Doparies: A Novel Party Deliberative and Aggregative Decision-Making Mechanism to Improve the Quality of Representative Democracy

Raffaele Calabretta

doi:10.1177/2158244011433699

Doparies: A Novel Party Deliberative and Aggregative Decision-Making Mechanism to Improve the Quality of Representative Democracy

Calabretta, Raffaele 2011-12-29 00:00:00 The failings of parties are one of the central problems of contemporary democracies. What can be done to revive citizen participation? In this article, we present a novel party participatory decision-making mechanism named “doparies”. They are procedures that are nationally or locally implemented within and by parties, and permit any voter who declares to be an elector of that party (open doparies) or party members (internal doparies) to vote regarding crucial and controversial decisions during the period between one election and another. Whereas primaries are done before elections for choosing party candidates, doparies are done after elections for making party choices on issues. Doparies represent a bidirectional communication system between voters and representatives, and would retain the advantages of primaries (party–voters relationship) and referenda (debate before the vote), but would limit the excessive personalization of politics focusing on issues and not on people. There are both propositional doparies, allowing citizens to raise problems that are absent from their party political agenda, and consultative ones, allowing parties to hear the true voice of their voters, who, differently from what happens in polls, are informed by debates in party circles. We suggest that doparies are a new combination of deliberative and aggregative processes, and hypothesize that they can counteract parties’ crisis and abstention. Procedures similar to doparies are now part of the Italian Democratic Party statute and prominent national leaders have gathered signatures to organize local consultations. The use of primaries by Italian left-wing parties has had a contagious effect on right-wing ones as well as European ones. The same could happen with doparies. Keywords doparies, primaries, political parties, democracy, antipolitics, abstention, turnout, decision making, representation, participation, aggregation, deliberation Introduction Is in-depth crisis of many representative democracies irreversible? For representative democracies to work well, Electoral turnout is declining across Western Europe, point- there has to be a continuous interaction among the repre- ing to a strong disenchantment with elected officials and sented and the representatives. Before elections, in some their ability to represent citizen’s needs and demands. In countries (e.g., United States, Italy, France, Israel, Japan, France, abstention has reached 53.6% in the regional elec- Argentina), there are party primaries, in which party mem- tion of 2010, and almost 60% in the European election of bers and electors choose candidates and electoral platforms. 2009. In Germany, participation in the political election of However, the main problem arises after elections, when it is 2010 has seen a decrease of 7%, when compared with the very difficult for the electors to influence their representa- previous political election. In Italy, the increase in abstention tives. In the United States, President Barack Obama won the in the political election of 2008 has been the largest in the primaries and the 2008 presidential election, thanks to the Republic’s history. These figures become more relevant if Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies, Rome, Italy we consider that these three major liberal democracies have a tradition of very high electoral turnout. The scholarly lit- Corresponding Author: erature on democracy takes this trend of decreasing electoral Raffaele Calabretta, Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies, participation very seriously, as a symptom of a deeper demo- via San Martino della Battaglia, 44, Rome 00185, Italy cratic crisis. Email:raffaele.calabretta@cnr.it 2 SAGE Open direct engagement of thousands of volunteers, but failed to In this article, we will present a novel participatory dem- maintain the same level of consensus and mobilization after ocratic decision-making mechanism developed in Italy, the election. named “doparies” (Calabretta, 2005, 2007, 2010a), which functions within the context of political parties. Doparies One of the challenges that we’ve got to think about [he are consultations conducted after the elections among party said, mulling on this issue] is how do I meet my electors, not just members, to choose among contested responsibilities here in the White House, which require party decisions. In this sense, they represent a tool of politi- a lot of hours and a lot of work, but still have that cal influence available to the civil society—movements, opportunity to engage with the American people on a associations, and individuals—without replacing political day-to-day basis, and know—give them confidence— parties, as civil society can only respond partially and incon- that I’m listening to them. (Obama, 2010) stantly to citizens’ needs. With doparies, civil society move- ments and parties become complementary and strengthen The Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi faced similar each other. Doparies represent a bidirectional communication problems after winning a very popular center-left primary system between citizens and their representatives, which can election in October 2005. He won the general election of be an easy and fast way to improve the quality of representa- 2006, but could not keep even the consensus of his base and tive democracy. We hypothesize that doparies can counter- was forced to resign in February 2008. act parties’ crisis, abstention, and antipolitics. Several proposal have been formulated to address increas- Words are important in democracy. Then, what about the ing citizens’ passivity, by introducing forms of participatory word doparies? Recent studies on human memory indicate democracy: strongly emphasized procedures of direct democ- that its function is also to flexibly prepare to possible future racy; a mixture of direct and indirect democracy with elec- situations that are simulated by putting together pieces of past tronic consultations, the “liquid democracy” of the German experiences (Schacter & Addis, 2007). Analogously, dopary Pirate Party (Maguire, 2010); platforms for interaction is a neologism that brings together different important words between the elected representatives (see Abgeordnetenwatch. that are important for democracy in the description of a useful de, 2011); the British proposal that “any officially sanctioned tool for the future. The initial letter “D” is for democracy, petition with a vast number of signatories [to] be considered decision, deliberation. The crasis of the Italian words dopo for a House of Commons debate and even, in the case of very (“after”), doping (“addiction”), dopamina (“dopamine”), and popular demands, for a bill that might end in a crowd-sourced primarie (“primaries”) indicates the need for democracy in law” (Bennett, 2011, p. 29); the adoption from the United the popular wisdom that crippled the names and adapted them States of the so-called “informed opinion polls”, also known to everyday life. Whereas primaries are done before elections as “deliberative polls” (Fishkin, 1995); etc. Noninstitutionali- for choosing party candidates, doparies are done after elec- zed forms of political participations (such as demonstration tions for making choices on issues. The term relates to “dop- and petitions) reverse gender and age inequalities and have ing”: in this case, it is a beneficial addiction, like the one the potential to mobilize women and young people, but “do being experienced when exercising, where body movements not provide an effective mechanism to get the lowly-educated are beneficial for the brain; similarly, the social movements groups within the population involved in politics” (Mariën, and social capital are beneficial for parties and democracy. Hooghe, & Quintelier, 2010, p. 11). Instead, dopamine is the neurotransmitter involved in the pro- Nadia Urbinati (2006) challenges the idea that representa- cess of decision making (e.g., Schultz, 2007). tive democracy is the second best choice when compared In the following, we will explain what doparies are and with direct democracy, in which citizens take political deci- how they work, present the rationale of the scientific project, sions. The fact is that no democracy in the world takes into and list possible advantages, risks, and critiques. In the consideration the culture of everyday politics and success- appendix we will briefly describe the steps of the proposal’s fully combines participatory and representative systems, if promotion. not in a superficial way (Ginsborg, 2005). Most importantly, representative democracy is a perfectly legitimate form of Doparies: What They Are democracy to shape the process of decision making. If it is in and How They Work crisis, we must not think of its replacement, but of how to address the crisis of political parties, because their failings are The idea of doparies stems from the awareness that the voters one of the central problems of contemporary democracies cannot do anything after election to influence the decisions of (Mair, 2005; for a different view, see Webb, 2009). Political their representatives. We are experimenting with doparies parties “constitute the representative process” (Urbinati, in the Italian context. Italian politics might be an interest- 2006, p. 134). Participation has indeed fallen, with partisan ing case study because it exhibits several problematic fea- loyalty and party membership strongly decreasing over time tures and evolving trends. (Dalton, 2006; Dalton & Wattenberg, 2000; Mair & van Italian people are interested in democracy and in express- Biezen, 2001). ing their own narrative of the world, as shown by the success Calabretta 3 of blogs and social networks (De Biase, 2007; Petrella, 2007), election. The main problem with polls is that people are asked but they have a declining confidence in the institutions to express their opinions regarding very complex issues (e.g., (Eurispes, 2011). The Italian constitutionalist Andrea Manzella green vs. nuclear energy), but have no opportunity to think admits the substantial disappearance of parties as centers of about them and debate them. This situation opens the door to aggregation and planning of the common good (Manzella, emotive politics in which leaders do not lead and people are 2010). Italian political parties are seen as oligarchies that are manipulated, misinformed, and confused (see also below). far from common people’s everyday life and auto-referential Examples of doparies include assisted reproduction, lobbies led by charismatic leaders. There is an excessive and nuclear energy, living will, political alliances, quick citizen- pathological political personalization (Galli Della Loggia, ship for immigrants, and 20% taxation of financial income. 2009): Most parties add the name of the respective leaders on In particular, the latter was a proposal in the government pro- the party symbols, and unlike 10 years ago, television now gram of the center-left, but then, it split the majority in the gives more coverage to party leaders than institutions years 2006 to 2008. (D’Argenio, 2011). The popularity of leaders as celebrities Doparies are consultations organized by parties or coali- does not translate into trust, and disenchantment with them tions and are not open to all citizens but only to party mem- and the political system they represent has begun to spread bers and supporters: among young people, intellectuals, and a significant propor- tion of the Italian population (Amato, 2010; Diamanti, 2011a). 1. Doparies take place in organizations, such as par- Only 5% of Italians trust the political parties (Diamanti, ties, in which persons share some ideologies or 2011b). The fall of Silvio Berlusconi’s government in visions. November 2011 leads to Mario Monti’s emergency technical 2. Doparies require discussion among members— government that “does not include a single elected politician” pondering on issues, exchange of opinions, and (Squires, 2011). To complicate this scenario, it is improbable diversity of points of view. for the electorate to move from one political side to the other. 3. After the discussion, doparies have a central If the electors believe that their needs are poorly represented requirement: vote, as in primaries. by the political leaders of their own political party, they either continue to vote for them or find a convenient refuge in the Doparies can be called both from the top—leaders or party practice of abstention. As already mentioned, the Italian politi- committees decide to consult electors about decisions—and cal election of 2008 registered the fastest-growing electoral from the bottom—electors collect party members’ signatures to abstention of the postwar period (Istituto Cattaneo, 2008). Yet, ask their party to organize doparies. This process allows the abstention is not antipolitics, but one of the available political “final control of the agenda by the demos”, one of Robert options, according to the 2010 report of Audipolitica. The Dahl’s five criteria to meet the ideal of democracy: “The demos level of participation in the referenda of June 12 to 13, 2011, must have the exclusive opportunity to decide how matters are which were not tied to political parties, was high (Gramellini, to be placed on the agenda of matters that are to be decided by 2011). means of the democratic process” (Dahl, 1989, p. 113). In October 2005, the Italian center-left coalition organized Doparies may be used, for example, no more than once a an open primary for choosing its leader in the successive year—to consult the voters after the election on key issues. political election. It was a very successful primary with more Doparies do not force one to be always present and involved. than 4.5 million voters (Pasquino, 2005, 2007). Eight compo- Each citizen can use the instrument only when he or she nents, one for each of the center-left coalition parties, were believes that democracy does not work well or that an impor- part of the primary organizing committee. This committee tant point is missing in the political agenda. Of fundamental has fulfilled the tasks normally carried out in the elections by importance is that the tool exists and is accepted by parties to the Minister of Interior Affairs, namely, the control of the allow citizens, associations, movements, and civil society to legality of the vote. It prepared the document “Project for achieve a minimum political efficacy through their actions, Italy”, which the coalition acknowledged and proposed to the without much effort. Italians for the rebirth of the country and which was accepted It is possible to hypothesize two types of doparies to and signed by all the candidates and the voters in the primary address the issues raised by the debate on “liquid versus (Oliverio, 2005). Doparies can be organized in similar ways. solid party”, or American-style “light” open party versus The procedures of doparies are nationally or locally imple- valorization of party members: mented within and by parties, and permit party members or any voter who declares to be an elector of that party to vote Open doparies, open to all party electors and poten- regarding crucial and controversial decisions after the elec- tial new voters. They take place, for example, once tions. Doparies should not be confused with polls. Usually, a year, to debate crucial issues that split the party. parties conduct polls to find out what their electors think They refer to the procedures tested in national pri- about the key issues that arise after elections or that were in maries and constitute a real and beneficial physical the party’s electoral platforms, but divided the party after the movement of millions of citizens. 