ECPR

Install the app

Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.

Just tap Share then “Add to Home Screen”

Designing a Meta-Deliberative System: The Case of the Geneva Citizens' Assembly for Democracy

Citizenship
Democracy
Political Participation
Political Theory
Representation
Empirical
Victor Sanchez-Mazas
University of Geneva
Victor Sanchez-Mazas
University of Geneva

To access full paper downloads, participants are encouraged to install the official Event App, available on the App Store.


Abstract

In the face of democratic crises, innovations promise renewal through a variety of designed venues for participation. However, the field often suffers from "solutionism"-treating citizens' assemblies as ends in themselves rather than tools for systemic change. I argue that to avoid being siloed, these assemblies must function as "meta-deliberative" sites that trigger a reflexive problematization of the broader democratic framework. This paper analyzes the Geneva Citizens' Assembly for Democracy-an ongoing state-initiated process, whose mandate is the reform of the cantonal democratic system, co-designed and coordinated by the author. Its originality lies in a dual-track representational architecture that moves beyond descriptive "mini-public" orthodoxy toward a relational model of substantive representation. By coupling a statistically representative "General Group" with five "Connected Groups" composed of disenfranchised actors-including youth, non-nationals, and persons with disabilities-the design replaces the passive "mirror" of representation with a proactive "counter-public" logic. This architecture ensures that the representation of marginalized perspectives is not left to the chance of the draw, but is structurally institutionalized. Adopting an action research framework, I analyze the design and implementation phases to evaluate how this split-body model procedurally negotiates the tensions between majoritarian popular legitimacy and marginalized epistemic justice. I argue that by institutionalizing the interaction between these distinct social positions, the Geneva model functions as a "micro-systemic" intervention that replicates-and then seeks to resolve-the representational deficits of the broader polity. The case demonstrates that centering the expertise of lived exclusion is a prerequisite for meta-deliberative success, transforming the citizens' assembly from a static tool into a catalyst for systemic reform.