In this paper, we analyse the challenges faced in attempting to conceptualize responsiveness using fixed object categories such as political parties, citizens, civil society organisations and politicians. We set out the challenges and propose a schema by which responsiveness can be empirically estimated by capturing evolving preference transformation dynamics through deliberative processes that are facilitated by technology. In doing so, we propose 1) an alternative conception of representation and 2) provide a means by which this new approach can enable measurement of responsiveness. Our approach is specifically targeted to the challenge of increasing social diversity for representation, responsiveness, and social cohesion.
We begin by problematising the framework of ´policy preferences´ and present a case for a deliberative approach to preference realization where discourse evolution processes are captured. We then present a theoretical model for inter-discourse deliberation. We illustrate how technological innovations can be used to harness discourse patterns; provide a diversity index to show both the dominant and minority discourses prevailing on an issue as well as gaps in discourse patterns. The model also measures the spatial distance between discourses which attends to the unrealizable ‘unidimensional’ discourse requirement for estimating ‘responsiveness’ set out by Powell in his critique (2003); and the ‘coherent will’ outlined by Riker (1982).
Our approach is grounded in the innovations of John Dryzek with respect to discourse representation and meta-consensus (2010). They provide a framework by which, current political systems can address the crisis of representation (Mainwaring et al., 2006) and innovate to align with citizen communicative power and political expectations.
In the context of evolving notions of representation, we argue that political congruence should depart from the notion that legislators should resemble their constituents ideologically. Reverting to Dovi (2007) who claims that the primary function of a representative is to enable citizens to self-govern, we argue that by conceiving politics as primarily a resource problem solving role (who gets what, when, how (Laswell, 1936)) congruence can be argued to be the extent to which representatives can transparently and fairly negotiate policy output using citizen information on competing social discourses in a way that constituents can accept.
Our proposed computer-mediated approach provides critical data by which the representativeness of policy discussions can be measured and hence the potential for any policy outcome to be demonstrably responsive to citizens. To highlight, we show the dynamics of preference transformation through the framework of meta-consensus can be used to move citizens towards collaborative governance and preference structuration as demonstrated by Dryzek and Niemeyer (2006). We also set out a case for the representative legitimacy of the approach. Finally, we ground our theoretical analysis in the specific context of representation in Kenya characterized by competing ethnic and social discourses yet founded on a clientelist tradition.
