There is a clear lack of research on how policy proposals from bottom-up deliberative arenas, like Citizens' Juries, are perceived by the general public. This is especially apparent in countries of the Global South, where such policymaking approaches provide a promising case to solve pressing environmental issues. This study addresses this gap by investigating public support and the perceived legitimacy of policy recommendations emerging from Citizens’ Juries, using anti-deforestation measures in the Colombian Amazon as a case study. We aim to conduct an online survey experiment (n = 1,200) with Colombian participants to assess how the origin of an environmental policy - whether from a citizens’ jury, expert panel, or different government bodies - affects public support and perceived legitimacy. In addition, we will conduct a discrete choice experiment with the same sample, examining public preferences for Citizens' Jury characteristics. By presenting respondents with jury design variations in terms of representativeness, decision-making authority, depth of deliberation, and financial implications, we can determine which characteristics are most closely associated with perceived fairness and acceptance. Demographic and attitudinal data will also be collected to assess how factors such as political stance and environmental attitudes moderate perceptions of jury legitimacy. Our study will provide novel insight into the design of deliberative processes in Colombia and similar contexts, thereby enhancing public engagement and trust in participatory policy development.
In the theory of public affairs governance, people's concepts and behaviors are mostly explained from the perspective of rational man, but the theory of interactive ritual chain of American sociologist Collins bridges the theoretical gap beyond the perspective of rational man. Through this theoretical perspective and the case study of Q village, the author tries to analyze the significance of emotional maintenance for the sustainable cooperation of farmers in the vernacular field, and explore the possibility of rebuilding the farmers' subjective status and common emotions, so as to identify the development trend of farmers' cooperation. In Q village, Mianyang City, Sichuan Province, the prevalence of Wenchang temple fairs and running water banquets has led to a higher social prestige and participation of the people involved compared to other villages without temple fairs and running water banquets, i.e., a higher level of social capital, which is regarded as a key variable influencing the success of collective action. Therefore, the fact that Q village does not need to call for public affairs related to road repair and canal construction, but rather donates and labors on its own accord, is a phenomenon that attracts the author's attention. Temple fairs and running water banquets belong to the same kind of interactive rituals, which are made up of daily programmed activities regarding this by the exchange of capital and emotions, and consist of important linking factors such as face-to-face composition of the group, and each other's concerns. The reshaping of the rural public affairs governance system is coupled with the generative logic of interactive rituals, and the emotional energy of interactive rituals will promote the reshaping of the rural public affairs governance system with half the effort and break through the current dilemma.
Elinor Ostrom’s seminal work and most of the empirical research on the management of common pool resources it has spawned make no more than oblique references to the democratic quality and legitimacy of CPR governance arrangements. The political nature of these arrangements – their authority to make and enforce collectively binding decisions on the allocation of resources – and the motivations of users’ compliance are rarely discussed explicitly. While Ostrom cautions that such forms of network governance between market and state are no “panacea” and need to be underpinned by “trust” to work effectively, their democratic quality and legitimacy is more often assumed than demonstrated. Yet, arguably, self-interest and coercion – highlighted by Ostrom in her discussion of institutional “design principles” and rule enforcement through monitoring and sanctions – need to be complemented by “diffuse” support anchored in social norms and values to overcome the prisoners’ dilemma of CPR governance and to ensure the stability and sustainability of these arrangements. Whereas Easton’s “specific” type of support or “output” legitimacy is grounded in self-interested evaluations of regime performance and effectiveness, “diffuse” support is usually associated with democratic legitimacy. However, while Ostrom implicitly suggests that her decentralized, relatively informal examples of CPR governance may be both democratic (participatory) and effective, political science research has identified likely trade-offs between democratic quality and effectiveness, especially in the context of non-local and multi-level regimes. This theoretical paper makes the case for a focus on democratic quality and legitimacy in research on CPR governance. It develops a conceptual framework for such a more genuinely political science (as opposed to economic and game-theoretical) approach, considers methodological implications and sketches a research program. The paper raises and tentatively answers questions such as these: How democratic and legitimate are various types of CPR governance? How can democratic quality and legitimacy be measured? How may the impact of democratic quality on legitimacy – and of legitimacy on compliance, regime stability and sustainability – be gauged? Are there trade-offs between “input” legitimacy and effectiveness in CPR governance?
© 2025 | Privacy & Cookies Policy
