Articulating contesting policy narratives: A comparative analysis of two political arenas

Given that the narratives used to articulate, justify and challenge public policies are the lifeblood of political life, the existence of a democratic public sphere in which different narratives about public policies collide and contest each other is very important. For this reason, this research seeks to examine and compare the characteristics of public policy narratives articulated in two different, but comparable, political arenas, the citizen assembly and the public hearing. The main goal of the research is to use the narrative components index (NCI), to examine the characteristics of the narratives within both arenas, in the context of the hybrid regime, for the purpose of comparative analysis of those narratives regarding the two most constant variables for measuring the quality of democracy, inclusivity and contestation. If the research shows that within the deliberation process in the citizens' assembly, a more inclusive narrative was articulated that contests the dominant narrative of politicians of the ruling coalition, then we can say that the deliberation process leads to the democratization and pluralization of the public sphere in terms of narratives about policies. The preliminary results of this research, which is part of my doctoral dissertation in preparation, will be presented at the conference itself.