4 SAGE Open Internal doparies, open to party members who are used excellence. The overall solution should be looked for a ratio- to meet and discuss political issues. They would be nal use of different systems and decision-making bodies, electronic, more “detailed” and frequent, and serve such that each of these finds its corresponding corrective and the purpose of building party’s policies. complement to the other (Sartori, 1995). Webb (2009) asks what evidence is there to show that peo- This architecture of doparies avoids the danger “to dis- ple “yearn for deeper and more extensive political engage- arm activist’s desire to participate”, which, according to ment.” In Italy, this request has been very clear on several some experts, is a result of primaries being open to all voters occasions, mostly regarding primaries. In particular, it hap- (Seddone & Venturino, 2010). In the case of doparies, activ- pened in December 2010, after a newspaper interview of the ists have more privileges than the electors who are not active secretary of the Democratic Party Pierluigi Bersani, who in the party. argued the need to sacrifice the primary to choose the center- Could the results of doparies have a binding force? Many left candidate for prime minister to broaden the political citizens and politicians argue that results should be binding. coalition in possible election against center-right (Bartocci, This is a sensitive and important issue that needs to be dis- 2010; De Marchis, 2010). The revolt of the base of the party cussed. Referring to participatory democracy, Luigi Bobbio on social networks and a number of important leaders has (2006), a scholar who has made numerous studies on delib- been very clear, and thus, on January 13, 2011, at the party’s erative democracy, argues that the lack of binding power is national leadership committee, Bersani announced a national one of his strong points because it allows interactions that are conference to discuss the issue of primaries and internal not harnessed and promotes the informality of the relation- democracy (De Marchis, 2011). After the local elections in ship between the participants, allowing them to compete May 2011, many political analysts and politicians agreed that openly without preestablished positions and invent new solu- primaries were one of the main reasons for the success of the tions. If they deem it necessary for the good of the community center-left coalition. As a result, for the first time, the issue of and respect of minorities, political leaders would still have primaries has become resoundingly central in the center-right the possibility to disregard the result of the dopary and, there- political field to the point of filling the pages of newspapers fore, the prevailing opinion of their electors that the dopary and television and stimulating the elaboration of a specific would finally manifest. They would assume the responsibil- law (Amabile, 2011; “Dopo i ballottaggi”, 2011). ity, as political leaders, to lead and not be led (Parisi, 2007). Dopary is a new simple mechanism that does not need In this case, it is essential that they recognize a minimum of new laws and, therefore, agreement among parties to be effective action to voters who organized the dopary and voted implemented and that gives an answer to the citizens’ right in it. For example, they could explain, with maximum media and need for influencing political decisions. Today’s com- exposure, the reasons for their decision not to respect the out- plex societies cannot be guided solely by politicians, who come of the dopary. often become oligarchic; by experts, who sometimes make big mistakes (Tetlock, 2005); or by citizens, who frequently lack the skills and information necessary to decide. The Doparies Research Project Rationale mechanism of doparies involves various democracy actors: In the essay “Global Divergence of Democracies”, Diamond experts, politicians, journalists, and citizens. Citizenship and and Plattner (2001) review the distinction between electoral political parties are key players in the vote, whereas journal- democracy—defined by a single criterion: to ensure the ists and experts are actors in the debate preceding the vote. holding of regular, free, and fair elections among competing Experts and stakeholders are actively involved in the delib- parties—and liberal democracy—characterized by the addi- erative polls (Fishkin, 1995) that could enrich the predopary tional requirements in which the central role of the civil discussion. society and citizen associations stands out as a check on Zurich Professor Bruno Frey’s research (2002) shows that policy choices and as a deep soul of democracy. giving Swiss citizens the possibility to have a role on politi- Some critics of political parties believe that civil society cal decisions increases their satisfaction with life and that the can be self-sufficient, but, according to Ronsvallon (Gambaro, positive effect of direct democracy on happiness is stronger 2008), it is an illusion to think that democracy can only be in cantons with medium or high direct democracy rights, over reduced to the civil society. Democracy is always a face-off and above economic conditions. Emotions are influenced by between the government and society and between decisions interpersonal and social relationships, and depend very much and consensus. It must be continually subjected to a process of on the ability of influencing others, changing society, and appropriation, owing to activities of the civil society, institu- affecting politics. In the introduction to the collection of tions, and permanent interaction between power and society. essays “Felicità e libertà,” Bruni and Porta (2006) argue Hay and Stoker stressed that “if we are to reanimate and revi- that the interpersonal dimension can be the bridge between talize our politics, then we need to recreate the space for public Daniel Kaheneman’s utilitarian tradition and Amartya Sen’s and visible deliberative decision-making” (Hay & Stoker, 2009, Aristotelian tradition about happiness. All the other authors p. 235). However, there is no decision-making system par in this volume, including Kahneman and Sen, share the idea Calabretta 5 that life does not flourish, in Sen’s words, and that existence the organization of doparies and should encourage a kind of is not pleasant, as Kahneman puts it, without friends and discussion (members/experts) different from what happens without genuine relationships, especially disinterested rela- in referenda (voter/media) and similar to a kind of spontane- tionships with others. The relational dimension, then, is ous deliberation (see also below). Let us consider the case of important not only as a source of happiness but also because referenda in Italy. They can only be abrogatory and not prop- it is the place where one exercises (or not exercises) the rights, ositional, whereas doparies can be both consultative and human development, freedom, and civil life. All these authors propositional. They have a quorum, and those who are against highlight the importance of considering happiness not only as have become aware that the most effective strategy to defeat the satisfaction of desires but also of linking happiness with a referendum is to focus on abstention. As 25% of the popula- relatedness (the quality of human relationships) and with the tion never goes to vote, it is enough to just add a 25% moti- possibility for citizens to live their virtues (not in a moralistic vated abstention to defeat a specific referendum. As referenda sense but in the sense of action) and develop activities (hap- normally generate low levels of participation, the 57% turn- piness as “human flourishing” or “fulfillment” according to out in the referenda of June 2011 in Italy was unexpected. Sen, which is much like the Greek eudaimonia). Doparies do not have quorum and therefore cannot be invali- One can naturally ask—What are the tools with which citi- dated. The most important difference between referenda and zens today can say what is wrong in their relationship with doparies is that the latter have the main function to recreate, politics? The main function of doparies is to open a channel although in new forms, the growing intellectual exchange of communication between those involved in democracy. among sympathizers/members/activists and political lead- Public happiness comes from an intense democratic related- ers, which partly characterized the life of the Italian parties ness among citizens, political parties, experts, information, until the nineties of the last century. and institutions. According to Domenico Parisi (2006), today the society becomes more complicated to understand, and people have very few tools to comprehend it: We should invest in the Doparies: Advantages, problem of how to use new technologies (computers, Internet, Risks, and Critiques video games, and simulations) to increase the level of the What can be the advantages of using doparies in modern society’s social and economic literacy. Expression of an opin- representative democracies? And what about the risks and ion through doparies on difficult issues, such as living will or critiques? Unlike the primaries, doparies put the emphasis the use of nuclear energy, may provide unequal access to this not on individuals but on ideas. However, they are not opin- instrument of participatory democracy due to “education, ion polls and even referenda. What is the difference between class, gender, and age” (Mariën et al., 2010), as had already polls and doparies? The abused utilization of the methodology occurred for institutionalized and noninstitutionalized partici- of polls to understand and influence the orientations of citi- pation instruments. In contrast, the prediction here, based on zens toward political and electoral issues has several draw- the “impressive turnout” at the so-called Italian national pri- backs (e.g., Callegaro & Gasperoni, 2008; Durand, 2008). maries of 2005, 2007, and 2009 (Seddone & Venturino, 2010; Whereas polls are conducted on a significant sample of the Valbruzzi & Passarelli, 2008), is that people, motivated by population, in doparies a very high number of voters express the fact of expressing an important opinion, feel the need to themselves. Differently from polls, doparies can be activated exploit new learning opportunities as those offered by the by citizens. However, the essential difference is that respon- Internet (e.g., Wikipedia and free online university courses dents in an opinion poll are completely unaware of the offered by some of the leading universities worldwide). implications of the subject matter they are asked to evaluate, In some of the criticisms on doparies, the argument of and they respond according to the superficial impression of the “madness of crowds” is cited to refer to the risk of mak- the moment. In contrast, in doparies, as in referenda, citizens ing political decisions collectively (Pace, 2009). The litera- know that they must express an opinion that may affect ture shows the critical importance of optimizing animal important political decisions, and they have the time and collective behavior of a dynamic environment where there motivation to inform and deepen their knowledge, creating a is a constant flow of information to allow an individual to view that is certainly more responsive than the one given in change behavior at all times (Amé, Halloy, Rivault, a poll. As shown by Frey (2002), “the main function of the Detrain, & Deneubourg, 2006). The dopary process repre- prereferendum process is certainly to raise the level of infor- sents a direct channel for a continuous flow of information mation of the participants” (p. 138). The exchange of opin- and a mechanism for turning private judgments into collec- ions also favors the formation of preferences of participants. tive decision (Surowiecki, 2004). A very large number of There are important differences also between referenda citizens can express themselves, thereby promoting the and doparies. First, as already mentioned, doparies call to diversity of opinion, which is very important to ensure that vote supporters and members of the majority or opposition the aggregate opinion of a group of people of media com- parties that have launched them, whereas referenda call to petence can be better than that of a smaller group of experts vote the entire electorate of the country. Parties care about (Page, 2007). 