By supporting diverse participatory approaches, Brussels recently made efforts to address the democratic deficit of the European Union. To date, the pan-European deliberative poll on third country migration and climate change (Europolis) can be regarded as one of the most extensive attempts to increase citizens’ involvement in the EU. By gathering a representative sample of citizens from all 27 EU member states, Europolis created the opportunity for a wide variety of European voices to be expressed. Although participants with diverse social and national backgrounds participated at the event, the question remains whether they actively participated at the discussion and, if they did so, whether their claims were equally considered. The aim of this paper is therefore to evaluate the inclusiveness of this particular deliberative discussion. The first part of the analysis will take a closer look at the speakers: Was everybody able to appropriately express their views? Was the discussion dominated by a particular perspective (e.g. Western European male; pro/contra immigration)? The second part of the analysis will then adopt a listener’s perspective: Whose voices got a response? Did some voices remain unanswered? The analysis will largely be supported by the use of the method of Social Network Analysis in order to address issues like centrality, mutuality and homophily. The research design also allows assessing whether the facilitator succeeded in ensuring that different perspectives were considered.
