Hybrid Democratic Innovations: Discussing PhD Findings on Their Potential to Improve General Public Political Support

Deliberative democratic innovations are often praised for fostering dialogue and informing better public policy. However, they face persistent critiques for their limited engagement with the general public. To address this challenge, my PhD research explores the potential of hybrid designs that combine small-scale deliberation with large-scale public voting. Such hybrids aim to enhance general public engagement and strengthen their levels of political support. Over four years, I conducted several longitudinal survey studies and dozens of in-depth citizen interviews to assess the salutary potential of hybrids in relation to general public political support. The research focused on the Dutch context, with studies on three cases of local participatory budgeting and one provincial deliberative mini-public, providing a comprehensive analysis of how various hybrid participation designs can influence general public political support—an under explored but crucial area in democratic innovation research. The discussion chapter of my dissertation synthesises these findings and critically evaluates the potential of hybrid designs to address democratic backsliding. My results show that while hybrid processes hold promise, their impact on political support among the general public remains limited. Persistent challenges that go beyond hybrid participatory designs, such as the absence of well-structured input feedback mechanisms and input implementation, its ad-hoc nature, and pre-existing public perceptions of government and participation preferences, appear to constrain not only the effectiveness of hybrids, but also participatory instruments more generally. These external factors underscore the need for broader systemic changes to maximise the potential of democratic innovations, including hybrid designs. Despite these limitations, hybrid democratic innovations also show potential when key conditions are met. These include granting the general public meaningful policy influence, ensuring procedural transparency, and incorporating robust feedback mechanisms. By balancing these limitations and opportunities, my work bridges the gap between theoretical ideals and practical realities. It offers citizen-driven insights that are of value for scholars and practitioners seeking to refine participatory innovations and to strengthen democratic systems. The discussion of my findings will invite reflections from other scholars, particularly regarding the scalability of hybrid designs to influence the general public sphere. In the context of democratic backsliding, understanding both the successes and limitations of hybrid approaches from the perspective of the general public is crucial for addressing legitimacy concerns and fostering democratic resilience. Through this discussion, I aim to contribute to ongoing debates on the potential of democratic innovations to strengthen democracies and inspire pathways for more effective citizen engagement.