6 SAGE Open One critique of doparies argues that even if people are alone or reasoning with like-minded people (Koriat, informed and documented, and even if it is not just a choice Lichtenstein, & Fischhoff, 1980; Landemore & Page, 2011; between two leaders (such as in primaries), there is always Sunstein, 2002; Tesser, 1978). the danger—in the society of entertainment—that emotion Political analyst Massimo Teodori is skeptical about the prevails over the critical sense and few demagogic slogan actual chance of convincing/forcing political parties to over informed choices (La Porta, 2010). In reality, this danger greater participatory democracy (through doparies or other has been present for some time in Italy, with politics led by an similar instruments), unless the character of private law is exasperated poll addiction. The exchange of opinions (espe- changed (personal communication, July 2008). According to cially those of minorities) and the constant flow of informa- Teodori, a necessary step to enhance participatory democ- tion in doparies are essential to move from the “madness” racy is the acquisition of legal personality by the parties toward the “wisdom” of the crowd. (Frosini, 2003). In this regard, several draft laws have been Luigi Bobbio (2006) is perplexed by the proposal of pending in the Italian Parliament for years. Should we wait doparies because he thinks that the choice of alternative proj- until those become law to seek the implementation of demo- ects or policies cannot be called to vote (even of activists) cratic instruments such as doparies? but should first be subject to discussion. In other words, Other arguments against doparies may be quickly according to Bobbio, what is needed is a deliberative pro- addressed. Direct democracy only works well in small sys- cess, rather than an aggregative one. However, a deliberative tems such as Switzerland, they say. But the great success of process may be conducted only among a limited number of the primaries shows that it is possible even in large countries participants on well-defined issues (personal communica- such as Italy; moreover, the political leaders of various coun- tion, September 2008). When he talked about the process of tries, including France, have studied the Italian primaries to aggregation, Bobbio refers to counting of votes among pre- replicate them. Others say that the high costs of doparies established positions according to the principle of majority; could be an obstacle, but Italians have shown willingness to according to the deliberativists, the essence of democracy is support the organization of primaries through generous vol- based on arguments in the “discussion” (“deliberation”, in untary contributions. The apathy of voters would be also an English) between all actors involved in the issue at hand. issue, though the large turnout in 2011 Italian primaries and To answer this objection, it is necessary to try to explain referenda suggests the contrary; in Switzerland, 40% of the in more detail what is meant by “deliberative process”. population usually votes, but they vote even 4 times a year, Deliberation is a method of decision making (e.g., Cohen, whereas in doparies one would vote no more than once a 1989; Elster, 1998; Habermas, 1997; see also Fung, 2003), year. Finally, there would be the risk of oversimplifying which is differently defined. According to Mercier and complex problems—however, with doparies, it is possible Landemore (in press), public deliberation is an exchange of not only to vote “yes” or “no” but also to choose between arguments for and against a given proposition, where different documents that address the same problem (e.g., the “exchange” means that “there must be a feedback loop type of employment contract that facilitates the entry into the between reasoning from at least two opinions” and “a dis- labor market of unemployed youth). agreement between at least two individuals in the course of a conversation.” Doparies are consultations about specific con- Conclusions troversial political decisions, and therefore, the debate is, by definition, related to diverging opinions about the same Even critics of participatory and deliberative democracy issue. As a consequence, in these situations, the feedback admit that there are situations in which people want to con- loop can take place. Moreover, the hypothesis is that, differ- tribute to political decisions and in which participation ben- ent from the general referenda—which are open to all the efits both the person and the political system. We presume citizens and mainly covered by television and other political that the current serious crisis of many democracies is one of debate media and in which citizens often reason alone or those situations and propose doparies as a new bidirectional with their family and friends—debates of doparies occur in communication mechanism between parties and their elec- party circles, clubs, and places where there is a limited num- tors. Doparies are consultations among party members or ber of participants who exchange reasoned arguments. In electors that are done after elections for taking crucial and short, it can be said that doparies are a new combination of a controversial decisions. deliberative process, in which the debate takes place in par- Representative democracy needs to regenerate itself with ties circles, among a limited number of participants who the latest scientific knowledge and innovative energies of hold different opinions and exchange reasoned arguments citizens. Today, everything is changing so fast that no party about a specific issue, and an aggregative processes, because can predict at the time of preparation of the electoral program in the end there is the vote. Future research should verify what will be the challenges that it will face once in govern- whether this particular kind of process avoids, as it usually ment. Could doparies be the basic tool through which ordi- happens with genuine deliberation, the problems of polariza- nary citizens avoid the disastrous experience of democratic tion and overconfidence—the characteristics of reasoning disenchantment of abstention, build a proper relationship of Calabretta 7 political representation, and enjoy the pleasure of the happy Harvard. As a research agenda, we plan to use computer exercise of public reason? Doparies serve to create communi- simulations and to conduct laboratory and field experiments. cation and trust between voters and their representatives, The use of primaries by the Italian Democratic Party has improving the quality of representative democracy, which, had a contagious effect on Italian right-wing parties (e.g., thus, becomes participatory. Carioti, 2011) as well as on other European parties (French Due to the effects on people’s lives of “the biggest finan- socialist party; Gozi, 2011). It has already happened with pri- cial crisis the world has ever faced” (Kirkup, 2011), 2011 has maries and it could happen with doparies. seen the wave of popular protests worldwide demanding Appendix more participatory democracy (e.g., Indignants and Occupy movements; Rogers, 2011). I mean that the introduction of Promotion of Doparies doparies would be important not only for the Italian political system but also for that of other countries. Doparies are dif- In December 2005, the proposal of doparies was first ferent from referenda: Participation is not open to all voters officially presented in the weekly magazine Avvenimenti but is limited to party members or electors. Moreover, no (Calabretta, 2005). In December 2007, the spokesman for quorum is required for the validity of the vote. Finally, there the Secretary of the Democratic Party (PD) Roberto Roscani are both propositional doparies (i.e., party members collect commented as follows: “The proposal of doparies was read signatures to ask their party to be consulted on a particular with attention and will be considered in the committee that topic), allowing citizens to raise problems that are absent has the task of preparing proposals for the Statute of the from their party political agenda, and, in the other direction, PD.” Article 27 of the Statute of the PD—approved on consultative ones, allowing parties to hear the true voice of February 16, 2008, and amended by the National Assembly its voters, who, differently from what happens in the polls, on May 21-22, 2010—provides for procedures similar to were informed by the debates in party circles. Doparies doparies (called “internal referenda”). would retain the advantages of primaries (party–voters rela- In early March 2009, two articles on doparies written by tionship) and referenda (debate before the vote), but would Mario Pirani (2009a, 2009b), one of the most prominent limit the excessive personalization of politics, focusing on Italian journalists (Pirani, 2010), were published in the most issues and not on people. important Italian newspaper, la Repubblica, followed by Doparies would: several other commentary articles in main national newspa- pers and by national public television interviews (e.g., • Allow common people to realize the aspiration to a Calabretta, 2009a, 2009b). more constant participatory democracy At the end of March 2009, the first congress of the right- • Not force people to align themselves with the wing party Il Popolo della Libertà (PDL) approved the stat- thought of political parties ute of the party. Article 10 provides for electronic • Convince undecided and disappointed persons to consultations on important decisions. (As already pointed become interested in public issues and to vote out, doparies have to be preceded by a critical phase of study • Give movements a tool for controlling politicians and debate, in which there is a reasoned exchange of differ- • Bring politics near the people’s everyday problems ent positions with regard to the subject of the dopary among • Help elected politicians feel useful and avoid being a limited number of participants.) under the thumb of power The proposal of doparies entered into all three motions of • Decrease expectations about politics held by elec- primaries’ congress of the PD in October 2009 (in the con- tors and reduce anger from them toward their party gress motion Marino, it is written as “primary and dopary leaders because they would understand how diffi- party”; Civati, 2009). Close to the primaries of the PD, the cult it is to take decisions media coverage of doparies had an international visibility • Create stronger social cohesion between politicians through Miguel Mora in the Spanish newspaper El Paìs and electorate and within the electorate (Mora, 2009). In January 2010, the essay titled “Doparie dopo le prima- The scientific project of doparies, which will be carried rie” (Calabretta, 2010a) was published, and then promoted out in collaboration with Yale University, is expected to all over the country. On December 20, 2010, doparies were achieve a series of scientific studies seeking to demonstrate described in the newspaper la Repubblica as “a system of that this tool influences the well-being, cognitive style, and democratic common sense wisdom” (Ceccarelli, 2010). In social behavior of the participants (Calabretta, 2010b, February 2011, the new center-right party Futuro e Libertà, 2010c; Clark & Mills, in press; Keil, 2010; Spada & Vreeland, born from the splitting of PDL held its constituent assembly 2010). The joint 2011-2012 CNR (National Research Council and approved the first articles of the Statute, which speak of of Italy)/NEH (National Endowment for the Humanities) “peripheral participation in decision-making.” The party Fellowship will fund a 6-month period of research on dopar- (continued) ies in the American Universities of Yale, Stanford, MIT, and 8 SAGE Open Appendix (continued) It has to be verified whether the ordinary accomplishment of doparies in one of the two major Italian parties could have leaders have spoken from the stage of a technology platform, a contagious effect on the other political parties, as seems to connected to the Internet, for members to vote on all deci- be already happening: In March 2011, a consultation on sions of the party (Maurelli, 2011). nuclear energy was launched among the party members on The widespread implementation of doparies could start the site of right-wing party Futuro e Libertà. In May 2011, from the bottom. On March 5, 2008, a civil list near the Antonio Barile, a former mayor of San Giovanni in Fiore center-right at Bitonto, a large town near Bari, in southern (Calabria, South Italy), committed himself to delivering Italy, brought the political agenda for administrative dopar- doparies if reelected as mayor (PDL more civic lists). In ies (bitonto.myblog.it). On October 25, 2009, the same day Emilia Romagna, two regional leaders of Beppe Grillo’s Five when the national primary of the PD was conducted, the Star Movement have brought their resignation in the face of party leaders of Luino (Varese) decided to organize a sort of public confronting a sort of referendum on the work that they referendum on the decision of the municipal administration carry out the election in the region (Ponzano, 2011). The to build a wall along the lake. The consultation was open to decision on what should be their salary was also subjected to all citizens and had a great turnout: About 15% more than consultation. Did this participatory policy influence the the people who have voted in the primaries decided to movement’s local elections in Bologna on May 15, 2011, express their opinion in the consultation, despite the require- where the Five Star Movement scored a very good result ment to make a double line (Varese news, 2009). (nearly 10% of the vote)? On June 24, 2011, Pierluigi In the uncertain situation of Italian politics at the end of Bersani, general secretary of PD, called and chaired the par- 2010 and early 2011, characterized by mistrust from the side ty’s national board focused on internal democracy; during the of electors to the major Italian parties, the secretaries of the press conference, he announced that his party would soon PD of some towns in Sicily (Enna, Caltagirone, and Gela) organize the first party internal referendum (Collini, 2011). organized a referendum open to members and electors on the After 2 years since the appearance on Facebook, dopary decision of whether the party should continue to support the pages have thousands of friends (of different political affili- regional government. The initiative infected the other parties ations, right and left), in addition to the thousands who of the center-left wing, which called for a coalition regional have signed the petition online (www.petitiononline.com/ consultation on the issue. Subsequently, Senator Enzo doparie). On March 24, 2011, the proposal of doparies was Bianco, a former Minister of Interior Affairs, through presented at the library of the Italian Chamber of Deputies YouTube, gathered signatures of party members for a delib- by invitation of the PD parliamentary group. It is gaining erative referendum based on Article 36 of the Statute of the increased interest in Italy (see doparies.it and facebook.com/ Regional PD, which refers to Article 27 of the national stat- doparie) and beginning to be known in other countries: On ute. Some newspapers and blogs explicitly spoke of “dopar- May 27, 2011, the most widespread nonsports newspaper in ies” (Catania Politica, 2011; Condorelli, 2011; Giornale di Spain El Paìs has published a long article about primaries in Sicilia, 2011; L’Opinione, 2011; Pipitone, 2011). A total of Europe (Gomez & Prades, 2011), and doparies are the only 5,000 signatures were then delivered by May 2, 2011: The new method mentioned. The first vice-president of the regional leaders of the party indicated that referendum regu- European Parliament Gianni Pittella wrote that politics lation would be approved in June 2011 and that what should needs to encourage direct participation in public life with be the first regional dopary would take place after the sum- doparies (Pittella, 2011). mer. In a press conference at the Chamber of Deputies, convened on April 14, 2011, to present to the press a new draft law on internal party democracy and discipline of pri- Acknowledgments maries, the former secretary of the PD Walter Veltroni spoke in favor of the internal party referenda and specified that The author would like to thank Anna Di Lellio, Domenico Parisi, they could be subject to further regulation in political parties and Pietro Terna for very helpful comments on the manuscript, and (Fraschilla, 2011). acknowledge the useful discussions with Margaret Clark, Helene During the same period, young national political party Ganser, Donald Green, Malte Ierl, Frank Keil, Hélène Landemore, leaders such as Giuseppe Civati and Sandro Gozi have Kristi Lockart, Kristine Olson, Gianfranco Pasquino, Leonid publicly expressed on their Facebook profiles that they Peisakhin, Paolo Spada, Tom Tyler, Nadia Urbinati, Salvatore will organize the first national dopary on the theme of the Vassallo, Hayden White, and the members of Frank Keil’s lab at political alliances of the PD, a topic that lacerates the party Yale University during weekly meetings in October 2010. for years. In his book “Oltre i partiti” (“Beyond the parties”, Declaration of Conflicting Interests 2011) the former coordinator of PD Goffredo Bettini has proposed to the center-left to open up to new forms of rep- The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with resentation, in which the role of primaries and doparies respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this would be crucial. article. Calabretta 9 Funding Carioti, F. (2011, October 23). La promessa di Alfano Cambio il PDL per vincere. Libero, p. 1. The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support Catania Politica. (2011, January 26). L’Enzo Bianco 2.0 lancia for the research and/or authorship of this article: The financial sup- le doparie sul Pd filolombardo. Retrieved from http://lnx.cat- port of the National Research Council of Italy (Short Term Mobility aniapolitica.it/wordpress/archives/22274 Program 2010 at Yale University) is gratefully acknowledged. Ceccarelli, F. (2010, December 20). Il mito del voto dal basso. Da ancora di salvezza a psicodramma politico. la Repubblica, p. 13. References Civati, G. (2009). Nostalgia del futuro. La sinistra e il Pd da oggi Abgeordnetenwatch.de. (2011). Available from abgeordnetenwatch.de. in poi. Venezia, Italy: Marsilio. Amabile, F. (2011, May 30). Berlusconi ora pensa alle primarie. La Clark, M., & Mills, J. R. (in press). Communal relationships. Cohen, J. (1989). Deliberation and democratic legitimacy. Stampa, p. 2. In A. Hamlin & P. Pettit (Eds.), The good polity (pp. 17-34). Amato, R. (2010). Censis: Società senza regole e sogni che non New York, NY: Blackwell. crede più nel carisma del capo. Retrieved from http://www. Collini, S. (2011, June 25). Primarie e programma. Bersani: repubblica.it/politica/2010/12/03/news/censis_rapporto- Prepariamoci al dopo-Berlusconi. l’Unità, pp. 10-11. 