Democratizing the institutionalization of democratic innovations through participation? Three instances of the so-called “meta-participation” from Italy: Tuscany, Metropolitan City of Bologna and City of Milan

Democratic innovations such as participatory budgetings and public debates are being more and more implemented in Italy. In some cases they have also been institutionalized through specific legislative interventions at the national, regional or local level. When it comes to the institutionalization of these practices, academia is usually divided. Some scholars believe that institutionalization can be a positive means to stabilize these experiences, so democratic innovations can become an ordinary governance tool; others see possible negative consequences in the institutionalization, for instance the risk that democratic innovations can be implemented in a more and more ritual and ceremonial manner, and the risk of an excessive institutional control over these practices. Important authors such as Luigi Bobbio think that democratic innovations have to be regulated. However, rules cannot simply be imposed by institutions wanting to institutionalize democratic innovations, but participants should also agree on them. A way to have possible participants agree on rules regulating democratic innovations can be found in what the Italian pertinent literature has already occasionally called meta-participation. Meta-participation occurs when participatory and deliberative tools (such as town meetings, open space technologies, on-line consultations) are used by the general population to deliberate over participation-related problems, in a legislative process where representative institutions have the last word. Meta-participation could be a way to democratize both the process leading to the institutionalization of democratic innovations and innovations themselves, because the process becomes open to contributions about democratic practices coming from the general population. Whether meta-participation actually works as an effective instrument to democratize the institutionalization process and democratic innovations, it actually depends on how inclusive the process is, and on the impact the results of the meta-participation have on the final decisions the representative institutions make. This paper will describe and compare, through the analysis of official documents provided by the involved institutions, three processes of meta-participation occurred in Italy. The first took place in Tuscany regarding the adoption of a regional law about public debate and the promotion of participatory practices. The second was implemented in the Metropolitan City of Bologna, concerning the adoption of the Statute which was destined to regulate, among the other fields, public participation as well. The last one took place in the City of Milan, again on the adoption of a municipal law destined to institutionalize participatory and deliberative practices. The work will assess the pros and cons of these processes, particularly looking at how inclusive they were and at the impact they had on final decisions made by representative institutions. In this way, finally, the paper will try to establish some best practices regarding how meta-participation should (and should not) be implemented.