Ireland’s Convention on the Constitution (2012–2014) was a world-first process in mixing randomly selected private citizens and political representatives in a deliberative mini-public that made recommendations on a wide range of constitutional issues. Acknowledging the gender gap identified in studies of deliberative forums, the Convention made specific design choices in an effort to achieve gender inclusion. Using data collected during the course of the Convention, we explore the effects of contextual (institutional rules, procedures and topics discussed) and actor-related characteristics (gender, type of membership) on inclusion. We find that contextual issues such as the topic discussed and the gender composition of the small roundtable deliberations did not influence gender rates of participation. However, the forum of participation did, with women participating more than men in the facilitated small group sessions.
AbdullahCKarpowitzCFRaphaelC (2016) Affinity groups, enclave deliberation, and equity. Journal of Deliberative Democracy12(2): 6.
2.
AllenPCampbellREspirito SantoA (2014) The slippery slope: Measuring women’s political interests. In: CampbellRChildsS (eds) Deeds and Words: Gendering Politics after Joni Lovenduski. Colchester: ECPR Press, pp.229–248.
3.
ArnoldTFarrellDMSuiterJ (2019) Lessons from a hybrid sortition chamber: The 2012-14 Irish Constitutional Convention. In: GastilJOlin WrightE (eds) Legislature by Lot: Transformative Designs for Deliberative Governance. London: Verso, pp.101–122.
4.
BächtigerASteenbergenMR (2004) The Real World of Deliberation: A Comparative Study of its Favorable Conditions in Legislatures. Fiesole: European University Institute.
5.
BächtigerASetäläMGrönlundK (2014) Towards a new era of deliberative mini-publics. In: GrönlundKBächtigerASetälaM (eds) Deliberative mini-publics involving citizens in the democratic process. Colchester: ECPR Press, pp.225–241.
6.
BeauvaisEBächtigerA (2016) Taking the goals of deliberation seriously: A differentiated view on equality and equity in deliberative designs and processes. Journal of Public Deliberation12(2): 3.
7.
BeckwithKCowell-MeyersK (2007) Sheer numbers: Critical representation thresholds and women’s political representation. Perspectives on Politics5(3): 553–565.
8.
BeethamD (2012) Evaluating new vs old forms of citizen engagement and participation. In: GeisselBNewtonK (eds) Evaluating Democratic Innovations Curing the Democratic Malaise?London; New York: Routledge, pp.56–68.
9.
BeyerSBowdenEM (1997) Gender differences in self-perceptions: Convergent evidence from three measures of accuracy and bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin23(2): 157–172.
10.
BohmanJ (1997) Deliberative democracy and effective social freedom: Capabilities, resources and opportunities. In: BohmanJRehgW (eds) Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp.321–345.
11.
BuckleyF (2013) Women and politics in Ireland: The road to sex quotas. Irish Political Studies28(3): 341–359.
12.
BurnsNLehman ScholzmanKVerbaS (2001) The Private Roots of Public Action: Gender Equality, and Political Participation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13.
CaluwaertsDKavadisD (2014) Deliberative democracy in divided Belgium: An alternative for democracy on edge? In: GrönlundKBächtigerASetälaM (eds) Deliberative Mini-Publics Involving Citizens in the Democratic Process. Colchester: ECPR Press, pp.135–156.
14.
CampbellRWintersK (2008) Understanding men’s and women’s political interests: Evidence from a study of gendered political attitudes. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties18(1): 53–74.
15.
CarminesEGStimsonJ (1980) The two faces of issue voting. American Political Science Review74: 78–91.
16.
CelisKLovenduskiJ (2018) Power struggles: Gender equality in political representation. European Journal of Politics and Gender1(1–2): 149–166.
17.
CofféH (2013) Women stay local, men go national and global? Gender differences in political interest. Sex and Roles69(5–6): 323–338.
18.
CofféHBolzendahlC (2010) Same game, different rules? Gender differences in political participation. Sex Roles 62(5–6): 318–333.
19.
CuratoNDryzekJSElcanSA, et al. (2017) Twelve key findings in deliberative democracy research. Daedalus146(3): 28–38.
20.
DryzekJS (2000) Deliberative Democracy and beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21.