9769145/?ref=HREC1-4 Condorelli, A. (2011, January 9). Il PD siciliano vieta il referen- Amé, J.-M., Halloy, J., Rivault, C., Detrain, C., & Deneubourg, J. dum sull’alleanza con l’Mpa di Raffaele Lombardo. Il Fatto L. (2006). Collegial decision making based on social ampli- Quotidiano. Retrieved from http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/ fication leads to optimal group formation. Proceeding of the 2011/01/09/il-pd-siciliano-vieta-il-referendum-sullalleanza- National Academy of Science of the USA, 103, 5835-5840. con-lombardo/85594 Audipolitica. (2010). Italiani che non votano. Retrieved from Dahl, R. A. (1989). Democracy and its critics. New Haven, CT: http://www.audipolitica.it/images/stories/sintesi/Sintesi_Italiani Yale University Press. CheNonVotano.pdf Dalton, R. J. (2006). Citizen politics: Public opinion and political Bartocci, M. (2010, December 18). Il Venerdì 17 di Bersani. Il parties in advanced industrial democracies. Washington, DC: Manifesto, p. 4. Congressional Quarterly Press. Bennett, C. (2011, January 2). Let’s all join in not signing up to this Dalton, R. J., & Wattenberg, M. P. (2000). Parties without partisans: idea of e-petitions. The Observer, p. 29. Political change in advanced industrial democracies. Oxford, Bettini, G. (2011). Oltre i partiti. Un nuovo campo dei democratici UK: Oxford University Press. per cambiarel’Italia. Venezia, Italy: Marsilio. D’Argenio, A. (2011, February 9). L’invasione di Berlusconi nei tg. Bobbio, L. (2006). Dilemmi della democrazia partecipativa. la Repubblica, p. 9. Democrazia e diritto, 44(4), 11-16. De Biase, L. (2007). Economia della felicità. Dalla blogosfera al Bruni, L., & Porta, P. L. (2006). Felicità e libertà. Economia e valore del dono e oltre. Milano, Italy: Feltrinelli. benessere in prospettiva relazionale. Milano, Italy: Guerini e De Marchis, G. (2010, December 17). Ora alleanza col terzo polo. Si associati. rimette in discussione tutto e sacrifichiamo le primarie. Bersani: Calabretta, R. (2005, December 16). Dopo le primarie propongo le Un nuovo patto per superare Berlusconi. la Repubblica, p. 3. doparie. Avvenimenti, 48, p. 49. De Marchis, G. (2011, January 13). Pd, Bersani tenta la tregua con Calabretta, R. (2007). Il film delle emozioni (2nd ed.). Roma, Italy: Veltroni. la Repubblica, p. 11. Gaffi. Diamanti, I. (2011a, October 24). Il Paese sospeso tra indignazione Calabretta, R. (2009a, March 6). Politica: Dalle primarie alle dopa- e sfiducia. la Repubblica, p. 1. rie. Il Corriere della Sera, p. 37. Diamanti, I. (2011b, November 7). Il disincanto della democrazia. Calabretta, R. (2009b, August 10). Live television interview. National la Repubblica, p. 1. Public Television RAI: Il Caffé di RaiNews24, RAI Tre. Diamond, L. J., & Plattner, M. F. (2001). The global divergence of Calabretta, R. (2010a). Doparie, dopo le primarie. Diario di un elet- democracies. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. tore errante alla ricerca della felicità. Roma, Italy: Nutrimenti. Dopo i ballottaggi le primarie del Pdl? (2011, May 30). Il Foglio, Calabretta, R. (2010b, October 18). Doparie: The democracy of hap- p. 1. piness? Invited talk, Laboratory of Cognition and Development, Durand, C. (2008). The polls of the 2007 French presidential cam- Yale Department of Psychology. paign: Were lessons learned from the 2002 catastrophe? Inter- Calabretta, R. (2010c, October 29). Doparie: A novel democratic national Journal of Public Opinion Research, 20, 275-298. participatory decision making mechanism that affects party sup- Elster, J. (Ed.). (1998). Deliberative democracy. Cambridge, UK: porters well-being? Invited talk, Experiments Lunch Fall 2010/ Cambridge University Press. Spring 2011, Yale Institution for Social and Policy Studies. Eurispes. (2011). Rapporto Italia 2011. Retrieved from www. Callegaro, M., & Gasperoni, G. (2008). Accuracy of pre-election eurispes.it polls for the 2006 Italian parliamentary election: Too close to Fishkin, J. (1995). The voice of the people: Public opinion and call. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 20, democracy. Yale University Press. 148-170. 10 SAGE Open Fraschilla, A. (2011, April 14). Veltroni chiede al Pd di rompere con La Porta, F. (2010). Inventiamoci le doparie. Enne Effe, 1, 2. Lombardo. “Ascoltiamo la base, esperienza da chiudere.” la L’Opinione (2011, January 27). Le “doparie” per Lombardo. L’Opinione, p. 4. Repubblica Palermo. Retrieved from http://palermo.repubblica. Maguire, H. (2010). German Pirate party plunges into “liquid it/cronaca/2011/04/14/news/veltroni_chiede_al_pd_di_lasciare democracy.” Retrieved from http://www.monstersandcritics _lombardo_ascoltiamo_la_base_chiudiamo_questa_esperienza- .com/news/europe/news/article_1575725.php/INTERVIEW- 14936601/index.html?ref=search German-Pirate-party-plunges-into-liquid-democracy Frey, B. (2002). Happiness and economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Mair, P. (2005). Democracy beyond parties. Irvine, CA: Center for University Press. the Study of Democracy, University of California. Retrieved Frosini, T. E. (2003). È giunta l’ora di una legge sui partiti? Quaderni from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/3vs886v9 costituzionali, 1, 152-162. Mair, P., & van Biezen, I. (2001). Party membership in twenty Fung, A. (2003). Recipes for public spheres: Eight institutional European democracies, 1980-2000. Party Politics, 7(1), 5-21. design choices and their consequences. Journal of Political Manzella, A. (2010, December 7). L’orologio del Colle. la Repub- Philosophy, 11, 338-367. blica, p. 1. Galli Della Loggia, E. (2009, June 25). La politica cancellata. Il Mariën, S., Hooghe, M., & Quintelier, E. (2010). Inequalities in Corriere della Sera, p. 1. non-institutionalized forms of political participation. A multi- Gambaro, F. (2008, December 14). Intervista a Pierre Rosanval- level analysis for 26 countries. Political Studies, 58, 187-213. lon. Le democrazia non è solo “il voto nell’urna.” Il sottile dis- Maurelli, L. (2011, February 12). Obama, Jobs: La svolta web della crimine tra “controdemocrazia positiva” e controdemocrazia politica. Nasce Fli live, il portale delle idee: Assemblee, dibat- negative.” la Repubblica, p. 1. titi e votazioni online. Il Secolo d’Italia, p. 4. Ginsborg, P. (2005). Il tempo di cambiare. Politica e potere nella Mercier, H., & Landemore, H. E. (in press). Reasoning is for argu- vita quotidiana. Torino, Italy: Einaudi. ing: Understanding the successes and failures of deliberation. Giornale di Sicilia. (2011). Pd, su Youtube un referendum per il Political Psychology. sostegno a Lombardo. Retrieved from http://www.gds.it/gds/ Mora, M. (2009, October, 13). La izquierda italiana busca un líder sezioni/politica/dettaglio/articolo/gdsid/144608 que haga frente a Berlusconi. El Paìs, p. 3. Gomez, R. G., & Prades, J. (2011, May 27). Elegir caras o programas. Obama, B. (2010). Press conference. Retrieved from http://www. El Paìs. Retrieved from http://www.elpais.com/articulo/sociedad/ whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2010/11/03/presiden- Elegir/caras/programas/elpepisoc/20110527elpepisoc_1/Tes tial-press-conference#transcript Gozi, S. (2011, October 11). Dalla primarie all’italienne una lezione Oliverio, N. (2005). Energie Primarie. Roma, Italy: Gaffi editore. per noi. l’Unità, pp. 34-35. Pace, L. (2009, March 6). Se il Pd non vuole diventare come la Gramellini, M. (2011, June 14). Una vittoria senza padri. La Svizzera si ricordi un po’ di Mitterand. Il Foglio, p. 2. Stampa, p.1. Page, S. E. (2007). The difference: How the power of diversity cre- Habermas, J. (1997). Popular sovereignty as a procedure. ates better groups, firms, schools, and societies. Princeton, NJ: In J. Bohman & W. Regh (Eds.), Deliberative democracy Princeton University Press. (pp. 35-66). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Parisi, D. (2006). Strumenti per capire. Reset, 94, 30-31. Hay, C., & Stoker, G. (2009). Revitalising politics: Have we lost the Parisi, D. (2007, June 18-19). L’Occidente esporta felicità? Relazi- plot? Representation, 45, 225-236. one al convegno “Psicologia ed economia della felicità: verso Istituto Cattaneo. (2008). La maggior crescita di astensionismo elet- un cambiamento dell’agire politico.” Università degli Studi di torale del dopoguerra, assieme a quella del 1996. Retrieved from Roma “La Sapienza.” http://www.cattaneo.org/pubblicazioni/analisi/pdf/Analisi_ Pasquino, G. (2005). Postfazione. In M. Valbruzzi (Ed.), Prima- Cattaneo_Politiche2008_Astensionismo.pdf rie. Partecipazione e leadership (pp. 279-293). Bologna, Italy: Keil, F. C. (2010). When and why do Hedgehogs and Fox Differ? Bononia University Press. Critical Review, 22, 415-426. Pasquino, G. (2007). Strumenti della democrazia. Bologna, Italy: Kirkup, J. (2011, October, 6). World facing worst financial cri- il Mulino. sis in history, Bank of England Governor says. The Tele- Petrella, R. (2007). Una nuova narrazione del mondo. Bologna, graph. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ Italy: EMI. financialcrisis/8812260/World-facing-worst-financial-crisis- Pipitone, G. (2011, January 13). Lombardo, nuova grana dagli in-history-Bank-of-England-Governor-says.html alleati. UDC e FLI prendono le distanze dal PD. Giornale di Koriat, A., Lichtenstein, S., & Fischhoff, B. (1980). Reasons for Sicilia, p. 5. confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Pirani, M. (2009a, March 2). Impedire che i soliti se la cantino da Learning and Memory, 6, 107-118. soli. la Repubblica, p. 25. Landemore, H. E., & Page, S. (2011, October 20-22). Deliberation Pirani, M. (2009b, March 16). Chi ama e chi no le pulizie di Pasqua. and disagreement: Problem-solving, prediction, and positive la Repubblica, p. 22. dissensus. Paper prepared for presentation at the Confer- Pirani, M. (2010). Poteva andare peggio. Mezzo secolo di ragio- ence “Epistemic democracy in practice,” Yale University, nevoli illusioni. Milano, Italy: Mondadori. New Haven, CT. Calabretta 11 Pittella, G. (2011, July 13). Prendiamo esempio, diventiamo più Sunstein, C. R. (2002). The law of group polarization. Journal of “wiki. Europa, p. 9. Political Philosophy, 10, 175-195. Ponzano, M. (2011, May 4). Dimissioni a cinque stelle: Giovanni Surowiecki, J. (2004). The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are Favia. Radio Reset. Retrieved from http://www.resetradio.net/ smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, interviste/societa/il-diritto-di-farsi-licenziare-giovanni-favia economies, societies, and nations. New York, NY: Doubleday. Rogers, S. (2011, November, 11). Occupy protests around the Tesser, A. (1978). Self-generated attitude change. In L. Berkowitz world: Full list visualized. The Guardian. Retrieved from http:// (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 11, www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/17/occupy- pp. 289-338). New York, NY: Academic Press. protests-world-list-map Tetlock, P. E. (2005). Expert political judgment. How good is it? Sartori, G. (1995). Elementi di teoria politica. Bologna, Italy: il Mulino. How can we know? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Schacter, D. L., & Addis, D. R. (2007). Constructive memory: The Urbinati, N. (2006). Representative democracy: Principles and ghosts of past and future. Nature, 445, 27. genealogy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Schultz, W. (2007). Multiple dopamine functions at different time Valbruzzi, M., & Passarelli, G. (2008, March 18-20). L’elezione courses. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 30, 259-288. diretta del segretario del PD Analisi regionale e prospettiva Seddone, A., & Venturino, F. (2010, September 16-18). Choosing nazionale. Convegno nazionale della Società Italiana di Sci- the leader. The Italian Democratic Party at polls, 2007 and enza Politica (S.I.S.P.), Università di Pavia. 2009. Convegno Nazionale della Società Italiana di Scienza Varese news. (2009, October 27). I luinesi non vogliono il muro e lo Politica (S.I.S.P.), Università I.U.A.V. di Venezia. Retrieved dicono alle primarie. Retrieved from http://www3.varesenews from http://www.sisp.it/files/papers/2010/antonella-seddone-e- .it/varese/articolo.php?id=154662 fulvio-venturino-788.pdf Webb, P. (2009). The failings of political parties: Reality or percep- Spada, P., & Vreeland, J. R. (2010). Participatory decision making: tion? Representation, 45, 265-275. A field experiment on manipulating the votes. (Working paper, Bio Yale University). Retrieved from http://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/ mprapa/24048.html Raffaele Calabretta is a permanent researcher of the National Squires, N. (2011, November 16). New Italian government does not Research Council of Italy and an affiliate of the New England include a single elected politician. Telegraph. Retrieved from Complex Systems Institute (Cambridge, Massachusetts). He works http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/ at the Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies in Rome and 8895003/New-Italian-government-does-not-include-a-single- has developed the concept of “doparies” in the book Doparie, dopo elected-politician.html le primarie (Nutrimenti, 2010). http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png SAGE Open SAGE http://www.deepdyve.com/lp/sage/doparies-a-novel-party-deliberative-and-aggregative-decision-making-ABCtVPhFqi

