900 2012. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project, Working Paper Series, 19. Available at: https://www.v-dem.net/ (accessed 19 April 2018).
