Couplings, Interactions and Dynamics: Unpacking the Connectivity of Democratic Systems

The systemic turn in deliberative democracy scholarship stresses the core features of connectivity (Dryzek 2016; Hendriks et al. 2020). Without complex and selective connections between democratic elements, there are no systems. The field of democratic innovation (DI) also embraced this systemic tenet, by increasingly investigating the connections (or couplings): between democratic innovations; between democratic innovations and political institutions; or between democratic innovations and the broad public. In addition, the feature of connectivity opened up discussions about how to "integrate" (Boswell et al. 2023) or "embed" (Bussu 2020) democratic innovations within democratic systems. Complementing this perspective, the democratic assemblage stream shifts the focus on the dynamism of connections, the role of agents in their emergence, and their systemic effects (Asenbaum 2022; Felicetti 2021; Mendonça et al. 2024). This approach challenges static and linear portrayals of connectivity and critiques a dominant focus on institutional and "designed" connections. It also questions the general expectation of systemic "synergy," drawing attention to competitive or disruptive relationships and their potential impact on systems. Connectivity, as the core tenet of the systemic approach to democracy, remains the subject of ongoing debate and critical exploration. The paper theoretically delves into the complex phenomenon of systemic connectivity, in order to provide analytical categories to guide empirical investigations. First, drawing on social systems theory, it conceptualizes connections as relationships of power between agents within constraining/ enabling structures, oriented by specific political functions and enacting particular democratic principles. Second, it conceptually distinguishes and articulates three types of connections: the couplings between political venues, the interactions between political agents and the emergent dynamics stabilizing or challenging democratic systems. Each of these analytical categories captures a particular dimension of systemic connectivity, to be assessed on its own and with different criteria. Third, it sketches an analytical framework to assess the democratic quality of each type of connections, in order to orient and structure the task of (re-)designing connections in democratic systems.