Loading next page...

References (58)

Publisher: SAGE
Copyright: Copyright © 2022 by SAGE Publications Inc, unless otherwise noted. Manuscript content on this site is licensed under Creative Commons Licenses.
ISSN: 2158-2440
eISSN: 2158-2440
DOI: 10.1177/2158244011433699
Publisher site: See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The failings of parties are one of the central problems of contemporary democracies. What can be done to revive citizen participation? In this article, we present a novel party participatory decision-making mechanism named “doparies”. They are procedures that are nationally or locally implemented within and by parties, and permit any voter who declares to be an elector of that party (open doparies) or party members (internal doparies) to vote regarding crucial and controversial decisions during the period between one election and another. Whereas primaries are done before elections for choosing party candidates, doparies are done after elections for making party choices on issues. Doparies represent a bidirectional communication system between voters and representatives, and would retain the advantages of primaries (party–voters relationship) and referenda (debate before the vote), but would limit the excessive personalization of politics focusing on issues and not on people. There are both propositional doparies, allowing citizens to raise problems that are absent from their party political agenda, and consultative ones, allowing parties to hear the true voice of their voters, who, differently from what happens in polls, are informed by debates in party circles. We suggest that doparies are a new combination of deliberative and aggregative processes, and hypothesize that they can counteract parties’ crisis and abstention. Procedures similar to doparies are now part of the Italian Democratic Party statute and prominent national leaders have gathered signatures to organize local consultations. The use of primaries by Italian left-wing parties has had a contagious effect on right-wing ones as well as European ones. The same could happen with doparies. Keywords doparies, primaries, political parties, democracy, antipolitics, abstention, turnout, decision making, representation, participation, aggregation, deliberation Introduction Is in-depth crisis of many representative democracies irreversible? For representative democracies to work well, Electoral turnout is declining across Western Europe, point- there has to be a continuous interaction among the repre- ing to a strong disenchantment with elected officials and sented and the representatives. Before elections, in some their ability to represent citizen’s needs and demands. In countries (e.g., United States, Italy, France, Israel, Japan, France, abstention has reached 53.6% in the regional elec- Argentina), there are party primaries, in which party mem- tion of 2010, and almost 60% in the European election of bers and electors choose candidates and electoral platforms. 2009. In Germany, participation in the political election of However, the main problem arises after elections, when it is 2010 has seen a decrease of 7%, when compared with the very difficult for the electors to influence their representa- previous political election. In Italy, the increase in abstention tives. In the United States, President Barack Obama won the in the political election of 2008 has been the largest in the primaries and the 2008 presidential election, thanks to the Republic’s history. These figures become more relevant if Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies, Rome, Italy we consider that these three major liberal democracies have a tradition of very high electoral turnout. The scholarly lit- Corresponding Author: erature on democracy takes this trend of decreasing electoral Raffaele Calabretta, Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies, participation very seriously, as a symptom of a deeper demo- via San Martino della Battaglia, 44, Rome 00185, Italy cratic crisis. Email:raffaele.calabretta@cnr.it 2 SAGE Open direct engagement of thousands of volunteers, but failed to In this article, we will present a novel participatory dem- maintain the same level of consensus and mobilization after ocratic decision-making mechanism developed in Italy, the election. named “doparies” (Calabretta, 2005, 2007, 2010a), which functions within the context of political parties. Doparies One of the challenges that we’ve got to think about [he are consultations conducted after the elections among party said, mulling on this issue] is how do I meet my electors, not just members, to choose among contested responsibilities here in the White House, which require party decisions. In this sense, they represent a tool of politi- a lot of hours and a lot of work, but still have that cal influence available to the civil society—movements, opportunity to engage with the American people on a associations, and individuals—without replacing political day-to-day basis, and know—give them confidence— parties, as civil society can only respond partially and incon- that I’m listening to them. (Obama, 2010) stantly to citizens’ needs. With doparies, civil society move- ments and parties become complementary and strengthen The Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi faced similar each other. Doparies represent a bidirectional communication problems after winning a very popular center-left primary system between citizens and their representatives, which can election in October 2005. He won the general election of be an easy and fast way to improve the quality of representa- 2006, but could not keep even the consensus of his base and tive democracy. We hypothesize that doparies can counter- was forced to resign in February 2008. act parties’ crisis, abstention, and antipolitics. Several proposal have been formulated to address increas- Words are important in democracy. Then, what about the ing citizens’ passivity, by introducing forms of participatory word doparies? Recent studies on human memory indicate democracy: strongly emphasized procedures of direct democ- that its function is also to flexibly prepare to possible future racy; a mixture of direct and indirect democracy with elec- situations that are simulated by putting together pieces of past tronic consultations, the “liquid democracy” of the German experiences (Schacter & Addis, 2007). Analogously, dopary Pirate Party (Maguire, 2010); platforms for interaction is a neologism that brings together different important words between the elected representatives (see Abgeordnetenwatch. that are important for democracy in the description of a useful de, 2011); the British proposal that “any officially sanctioned tool for the future. The initial letter “D” is for democracy, petition with a vast number of signatories [to] be considered decision, deliberation. The crasis of the Italian words dopo for a House of Commons debate and even, in the case of very (“after”), doping (“addiction”), dopamina (“dopamine”), and popular demands, for a bill that might end in a crowd-sourced primarie (“primaries”) indicates the need for democracy in law” (Bennett, 2011, p. 29); the adoption from the United the popular wisdom that crippled the names and adapted them States of the so-called “informed opinion polls”, also known to everyday life. Whereas primaries are done before elections as “deliberative polls” (Fishkin, 1995); etc. Noninstitutionali- for choosing party candidates, doparies are done after elec- zed forms of political participations (such as demonstration tions for making choices on issues. The term relates to “dop- and petitions) reverse gender and age inequalities and have ing”: in this case, it is a beneficial addiction, like the one the potential to mobilize women and young people, but “do being experienced when exercising, where body movements not provide an effective mechanism to get the lowly-educated are beneficial for the brain; similarly, the social movements groups within the population involved in politics” (Mariën, and social capital are beneficial for parties and democracy. Hooghe, & Quintelier, 2010, p. 11). Instead, dopamine is the neurotransmitter involved in the pro- Nadia Urbinati (2006) challenges the idea that representa- cess of decision making (e.g., Schultz, 2007). tive democracy is the second best choice when compared In the following, we will explain what doparies are and with direct democracy, in which citizens take political deci- how they work, present the rationale of the scientific project, sions. The fact is that no democracy in the world takes into and list possible advantages, risks, and critiques. In the consideration the culture of everyday politics and success- appendix we will briefly describe the steps of the proposal’s fully combines participatory and representative systems, if promotion. not in a superficial way (Ginsborg, 2005). Most importantly, representative democracy is a perfectly legitimate form of Doparies: What They Are democracy to shape the process of decision making. If it is in and How They Work crisis, we must not think of its replacement, but of how to address the crisis of political parties, because their failings are The idea of doparies stems from the awareness that the voters one of the central problems of contemporary democracies cannot do anything after election to influence the decisions of (Mair, 2005; for a different view, see Webb, 2009). Political their representatives. We are experimenting with doparies parties “constitute the representative process” (Urbinati, in the Italian context. Italian politics might be an interest- 2006, p. 134). Participation has indeed fallen, with partisan ing case study because it exhibits several problematic fea- loyalty and party membership strongly decreasing over time tures and evolving trends. (Dalton, 2006; Dalton & Wattenberg, 2000; Mair & van Italian people are interested in democracy and in express- Biezen, 2001). ing their own narrative of the world, as shown by the success Calabretta 3 of blogs and social networks (De Biase, 2007; Petrella, 2007), election. The main problem with polls is that people are asked but they have a declining confidence in the institutions to express their opinions regarding very complex issues (e.g., (Eurispes, 2011). The Italian constitutionalist Andrea Manzella green vs. nuclear energy), but have no opportunity to think admits the substantial disappearance of parties as centers of about them and debate them. This situation opens the door to aggregation and planning of the common good (Manzella, emotive politics in which leaders do not lead and people are 2010). Italian political parties are seen as oligarchies that are manipulated, misinformed, and confused (see also below). far from common people’s everyday life and auto-referential Examples of doparies include assisted reproduction, lobbies led by charismatic leaders. There is an excessive and nuclear energy, living will, political alliances, quick citizen- pathological political personalization (Galli Della Loggia, ship for immigrants, and 20% taxation of financial income. 2009): Most parties add the name of the respective leaders on In particular, the latter was a proposal in the government pro- the party symbols, and unlike 10 years ago, television now gram of the center-left, but then, it split the majority in the gives more coverage to party leaders than institutions years 2006 to 2008. (D’Argenio, 2011). The popularity of leaders as celebrities Doparies are consultations organized by parties or coali- does not translate into trust, and disenchantment with them tions and are not open to all citizens but only to party mem- and the political system they represent has begun to spread bers and supporters: among young people, intellectuals, and a significant propor- tion of the Italian population (Amato, 2010; Diamanti, 2011a). 1. Doparies take place in organizations, such as par- Only 5% of Italians trust the political parties (Diamanti, ties, in which persons share some ideologies or 2011b). The fall of Silvio Berlusconi’s government in visions. November 2011 leads to Mario Monti’s emergency technical 2. Doparies require discussion among members— government that “does not include a single elected politician” pondering on issues, exchange of opinions, and (Squires, 2011). To complicate this scenario, it is improbable diversity of points of view. for the electorate to move from one political side to the other. 3. After the discussion, doparies have a central If the electors believe that their needs are poorly represented requirement: vote, as in primaries. by the political leaders of their own political party, they either continue to vote for them or find a convenient refuge in the Doparies can be called both from the top—leaders or party practice of abstention. As already mentioned, the Italian politi- committees decide to consult electors about decisions—and cal election of 2008 registered the fastest-growing electoral from the bottom—electors collect party members’ signatures to abstention of the postwar period (Istituto Cattaneo, 2008). Yet, ask their party to organize doparies. This process allows the abstention is not antipolitics, but one of the available political “final control of the agenda by the demos”, one of Robert options, according to the 2010 report of Audipolitica. The Dahl’s five criteria to meet the ideal of democracy: “The demos level of participation in the referenda of June 12 to 13, 2011, must have the exclusive opportunity to decide how matters are which were not tied to political parties, was high (Gramellini, to be placed on the agenda of matters that are to be decided by 2011). means of the democratic process” (Dahl, 1989, p. 113). In October 2005, the Italian center-left coalition organized Doparies may be used, for example, no more than once a an open primary for choosing its leader in the successive year—to consult the voters after the election on key issues. political election. It was a very successful primary with more Doparies do not force one to be always present and involved. than 4.5 million voters (Pasquino, 2005, 2007). Eight compo- Each citizen can use the instrument only when he or she nents, one for each of the center-left coalition parties, were believes that democracy does not work well or that an impor- part of the primary organizing committee. This committee tant point is missing in the political agenda. Of fundamental has fulfilled the tasks normally carried out in the elections by importance is that the tool exists and is accepted by parties to the Minister of Interior Affairs, namely, the control of the allow citizens, associations, movements, and civil society to legality of the vote. It prepared the document “Project for achieve a minimum political efficacy through their actions, Italy”, which the coalition acknowledged and proposed to the without much effort. Italians for the rebirth of the country and which was accepted It is possible to hypothesize two types of doparies to and signed by all the candidates and the voters in the primary address the issues raised by the debate on “liquid versus (Oliverio, 2005). Doparies can be organized in similar ways. solid party”, or American-style “light” open party versus The procedures of doparies are nationally or locally imple- valorization of party members: mented within and by parties, and permit party members or any voter who declares to be an elector of that party to vote Open doparies, open to all party electors and poten- regarding crucial and controversial decisions after the elec- tial new voters. They take place, for example, once tions. Doparies should not be confused with polls. Usually, a year, to debate crucial issues that split the party. parties conduct polls to find out what their electors think They refer to the procedures tested in national pri- about the key issues that arise after elections or that were in maries and constitute a real and beneficial physical the party’s electoral platforms, but divided the party after the movement of millions of citizens. 