DryzekJS (2007) Theory, evidence and the tasks of deliberation. In: RosenbergSW (ed.) Deliberation, Participation and Democracy, Can the People Govern?Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan, pp.236–250.
22.
DryzekJS (2009) The Australian Citizens’ parliament: A world first. Journal of Public Deliberation5(1): 9.
23.
Electoral Commission (2004) Gender and Political Participation. London: The Electoral Commission.
24.
ElstubS (2014) Mini-publics: Issues and cases. In: ElstubSMcLavertyP (eds) Deliberative Democracy: Issues and Cases. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp.166–188.
25.
FarrellDMHarrisCSuiterJ (2017) Bringing people into the heart of Irish constitutional design: The Irish Constitutional Convention 2012–2014. In: ContiadesXFotiadouA (eds) Participatory Constitutional Change. London: Routledge, pp.120–136.
26.
FarrellDMSuiterJHarrisC, et al. (2020a) Ireland’s deliberative mini-publics. In: FarrellDMHardimanN (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Irish Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27.
FarrellDMSuiterJHarrisC, et al. (2020b) The effects of mixed membership in a deliberative forum: The Irish Constitutional Convention of 2012–2014. Political Studies68(1): 54–73.
28.
FelicettiANiemeyerSCuratoN (2016) Improving deliberative participation: Connecting mini-publics to deliberative systems. European Political Science Review8(3): 427–448.
29.
FerrínMFraileMGarcía-AlbaceteGM, et al. (2019) The gender gap in political interest revisited. International Political Science Review. Epub ahead of print 16August. DOI: 10.1177/0192512119860260
30.
FraileM (2014) Does deliberation contribute to decreasing the gender gap in knowledge?European Union Politics15(3): 372–388.
31.
FraileMGomezR (2017) Bridging the enduring gender gap in political interest in Europe: The relevance of promoting gender equality. European Journal of Political Research56(3): 601–618.
32.
FraserN (1992) Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. In: CalhounC (ed) Habermas and the Public Sphere. Boston, MA: MIT Press, pp.109–142.
33.
FungA (2003) Recipes for public spheres: Eight institutional design choices and their consequences. Journal of Political Philosophy11(3): 338–367.
34.
GalliganYBuckleyF (2018) Women in politics. In: CoakleyJGallagherM (eds) Politics in the Republic of Ireland. London; New York: Routledge; Taylor and Francis.
35.
GeisselB (2012) Impacts of democratic innovations in Europe: Findings and desiderata. In: GeisselBNewtonK (eds) Evaluating Democratic Innovations Curing the Democratic Malaise?London; New York: Routledge, pp.163–183.
36.
GerberM (2015) Equal partners in dialogue? Participation equality in a transnational deliberative poll (Europolis). Political Studies63(1): 110–130.
37.
GerberMBächtigerAFiketI, et al. (2014) Deliberative and non-deliberative persuasion: Mechanisms of opinion formation in EuroPolis. European Union Politics15(3): 410–429.
38.
GerberMBächtigerAShikanoS, et al. (2016) Deliberative abilities and influence in a transnational deliberative poll (EUROPOLIS). British Journal of Political Science48: 1093–1118.
39.
GerberMSchaubHPMüllerS (2019) O sister, where art thou? Theory and evidence on female participation at citizen assemblies. European Journal of Politics and Gender2(2): 173–195.
40.
GrönlundKHerneKSetäläM (2015) Does enclave deliberation polarize opinions?Political Behaviour37(4): 995–1020.
HangartnerDBächtigerAGrünenfelderR, et al. (2007) Mixing Habermas with Bayes: Methodological and theoretical advances in the study of deliberation. Swiss Political Science Review13(4): 607–644.
HansenSB (1997) Talking about politics: Gender and contextual effects on political proselytizing. Journal of Politics59(1): 73–103.
45.
HarrisC (2019) Deliberative mini-publics: Design choices and legitimacy. In: ElstubSEscobarO (eds) The Handbook of Democratic Innovation and Governance. Cheltenham; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
46.
HendriksCMDryzekJSHunholdC (2007) Turning up the heat: Partisanship in deliberative innovation. Political Studies55(2): 362–383.
47.
HickersonAGastilJ (2008) Assessing the difference critique of deliberation: Gender, emotion, and the jury experience. Communication Theory18(2): 281–303.
