Beyond Deliberative Idealism: A Policy Process Framework for Understanding the Policy Influence of Deliberative Mini-Publics

Deliberative mini-publics (DMPs), such as citizens' assemblies and citizens' juries, are increasingly being implemented to engage citizens in political decision-making on complex policy issues ranging from climate change to constitutional reform. With the rise of DMPs across Europe, growing attention has been directed toward whether and to what extent these deliberative processes are able to influence public policies and legislation. However, as is increasingly pointed out (Boswell et al., 2023; Escobar & Bua, 2025; Pfeffer & Newig, 2025), both academic and public discourse on the policy impact of DMPs often relies on an overly linear understanding of policy influence, in which mini-publics develop recommendations that can – and to some extent should – simply be taken up by empowered institutions. Yet, this conception pays no heed to the complexities and messiness of policymaking. A broad body of policy process and public administration scholarship emphasizes that policymaking occurs within complex environments characterized by contingent, non-linear relationships among numerous factors, and that almost no designed ‘intervention’ has a direct impact on policy outcomes. Surprisingly, this research has thus far received little attention in the scholarship on deliberative mini-publics. This paper addresses this gap by exploring how policy process research can enhance our understanding of the conditions under which DMPs manage to elicit policy change. Drawing on widely established policy theories and frameworks, the article develops an integrated theoretical framework organized around four dimensions that can serve as barriers or facilitators to policy impact: actors and networks, institutions, ideas, and context and timing. The framework provides a more realistic basis for assessing the potential of mini-publics to influence policymaking. The theoretical analysis reveals that achieving policy impact requires navigating complex policymaking environments over which individual decision-makers have little knowledge and even less control, and where multiple dimensions must align simultaneously. Furthermore, it points to important differences in the potential for DMP policy influence at local versus higher levels of government. The analysis also shows that DMP recommendations inevitably become political objects subject to the same dynamics as other policy proposals, entering competitive policy environments where their fate depends on political support, advocacy efforts, institutional constraints, and timing rather than their deliberative origins alone. The paper concludes by outlining implications for researchers seeking to understand and assess the policy impacts of DMPs.