4 SAGE Open Internal doparies, open to party members who are used excellence. The overall solution should be looked for a ratio- to meet and discuss political issues. They would be nal use of different systems and decision-making bodies, electronic, more “detailed” and frequent, and serve such that each of these finds its corresponding corrective and the purpose of building party’s policies. complement to the other (Sartori, 1995). Webb (2009) asks what evidence is there to show that peo- This architecture of doparies avoids the danger “to dis- ple “yearn for deeper and more extensive political engage- arm activist’s desire to participate”, which, according to ment.” In Italy, this request has been very clear on several some experts, is a result of primaries being open to all voters occasions, mostly regarding primaries. In particular, it hap- (Seddone & Venturino, 2010). In the case of doparies, activ- pened in December 2010, after a newspaper interview of the ists have more privileges than the electors who are not active secretary of the Democratic Party Pierluigi Bersani, who in the party. argued the need to sacrifice the primary to choose the center- Could the results of doparies have a binding force? Many left candidate for prime minister to broaden the political citizens and politicians argue that results should be binding. coalition in possible election against center-right (Bartocci, This is a sensitive and important issue that needs to be dis- 2010; De Marchis, 2010). The revolt of the base of the party cussed. Referring to participatory democracy, Luigi Bobbio on social networks and a number of important leaders has (2006), a scholar who has made numerous studies on delib- been very clear, and thus, on January 13, 2011, at the party’s erative democracy, argues that the lack of binding power is national leadership committee, Bersani announced a national one of his strong points because it allows interactions that are conference to discuss the issue of primaries and internal not harnessed and promotes the informality of the relation- democracy (De Marchis, 2011). After the local elections in ship between the participants, allowing them to compete May 2011, many political analysts and politicians agreed that openly without preestablished positions and invent new solu- primaries were one of the main reasons for the success of the tions. If they deem it necessary for the good of the community center-left coalition. As a result, for the first time, the issue of and respect of minorities, political leaders would still have primaries has become resoundingly central in the center-right the possibility to disregard the result of the dopary and, there- political field to the point of filling the pages of newspapers fore, the prevailing opinion of their electors that the dopary and television and stimulating the elaboration of a specific would finally manifest. They would assume the responsibil- law (Amabile, 2011; “Dopo i ballottaggi”, 2011). ity, as political leaders, to lead and not be led (Parisi, 2007). Dopary is a new simple mechanism that does not need In this case, it is essential that they recognize a minimum of new laws and, therefore, agreement among parties to be effective action to voters who organized the dopary and voted implemented and that gives an answer to the citizens’ right in it. For example, they could explain, with maximum media and need for influencing political decisions. Today’s com- exposure, the reasons for their decision not to respect the out- plex societies cannot be guided solely by politicians, who come of the dopary. often become oligarchic; by experts, who sometimes make big mistakes (Tetlock, 2005); or by citizens, who frequently lack the skills and information necessary to decide. The Doparies Research Project Rationale mechanism of doparies involves various democracy actors: In the essay “Global Divergence of Democracies”, Diamond experts, politicians, journalists, and citizens. Citizenship and and Plattner (2001) review the distinction between electoral political parties are key players in the vote, whereas journal- democracy—defined by a single criterion: to ensure the ists and experts are actors in the debate preceding the vote. holding of regular, free, and fair elections among competing Experts and stakeholders are actively involved in the delib- parties—and liberal democracy—characterized by the addi- erative polls (Fishkin, 1995) that could enrich the predopary tional requirements in which the central role of the civil discussion. society and citizen associations stands out as a check on Zurich Professor Bruno Frey’s research (2002) shows that policy choices and as a deep soul of democracy. giving Swiss citizens the possibility to have a role on politi- Some critics of political parties believe that civil society cal decisions increases their satisfaction with life and that the can be self-sufficient, but, according to Ronsvallon (Gambaro, positive effect of direct democracy on happiness is stronger 2008), it is an illusion to think that democracy can only be in cantons with medium or high direct democracy rights, over reduced to the civil society. Democracy is always a face-off and above economic conditions. Emotions are influenced by between the government and society and between decisions interpersonal and social relationships, and depend very much and consensus. It must be continually subjected to a process of on the ability of influencing others, changing society, and appropriation, owing to activities of the civil society, institu- affecting politics. In the introduction to the collection of tions, and permanent interaction between power and society. essays “Felicità e libertà,” Bruni and Porta (2006) argue Hay and Stoker stressed that “if we are to reanimate and revi- that the interpersonal dimension can be the bridge between talize our politics, then we need to recreate the space for public Daniel Kaheneman’s utilitarian tradition and Amartya Sen’s and visible deliberative decision-making” (Hay & Stoker, 2009, Aristotelian tradition about happiness. All the other authors p. 235). However, there is no decision-making system par in this volume, including Kahneman and Sen, share the idea Calabretta 5 that life does not flourish, in Sen’s words, and that existence the organization of doparies and should encourage a kind of is not pleasant, as Kahneman puts it, without friends and discussion (members/experts) different from what happens without genuine relationships, especially disinterested rela- in referenda (voter/media) and similar to a kind of spontane- tionships with others. The relational dimension, then, is ous deliberation (see also below). Let us consider the case of important not only as a source of happiness but also because referenda in Italy. They can only be abrogatory and not prop- it is the place where one exercises (or not exercises) the rights, ositional, whereas doparies can be both consultative and human development, freedom, and civil life. All these authors propositional. They have a quorum, and those who are against highlight the importance of considering happiness not only as have become aware that the most effective strategy to defeat the satisfaction of desires but also of linking happiness with a referendum is to focus on abstention. As 25% of the popula- relatedness (the quality of human relationships) and with the tion never goes to vote, it is enough to just add a 25% moti- possibility for citizens to live their virtues (not in a moralistic vated abstention to defeat a specific referendum. As referenda sense but in the sense of action) and develop activities (hap- normally generate low levels of participation, the 57% turn- piness as “human flourishing” or “fulfillment” according to out in the referenda of June 2011 in Italy was unexpected. Sen, which is much like the Greek eudaimonia). Doparies do not have quorum and therefore cannot be invali- One can naturally ask—What are the tools with which citi- dated. The most important difference between referenda and zens today can say what is wrong in their relationship with doparies is that the latter have the main function to recreate, politics? The main function of doparies is to open a channel although in new forms, the growing intellectual exchange of communication between those involved in democracy. among sympathizers/members/activists and political lead- Public happiness comes from an intense democratic related- ers, which partly characterized the life of the Italian parties ness among citizens, political parties, experts, information, until the nineties of the last century. and institutions. According to Domenico Parisi (2006), today the society becomes more complicated to understand, and people have very few tools to comprehend it: We should invest in the Doparies: Advantages, problem of how to use new technologies (computers, Internet, Risks, and Critiques video games, and simulations) to increase the level of the What can be the advantages of using doparies in modern society’s social and economic literacy. Expression of an opin- representative democracies? And what about the risks and ion through doparies on difficult issues, such as living will or critiques? Unlike the primaries, doparies put the emphasis the use of nuclear energy, may provide unequal access to this not on individuals but on ideas. However, they are not opin- instrument of participatory democracy due to “education, ion polls and even referenda. What is the difference between class, gender, and age” (Mariën et al., 2010), as had already polls and doparies? The abused utilization of the methodology occurred for institutionalized and noninstitutionalized partici- of polls to understand and influence the orientations of citi- pation instruments. In contrast, the prediction here, based on zens toward political and electoral issues has several draw- the “impressive turnout” at the so-called Italian national pri- backs (e.g., Callegaro & Gasperoni, 2008; Durand, 2008). maries of 2005, 2007, and 2009 (Seddone & Venturino, 2010; Whereas polls are conducted on a significant sample of the Valbruzzi & Passarelli, 2008), is that people, motivated by population, in doparies a very high number of voters express the fact of expressing an important opinion, feel the need to themselves. Differently from polls, doparies can be activated exploit new learning opportunities as those offered by the by citizens. However, the essential difference is that respon- Internet (e.g., Wikipedia and free online university courses dents in an opinion poll are completely unaware of the offered by some of the leading universities worldwide). implications of the subject matter they are asked to evaluate, In some of the criticisms on doparies, the argument of and they respond according to the superficial impression of the “madness of crowds” is cited to refer to the risk of mak- the moment. In contrast, in doparies, as in referenda, citizens ing political decisions collectively (Pace, 2009). The litera- know that they must express an opinion that may affect ture shows the critical importance of optimizing animal important political decisions, and they have the time and collective behavior of a dynamic environment where there motivation to inform and deepen their knowledge, creating a is a constant flow of information to allow an individual to view that is certainly more responsive than the one given in change behavior at all times (Amé, Halloy, Rivault, a poll. As shown by Frey (2002), “the main function of the Detrain, & Deneubourg, 2006). The dopary process repre- prereferendum process is certainly to raise the level of infor- sents a direct channel for a continuous flow of information mation of the participants” (p. 138). The exchange of opin- and a mechanism for turning private judgments into collec- ions also favors the formation of preferences of participants. tive decision (Surowiecki, 2004). A very large number of There are important differences also between referenda citizens can express themselves, thereby promoting the and doparies. First, as already mentioned, doparies call to diversity of opinion, which is very important to ensure that vote supporters and members of the majority or opposition the aggregate opinion of a group of people of media com- parties that have launched them, whereas referenda call to petence can be better than that of a smaller group of experts vote the entire electorate of the country. Parties care about (Page, 2007). 6 SAGE Open One critique of doparies argues that even if people are alone or reasoning with like-minded people (Koriat, informed and documented, and even if it is not just a choice Lichtenstein, & Fischhoff, 1980; Landemore & Page, 2011; between two leaders (such as in primaries), there is always Sunstein, 2002; Tesser, 1978). the danger—in the society of entertainment—that emotion Political analyst Massimo Teodori is skeptical about the prevails over the critical sense and few demagogic slogan actual chance of convincing/forcing political parties to over informed choices (La Porta, 2010). In reality, this danger greater participatory democracy (through doparies or other has been present for some time in Italy, with politics led by an similar instruments), unless the character of private law is exasperated poll addiction. The exchange of opinions (espe- changed (personal communication, July 2008). According to cially those of minorities) and the constant flow of informa- Teodori, a necessary step to enhance participatory democ- tion in doparies are essential to move from the “madness” racy is the acquisition of legal personality by the parties toward the “wisdom” of the crowd. (Frosini, 2003). In this regard, several draft laws have been Luigi Bobbio (2006) is perplexed by the proposal of pending in the Italian Parliament for years. Should we wait doparies because he thinks that the choice of alternative proj- until those become law to seek the implementation of demo- ects or policies cannot be called to vote (even of activists) cratic instruments such as doparies? but should first be subject to discussion. In other words, Other arguments against doparies may be quickly according to Bobbio, what is needed is a deliberative pro- addressed. Direct democracy only works well in small sys- cess, rather than an aggregative one. However, a deliberative tems such as Switzerland, they say. But the great success of process may be conducted only among a limited number of the primaries shows that it is possible even in large countries participants on well-defined issues (personal communica- such as Italy; moreover, the political leaders of various coun- tion, September 2008). When he talked about the process of tries, including France, have studied the Italian primaries to aggregation, Bobbio refers to counting of votes among pre- replicate them. Others say that the high costs of doparies