Deliberation in Challenging Contexts. A Systemic Analysis of The Konpondu Initiative

The systemic analysis of deliberative initiatives requires a compound assessment of deliberative fora and their surrounding political processes. However, most of the empirical literature account for initiatives designed to mirror the ideal speech situation in controlled experimental conditions. The case-study I present in this paper intends to bridge this gap through the analysis of a participatory process that it is both deeply entangled with a political process and implemented in non-ideal circumstances. The Basque Government and several civil society associations promoted The Konpondu Initiative between 2007 and 2009. It mobilised more than a hundred municipalities and almost 1500 citizens in 117 different forums. The exercise took place just after peace-talks (2004-2006) dramatically ended and surrounded by a period of escalation (Whitfield 2015). Therefore, the initiative provides an exceptional standpoint to analyse citizens deliberation in non-ideal circumstances. Results show that deliberation remains of value to cope with the deep division. Nonetheless, success depends on a trade-off between location (connectedness) and function (decisiveness). I analyse this trade-off as design-choices linking each forum to other sites and venues in the deliberative system. I suggest this kind of analysis requires considering deliberation a communicative practice of argumentation instead of a set of ideal principles of discourse.