48.
Higher Education Authority (2017) Higher Educational Institutional Staff Profiles by Gender: A Report. Dublin: Higher Education Authority.
49.
HimmelroosS (2017) Discourse quality in deliberative citizen forums – A comparison of four deliberative mini-publics. Journal of Public Deliberation13(1): 3.
50.
IserniaPFishkinJS (2014) The Europolis deliberative poll. European Union Politics15(3): 311–327.
51.
KarpowitzCFMendelbergT (2014) The Silent Sex Gender, Deliberations and Institutions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
52.
KarpowitzCFMendelbergTShakerL (2012) Gender inequality in deliberative participation. American Political Science Review103(3): 533–547.
53.
KarpowitzCFRaphaelC (2016) Ideals of inclusion in deliberation. Journal of Public Deliberation12(2): 3.
54.
KostelkaFBlaisAGidengilE (2019) Has the gender gap in voter turnout really disappeared?West European Politics42(3): 437–463.
55.
LevineJMRussoE (1995) Impact of anticipated interaction on information acquisition. Social Cognition13(3): 293–317.
56.
LupiaANortonA (2017) Inequality is always in the room: Language and power in deliberative democracy. Daedalus146(3): 64–76.
57.
MansbridgeJ (1999) Everyday talk in the deliberative system. In: MacedoS (ed.) Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement. New York: Oxford University Press, pp.211–239.
58.
MansbridgeJBohmanJChambersS, et al. (2010) The place of self-interest and the role of power in deliberative democracy. Journal of Political Philosophy18(1): 64–100.
59.
MendelbergTKarpowitzCF (2007) How people deliberate about justice: Groups, gender, and decision rules. In: RosenbergSW (ed.) Deliberation, Participation and Democracy, Can the People Govern?Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan, pp.101–129.
60.
MendelbergTKarpowitzCF (2016) Power, gender, and group discussion. Advances in Political Psychology37(1): 23–55.
61.
MendelbergTKarpowitzCFOliphantJB (2014) Gender inequality in deliberation: Unpacking the black box of interaction. Perspectives on Politics12(1): 18–44.
62.
MurphyMP (2015) Gendering the narrative of the Irish Crisis. Irish Political Studies30(2): 220–237.
63.
NorrisP (2002) Democratic Phoenix Reinventing Political Activism. New York: Cambridge University Press.
64.
PedriniS (2014) Deliberative capacity in the political and civic sphere. Swiss Political Science Review20(2): 263–286.
65.
RenwickAAllenSJenningsW, et al. (2018) What kind of Brexit do voters want? Lessons from the Citizens’ Assembly on Brexit. The Political Quarterly89: 649–658.
66.
SiuA (2017) Deliberation and the challenge of inequality. Daedalus146(3): 119–128.
67.
SmithG (2009) Democratic Innovations: Designing Institutions for Citizen Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
68.
SpadaPVreelandJR (2013) Who moderates the moderators? The effect of non-neutral moderators in deliberative decision making. Journal of Public Deliberation9(2): 3.
69.
SteenbergenMRBächtigerASpörndliM, et al. (2003) Measuring political deliberation, a Discourse Quality Index. Comparative European Politics1(1): 21–48.
70.
SteinerJBächtigerASpörndliM, et al. (2004) Deliberative Politics in Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
71.
SteinerJ (2012) The Foundations of Deliberative Democracy: Empirical Research and Normative Implications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
72.
StolleDHoogheM (2011) Shifting inequalities. European Societies13(1): 119–142.
73.
SuiterJFarrellDMHarrisC (2016) The Irish Constitutional Convention: A case of ‘high legitimacy’? In: ReuchampsMSuiterJ (eds) Constitutional Deliberative Democracy in Europe. Colchester: ECPR Press, pp.33–52.
74.
SunsteinC (2002) The law of group polarization. Journal of Political Philosophy10: 175–195.
75.
WojcieszakM (2014) Preferences for political decision-making processes and issue publics. Public Opinion Quarterly78(4): 917–939.
76.
WojcieszakMEPriceV (2012) Perceived versus actual disagreement: Which influences deliberative experiences?Journal of Communication62: 418–436.
77.
YoungIM (2000) Inclusion and Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