established positions according to the principle of majority; could be an obstacle, but Italians have shown willingness to according to the deliberativists, the essence of democracy is support the organization of primaries through generous vol- based on arguments in the “discussion” (“deliberation”, in untary contributions. The apathy of voters would be also an English) between all actors involved in the issue at hand. issue, though the large turnout in 2011 Italian primaries and To answer this objection, it is necessary to try to explain referenda suggests the contrary; in Switzerland, 40% of the in more detail what is meant by “deliberative process”. population usually votes, but they vote even 4 times a year, Deliberation is a method of decision making (e.g., Cohen, whereas in doparies one would vote no more than once a 1989; Elster, 1998; Habermas, 1997; see also Fung, 2003), year. Finally, there would be the risk of oversimplifying which is differently defined. According to Mercier and complex problems—however, with doparies, it is possible Landemore (in press), public deliberation is an exchange of not only to vote “yes” or “no” but also to choose between arguments for and against a given proposition, where different documents that address the same problem (e.g., the “exchange” means that “there must be a feedback loop type of employment contract that facilitates the entry into the between reasoning from at least two opinions” and “a dis- labor market of unemployed youth). agreement between at least two individuals in the course of a conversation.” Doparies are consultations about specific con- Conclusions troversial political decisions, and therefore, the debate is, by definition, related to diverging opinions about the same Even critics of participatory and deliberative democracy issue. As a consequence, in these situations, the feedback admit that there are situations in which people want to con- loop can take place. Moreover, the hypothesis is that, differ- tribute to political decisions and in which participation ben- ent from the general referenda—which are open to all the efits both the person and the political system. We presume citizens and mainly covered by television and other political that the current serious crisis of many democracies is one of debate media and in which citizens often reason alone or those situations and propose doparies as a new bidirectional with their family and friends—debates of doparies occur in communication mechanism between parties and their elec- party circles, clubs, and places where there is a limited num- tors. Doparies are consultations among party members or ber of participants who exchange reasoned arguments. In electors that are done after elections for taking crucial and short, it can be said that doparies are a new combination of a controversial decisions. deliberative process, in which the debate takes place in par- Representative democracy needs to regenerate itself with ties circles, among a limited number of participants who the latest scientific knowledge and innovative energies of hold different opinions and exchange reasoned arguments citizens. Today, everything is changing so fast that no party about a specific issue, and an aggregative processes, because can predict at the time of preparation of the electoral program in the end there is the vote. Future research should verify what will be the challenges that it will face once in govern- whether this particular kind of process avoids, as it usually ment. Could doparies be the basic tool through which ordi- happens with genuine deliberation, the problems of polariza- nary citizens avoid the disastrous experience of democratic tion and overconfidence—the characteristics of reasoning disenchantment of abstention, build a proper relationship of Calabretta 7 political representation, and enjoy the pleasure of the happy Harvard. As a research agenda, we plan to use computer exercise of public reason? Doparies serve to create communi- simulations and to conduct laboratory and field experiments. cation and trust between voters and their representatives, The use of primaries by the Italian Democratic Party has improving the quality of representative democracy, which, had a contagious effect on Italian right-wing parties (e.g., thus, becomes participatory. Carioti, 2011) as well as on other European parties (French Due to the effects on people’s lives of “the biggest finan- socialist party; Gozi, 2011). It has already happened with pri- cial crisis the world has ever faced” (Kirkup, 2011), 2011 has maries and it could happen with doparies. seen the wave of popular protests worldwide demanding Appendix more participatory democracy (e.g., Indignants and Occupy movements; Rogers, 2011). I mean that the introduction of Promotion of Doparies doparies would be important not only for the Italian political system but also for that of other countries. Doparies are dif- In December 2005, the proposal of doparies was first ferent from referenda: Participation is not open to all voters officially presented in the weekly magazine Avvenimenti but is limited to party members or electors. Moreover, no (Calabretta, 2005). In December 2007, the spokesman for quorum is required for the validity of the vote. Finally, there the Secretary of the Democratic Party (PD) Roberto Roscani are both propositional doparies (i.e., party members collect commented as follows: “The proposal of doparies was read signatures to ask their party to be consulted on a particular with attention and will be considered in the committee that topic), allowing citizens to raise problems that are absent has the task of preparing proposals for the Statute of the from their party political agenda, and, in the other direction, PD.” Article 27 of the Statute of the PD—approved on consultative ones, allowing parties to hear the true voice of February 16, 2008, and amended by the National Assembly its voters, who, differently from what happens in the polls, on May 21-22, 2010—provides for procedures similar to were informed by the debates in party circles. Doparies doparies (called “internal referenda”). would retain the advantages of primaries (party–voters rela- In early March 2009, two articles on doparies written by tionship) and referenda (debate before the vote), but would Mario Pirani (2009a, 2009b), one of the most prominent limit the excessive personalization of politics, focusing on Italian journalists (Pirani, 2010), were published in the most issues and not on people. important Italian newspaper, la Repubblica, followed by Doparies would: several other commentary articles in main national newspa- pers and by national public television interviews (e.g., • Allow common people to realize the aspiration to a Calabretta, 2009a, 2009b). more constant participatory democracy At the end of March 2009, the first congress of the right- • Not force people to align themselves with the wing party Il Popolo della Libertà (PDL) approved the stat- thought of political parties ute of the party. Article 10 provides for electronic • Convince undecided and disappointed persons to consultations on important decisions. (As already pointed become interested in public issues and to vote out, doparies have to be preceded by a critical phase of study • Give movements a tool for controlling politicians and debate, in which there is a reasoned exchange of differ- • Bring politics near the people’s everyday problems ent positions with regard to the subject of the dopary among • Help elected politicians feel useful and avoid being a limited number of participants.) under the thumb of power The proposal of doparies entered into all three motions of • Decrease expectations about politics held by elec- primaries’ congress of the PD in October 2009 (in the con- tors and reduce anger from them toward their party gress motion Marino, it is written as “primary and dopary leaders because they would understand how diffi- party”; Civati, 2009). Close to the primaries of the PD, the cult it is to take decisions media coverage of doparies had an international visibility • Create stronger social cohesion between politicians through Miguel Mora in the Spanish newspaper El Paìs and electorate and within the electorate (Mora, 2009). In January 2010, the essay titled “Doparie dopo le prima- The scientific project of doparies, which will be carried rie” (Calabretta, 2010a) was published, and then promoted out in collaboration with Yale University, is expected to all over the country. On December 20, 2010, doparies were achieve a series of scientific studies seeking to demonstrate described in the newspaper la Repubblica as “a system of that this tool influences the well-being, cognitive style, and democratic common sense wisdom” (Ceccarelli, 2010). In social behavior of the participants (Calabretta, 2010b, February 2011, the new center-right party Futuro e Libertà, 2010c; Clark & Mills, in press; Keil, 2010; Spada & Vreeland, born from the splitting of PDL held its constituent assembly 2010). The joint 2011-2012 CNR (National Research Council and approved the first articles of the Statute, which speak of of Italy)/NEH (National Endowment for the Humanities) “peripheral participation in decision-making.” The party Fellowship will fund a 6-month period of research on dopar- (continued) ies in the American Universities of Yale, Stanford, MIT, and 8 SAGE Open Appendix (continued) It has to be verified whether the ordinary accomplishment of doparies in one of the two major Italian parties could have leaders have spoken from the stage of a technology platform, a contagious effect on the other political parties, as seems to connected to the Internet, for members to vote on all deci- be already happening: In March 2011, a consultation on sions of the party (Maurelli, 2011). nuclear energy was launched among the party members on The widespread implementation of doparies could start the site of right-wing party Futuro e Libertà. In May 2011, from the bottom. On March 5, 2008, a civil list near the Antonio Barile, a former mayor of San Giovanni in Fiore center-right at Bitonto, a large town near Bari, in southern (Calabria, South Italy), committed himself to delivering Italy, brought the political agenda for administrative dopar- doparies if reelected as mayor (PDL more civic lists). In ies (bitonto.myblog.it). On October 25, 2009, the same day Emilia Romagna, two regional leaders of Beppe Grillo’s Five when the national primary of the PD was conducted, the Star Movement have brought their resignation in the face of party leaders of Luino (Varese) decided to organize a sort of public confronting a sort of referendum on the work that they referendum on the decision of the municipal administration carry out the election in the region (Ponzano, 2011). The to build a wall along the lake. The consultation was open to decision on what should be their salary was also subjected to all citizens and had a great turnout: About 15% more than consultation. Did this participatory policy influence the the people who have voted in the primaries decided to movement’s local elections in Bologna on May 15, 2011, express their opinion in the consultation, despite the require- where the Five Star Movement scored a very good result ment to make a double line (Varese news, 2009). (nearly 10% of the vote)? On June 24, 2011, Pierluigi In the uncertain situation of Italian politics at the end of Bersani, general secretary of PD, called and chaired the par- 2010 and early 2011, characterized by mistrust from the side ty’s national board focused on internal democracy; during the of electors to the major Italian parties, the secretaries of the press conference, he announced that his party would soon PD of some towns in Sicily (Enna, Caltagirone, and Gela) organize the first party internal referendum (Collini, 2011). organized a referendum open to members and electors on the After 2 years since the appearance on Facebook, dopary decision of whether the party should continue to support the pages have thousands of friends (of different political affili- regional government. The initiative infected the other parties ations, right and left), in addition to the thousands who of the center-left wing, which called for a coalition regional have signed the petition online (www.petitiononline.com/ consultation on the issue. Subsequently, Senator Enzo doparie). On March 24, 2011, the proposal of doparies was Bianco, a former Minister of Interior Affairs, through presented at the library of the Italian Chamber of Deputies YouTube, gathered signatures of party members for a delib- by invitation of the PD parliamentary group. It is gaining erative referendum based on Article 36 of the Statute of the increased interest in Italy (see doparies.it and facebook.com/ Regional PD, which refers to Article 27 of the national stat- doparie) and beginning to be known in other countries: On ute. Some newspapers and blogs explicitly spoke of “dopar- May 27, 2011, the most widespread nonsports newspaper in ies” (Catania Politica, 2011; Condorelli, 2011; Giornale di Spain El Paìs has published a long article about primaries in Sicilia, 2011; L’Opinione, 2011; Pipitone, 2011). A total of Europe (Gomez & Prades, 2011), and doparies are the only 5,000 signatures were then delivered by May 2, 2011: The new method mentioned. The first vice-president of the regional leaders of the party indicated that referendum regu- European Parliament Gianni Pittella wrote that politics lation would be approved in June 2011 and that what should needs to encourage direct participation in public life with be the first regional dopary would take place after the sum- doparies (Pittella, 2011). mer. In a press conference at the Chamber of Deputies, convened on April 14, 2011, to present to the press a new draft law on internal party democracy and discipline of pri- Acknowledgments maries, the former secretary of the PD Walter Veltroni spoke in favor of the internal party referenda and specified that The author would like to thank Anna Di Lellio, Domenico Parisi, they could be subject to further regulation in political parties and Pietro Terna for very helpful comments on the manuscript, and (Fraschilla, 2011). acknowledge the useful discussions with Margaret Clark, Helene During the same period, young national political party Ganser, Donald Green, Malte Ierl, Frank Keil, Hélène Landemore, leaders such as Giuseppe Civati and Sandro Gozi have Kristi Lockart, Kristine Olson, Gianfranco Pasquino, Leonid publicly expressed on their Facebook profiles that they Peisakhin, Paolo Spada, Tom Tyler, Nadia Urbinati, Salvatore will organize the first national dopary on the theme of the Vassallo, Hayden White, and the members of Frank Keil’s lab at political alliances of the PD, a topic that lacerates the party Yale University during weekly meetings in October 2010. for years. In his book “Oltre i partiti” (“Beyond the parties”, Declaration of Conflicting Interests 2011) the former coordinator of PD Goffredo Bettini has proposed to the center-left to open up to new forms of rep- The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with resentation, in which the role of primaries and doparies respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this would be crucial. article. Calabretta 9 Funding Carioti, F. (2011, October 23). La promessa di Alfano Cambio il PDL per vincere. Libero, p. 1. The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support Catania Politica. (2011, January 26). L’Enzo Bianco 2.0 lancia for the research and/or authorship of this article: The financial sup- le doparie sul Pd filolombardo. Retrieved from http://lnx.cat- port of the National Research Council of Italy (Short Term Mobility aniapolitica.it/wordpress/archives/22274 Program 2010 at Yale University) is gratefully acknowledged. Ceccarelli, F. (2010, December 20). Il mito del voto dal basso. Da ancora di salvezza a psicodramma politico. la Repubblica, p. 13. References Civati, G. (2009). Nostalgia del futuro. La sinistra e il Pd da oggi Abgeordnetenwatch.de. (2011). Available from abgeordnetenwatch.de. in poi. Venezia, Italy: Marsilio. Amabile, F. (2011, May 30). Berlusconi ora pensa alle primarie. La Clark, M., & Mills, J. R. (in press). Communal relationships. Cohen, J. (1989). Deliberation and democratic legitimacy. Stampa, p. 2. In A. Hamlin & P. Pettit (Eds.), The good polity (pp. 17-34). Amato, R. (2010). Censis: Società senza regole e sogni che non New York, NY: Blackwell. crede più nel carisma del capo. Retrieved from http://www. Collini, S. (2011, June 25). Primarie e programma. Bersani: repubblica.it/politica/2010/12/03/news/censis_rapporto- Prepariamoci al dopo-Berlusconi. l’Unità, pp. 10-11. 