This paper argues that people have become increasingly alienated from the decision-making processes that affect their lives. It presents market research as a tool for democracy, particularly in the form of Citizens’ Juries which re-open the lines of communication between voter and representative. The ways in which these have been used for public involvement programmes are described. The author suggests that the same approaches that are used by public bodies could be applied in corporate decision-making.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarkerA.. (1998). Involving the public.LGMB.
2.
CooperP.. (1998). Market research and democracy. In: ESOMAR Handbook of Market and Opinion ResearchMcDonaldC., & VangelderP.. (Eds.). Amsterdam: ESOMAR.
3.
CooteA., & MattinsonD.. (1997). Twelve good neighbours: the citizen as Juror.The Fabian Society, Discussion Paper 31.
4.
CooteA., & LenaghanJ.. (1997). Citizens’ juries: theory into practice.London: Institute for Public Policy Research.
5.
DaviesS., ElizabethS., HanleyB., NewB. & SangB.. (1998). Ordinary wisdom.Report on the King's Fund Pilot Citizens’ Juries. London: King's Fund.
6.
DienelP.. (1998). Power to the people?London: Innovations in European Public Participation.
7.
FishkinJ.. (1997). The voice of the people: public opinion and democracy.Yale University Press.
8.
HallD., & StewartJ.. (1997). Citizens’ juries in local government.Summary for the LGMB Pilot Projects. London: LGMB.
9.
McIverS.. (1998). Citizens’ juries in Health Authority settings: an independent evaluation.London: King's Fund.
10.
StewartJ.. (1995). Innovation in democratic practice.School of Public Policy, University of Birmingham.
11.
StewartJ.. (1996). More innovation in democratic practice.School of Public Policy, University of Birmingham.
12.
StewartJ.. (1997). Further innovation in democratic practice.School of Public Policy, University of Birmingham.
ABI Citizens’ jury (November 1997). Should insurance companies continue to have access to the results of genetic tests? What responsibilities do the insurance and government have for meeting the insurance needs of citizens?IPPR.
15.
Cambridge and Huntington Health Authority's Citizens’ jury (May 1996). Rationing health care.OLR, IPPR.
16.
Independent Television Commission Citizens’ jury (November 1997). What principles should regulators use to judge what is and what is not acceptable on television? How should these principles be applied?OLR, IPPR.
17.
Lewisham Citizens’ Jury (April 1996). People take drugs: what can we do to reduce harm to the community and to individuals? London Borough of Lewisham, OLR, IPPR. See also Ogden, J. (1996). Open Courf TheHealth Service Journal106, 12–13.
18.
Luton Citizens’ jury (November 1996). How should citizens pay for health services in the future?IPPR.
19.
Swiss Cottage Citizens'Jury (March 1997). How could the Swiss Cottage site be improved? How can these ambitions be achieved?London Borough of Camden, IPPR, OLR.
20.
Walsall Citizens’ Juries (August 1996). Improving palliative care in Walsall.IPPR.