9769145/?ref=HREC1-4 Condorelli, A. (2011, January 9). Il PD siciliano vieta il referen- Amé, J.-M., Halloy, J., Rivault, C., Detrain, C., & Deneubourg, J. dum sull’alleanza con l’Mpa di Raffaele Lombardo. Il Fatto L. (2006). Collegial decision making based on social ampli- Quotidiano. Retrieved from http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/ fication leads to optimal group formation. Proceeding of the 2011/01/09/il-pd-siciliano-vieta-il-referendum-sullalleanza- National Academy of Science of the USA, 103, 5835-5840. con-lombardo/85594 Audipolitica. (2010). Italiani che non votano. Retrieved from Dahl, R. A. (1989). Democracy and its critics. New Haven, CT: http://www.audipolitica.it/images/stories/sintesi/Sintesi_Italiani Yale University Press. CheNonVotano.pdf Dalton, R. J. (2006). Citizen politics: Public opinion and political Bartocci, M. (2010, December 18). Il Venerdì 17 di Bersani. Il parties in advanced industrial democracies. Washington, DC: Manifesto, p. 4. Congressional Quarterly Press. Bennett, C. (2011, January 2). Let’s all join in not signing up to this Dalton, R. J., & Wattenberg, M. P. (2000). Parties without partisans: idea of e-petitions. The Observer, p. 29. Political change in advanced industrial democracies. Oxford, Bettini, G. (2011). Oltre i partiti. Un nuovo campo dei democratici UK: Oxford University Press. per cambiarel’Italia. Venezia, Italy: Marsilio. D’Argenio, A. (2011, February 9). L’invasione di Berlusconi nei tg. Bobbio, L. (2006). Dilemmi della democrazia partecipativa. la Repubblica, p. 9. Democrazia e diritto, 44(4), 11-16. De Biase, L. (2007). Economia della felicità. Dalla blogosfera al Bruni, L., & Porta, P. L. (2006). Felicità e libertà. Economia e valore del dono e oltre. Milano, Italy: Feltrinelli. benessere in prospettiva relazionale. Milano, Italy: Guerini e De Marchis, G. (2010, December 17). Ora alleanza col terzo polo. Si associati. rimette in discussione tutto e sacrifichiamo le primarie. Bersani: Calabretta, R. (2005, December 16). Dopo le primarie propongo le Un nuovo patto per superare Berlusconi. la Repubblica, p. 3. doparie. Avvenimenti, 48, p. 49. De Marchis, G. (2011, January 13). Pd, Bersani tenta la tregua con Calabretta, R. (2007). Il film delle emozioni (2nd ed.). Roma, Italy: Veltroni. la Repubblica, p. 11. Gaffi. Diamanti, I. (2011a, October 24). Il Paese sospeso tra indignazione Calabretta, R. (2009a, March 6). Politica: Dalle primarie alle dopa- e sfiducia. la Repubblica, p. 1. rie. Il Corriere della Sera, p. 37. Diamanti, I. (2011b, November 7). Il disincanto della democrazia. Calabretta, R. (2009b, August 10). Live television interview. National la Repubblica, p. 1. Public Television RAI: Il Caffé di RaiNews24, RAI Tre. Diamond, L. J., & Plattner, M. F. (2001). The global divergence of Calabretta, R. (2010a). Doparie, dopo le primarie. Diario di un elet- democracies. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. tore errante alla ricerca della felicità. Roma, Italy: Nutrimenti. Dopo i ballottaggi le primarie del Pdl? (2011, May 30). Il Foglio, Calabretta, R. (2010b, October 18). Doparie: The democracy of hap- p. 1. piness? Invited talk, Laboratory of Cognition and Development, Durand, C. (2008). The polls of the 2007 French presidential cam- Yale Department of Psychology. paign: Were lessons learned from the 2002 catastrophe? Inter- Calabretta, R. (2010c, October 29). Doparie: A novel democratic national Journal of Public Opinion Research, 20, 275-298. participatory decision making mechanism that affects party sup- Elster, J. (Ed.). (1998). Deliberative democracy. Cambridge, UK: porters well-being? Invited talk, Experiments Lunch Fall 2010/ Cambridge University Press. Spring 2011, Yale Institution for Social and Policy Studies. Eurispes. (2011). Rapporto Italia 2011. Retrieved from www. Callegaro, M., & Gasperoni, G. (2008). Accuracy of pre-election eurispes.it polls for the 2006 Italian parliamentary election: Too close to Fishkin, J. (1995). The voice of the people: Public opinion and call. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 20, democracy. Yale University Press. 148-170. 10 SAGE Open Fraschilla, A. (2011, April 14). Veltroni chiede al Pd di rompere con La Porta, F. (2010). Inventiamoci le doparie. Enne Effe, 1, 2. Lombardo. “Ascoltiamo la base, esperienza da chiudere.” la L’Opinione (2011, January 27). Le “doparie” per Lombardo. L’Opinione, p. 4. Repubblica Palermo. Retrieved from http://palermo.repubblica. Maguire, H. (2010). German Pirate party plunges into “liquid it/cronaca/2011/04/14/news/veltroni_chiede_al_pd_di_lasciare democracy.” Retrieved from http://www.monstersandcritics _lombardo_ascoltiamo_la_base_chiudiamo_questa_esperienza- .com/news/europe/news/article_1575725.php/INTERVIEW- 14936601/index.html?ref=search German-Pirate-party-plunges-into-liquid-democracy Frey, B. (2002). Happiness and economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Mair, P. (2005). Democracy beyond parties. Irvine, CA: Center for University Press. the Study of Democracy, University of California. Retrieved Frosini, T. E. (2003). È giunta l’ora di una legge sui partiti? Quaderni from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/3vs886v9 costituzionali, 1, 152-162. Mair, P., & van Biezen, I. (2001). Party membership in twenty Fung, A. (2003). Recipes for public spheres: Eight institutional European democracies, 1980-2000. Party Politics, 7(1), 5-21. design choices and their consequences. Journal of Political Manzella, A. (2010, December 7). L’orologio del Colle. la Repub- Philosophy, 11, 338-367. blica, p. 1. Galli Della Loggia, E. (2009, June 25). La politica cancellata. Il Mariën, S., Hooghe, M., & Quintelier, E. (2010). Inequalities in Corriere della Sera, p. 1. non-institutionalized forms of political participation. A multi- Gambaro, F. (2008, December 14). Intervista a Pierre Rosanval- level analysis for 26 countries. Political Studies, 58, 187-213. lon. Le democrazia non è solo “il voto nell’urna.” Il sottile dis- Maurelli, L. (2011, February 12). Obama, Jobs: La svolta web della crimine tra “controdemocrazia positiva” e controdemocrazia politica. Nasce Fli live, il portale delle idee: Assemblee, dibat- negative.” la Repubblica, p. 1. titi e votazioni online. Il Secolo d’Italia, p. 4. Ginsborg, P. (2005). Il tempo di cambiare. Politica e potere nella Mercier, H., & Landemore, H. E. (in press). Reasoning is for argu- vita quotidiana. Torino, Italy: Einaudi. ing: Understanding the successes and failures of deliberation. Giornale di Sicilia. (2011). Pd, su Youtube un referendum per il Political Psychology. sostegno a Lombardo. Retrieved from http://www.gds.it/gds/ Mora, M. (2009, October, 13). La izquierda italiana busca un líder sezioni/politica/dettaglio/articolo/gdsid/144608 que haga frente a Berlusconi. El Paìs, p. 3. Gomez, R. G., & Prades, J. (2011, May 27). Elegir caras o programas. Obama, B. (2010). Press conference. Retrieved from http://www. El Paìs. Retrieved from http://www.elpais.com/articulo/sociedad/ whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2010/11/03/presiden- Elegir/caras/programas/elpepisoc/20110527elpepisoc_1/Tes tial-press-conference#transcript Gozi, S. (2011, October 11). Dalla primarie all’italienne una lezione Oliverio, N. (2005). Energie Primarie. Roma, Italy: Gaffi editore. per noi. l’Unità, pp. 34-35. Pace, L. (2009, March 6). Se il Pd non vuole diventare come la Gramellini, M. (2011, June 14). Una vittoria senza padri. La Svizzera si ricordi un po’ di Mitterand. Il Foglio, p. 2. Stampa, p.1. Page, S. E. (2007). The difference: How the power of diversity cre- Habermas, J. (1997). Popular sovereignty as a procedure. ates better groups, firms, schools, and societies. Princeton, NJ: In J. Bohman & W. Regh (Eds.), Deliberative democracy Princeton University Press. (pp. 35-66). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Parisi, D. (2006). Strumenti per capire. Reset, 94, 30-31. Hay, C., & Stoker, G. (2009). Revitalising politics: Have we lost the Parisi, D. (2007, June 18-19). L’Occidente esporta felicità? Relazi- plot? Representation, 45, 225-236. one al convegno “Psicologia ed economia della felicità: verso Istituto Cattaneo. (2008). La maggior crescita di astensionismo elet- un cambiamento dell’agire politico.” Università degli Studi di torale del dopoguerra, assieme a quella del 1996. Retrieved from Roma “La Sapienza.” http://www.cattaneo.org/pubblicazioni/analisi/pdf/Analisi_ Pasquino, G. (2005). Postfazione. In M. Valbruzzi (Ed.), Prima- Cattaneo_Politiche2008_Astensionismo.pdf rie. Partecipazione e leadership (pp. 279-293). Bologna, Italy: Keil, F. C. (2010). When and why do Hedgehogs and Fox Differ? Bononia University Press. Critical Review, 22, 415-426. Pasquino, G. (2007). Strumenti della democrazia. Bologna, Italy: Kirkup, J. (2011, October, 6). World facing worst financial cri- il Mulino. sis in history, Bank of England Governor says. The Tele- Petrella, R. (2007). Una nuova narrazione del mondo. Bologna, graph. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ Italy: EMI. financialcrisis/8812260/World-facing-worst-financial-crisis- Pipitone, G. (2011, January 13). Lombardo, nuova grana dagli in-history-Bank-of-England-Governor-says.html alleati. UDC e FLI prendono le distanze dal PD. Giornale di Koriat, A., Lichtenstein, S., & Fischhoff, B. (1980). Reasons for Sicilia, p. 5. confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Pirani, M. (2009a, March 2). Impedire che i soliti se la cantino da Learning and Memory, 6, 107-118. soli. la Repubblica, p. 25. Landemore, H. E., & Page, S. (2011, October 20-22). Deliberation Pirani, M. (2009b, March 16). Chi ama e chi no le pulizie di Pasqua. and disagreement: Problem-solving, prediction, and positive la Repubblica, p. 22. dissensus. Paper prepared for presentation at the Confer- Pirani, M. (2010). Poteva andare peggio. Mezzo secolo di ragio- ence “Epistemic democracy in practice,” Yale University, nevoli illusioni. Milano, Italy: Mondadori. New Haven, CT. Calabretta 11 Pittella, G. (2011, July 13). Prendiamo esempio, diventiamo più Sunstein, C. R. (2002). The law of group polarization. Journal of “wiki. Europa, p. 9. Political Philosophy, 10, 175-195. Ponzano, M. (2011, May 4). Dimissioni a cinque stelle: Giovanni Surowiecki, J. (2004). The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are Favia. Radio Reset. Retrieved from http://www.resetradio.net/ smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, interviste/societa/il-diritto-di-farsi-licenziare-giovanni-favia economies, societies, and nations. New York, NY: Doubleday. Rogers, S. (2011, November, 11). Occupy protests around the Tesser, A. (1978). Self-generated attitude change. In L. Berkowitz world: Full list visualized. The Guardian. Retrieved from http:// (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 11, www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/17/occupy- pp. 289-338). New York, NY: Academic Press. protests-world-list-map Tetlock, P. E. (2005). Expert political judgment. How good is it? Sartori, G. (1995). Elementi di teoria politica. Bologna, Italy: il Mulino. How can we know? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Schacter, D. L., & Addis, D. R. (2007). Constructive memory: The Urbinati, N. (2006). Representative democracy: Principles and ghosts of past and future. Nature, 445, 27. genealogy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Schultz, W. (2007). Multiple dopamine functions at different time Valbruzzi, M., & Passarelli, G. (2008, March 18-20). L’elezione courses. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 30, 259-288. diretta del segretario del PD Analisi regionale e prospettiva Seddone, A., & Venturino, F. (2010, September 16-18). Choosing nazionale. Convegno nazionale della Società Italiana di Sci- the leader. The Italian Democratic Party at polls, 2007 and enza Politica (S.I.S.P.), Università di Pavia. 2009. Convegno Nazionale della Società Italiana di Scienza Varese news. (2009, October 27). I luinesi non vogliono il muro e lo Politica (S.I.S.P.), Università I.U.A.V. di Venezia. Retrieved dicono alle primarie. Retrieved from http://www3.varesenews from http://www.sisp.it/files/papers/2010/antonella-seddone-e- .it/varese/articolo.php?id=154662 fulvio-venturino-788.pdf Webb, P. (2009). The failings of political parties: Reality or percep- Spada, P., & Vreeland, J. R. (2010). Participatory decision making: tion? Representation, 45, 265-275. A field experiment on manipulating the votes. (Working paper, Bio Yale University). Retrieved from http://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/ mprapa/24048.html Raffaele Calabretta is a permanent researcher of the National Squires, N. (2011, November 16). New Italian government does not Research Council of Italy and an affiliate of the New England include a single elected politician. Telegraph. Retrieved from Complex Systems Institute (Cambridge, Massachusetts). He works http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/ at the Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies in Rome and 8895003/New-Italian-government-does-not-include-a-single- has developed the concept of “doparies” in the book Doparie, dopo elected-politician.html le primarie (Nutrimenti, 2010).

Journal

SAGE Open – SAGE

Published: Dec 29, 2011

Keywords: doparies; primaries; political parties; democracy; antipolitics; abstention; turnout; decision making; representation; participation; aggregation; deliberation

Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Doparies: A Novel Party Deliberative and Aggregative Decision-Making Mechanism to Improve the Quality of Representative Democracy

Doparies: A Novel Party Deliberative and Aggregative Decision-Making Mechanism to Improve the Quality of Representative Democracy

Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Doparies: A Novel Party Deliberative and Aggregative Decision-Making Mechanism to Improve the Quality of Representative Democracy

Doparies: A Novel Party Deliberative and Aggregative Decision-Making Mechanism to Improve the Quality of Representative Democracy

References (58)

Abstract

Journal

Recommended Articles

There are no references for this article.

Our policy towards the use of cookies