Search

Many advanced liberal democracies exhibit 'democracy deserts' in which high levels of social exclusion among large sections of the population are compounded by low levels of democratic engagement. How to reverse declining levels of electoral participation and widespread public disenchantment with politics therefore forms a defining element of contemporary comparative politics. It is in this context that the processes and methods associated with 'deliberative democracy' have become significant. Whereas most research in this field has focused on experiments at the local or community level, this article utilises a comparative case-study approach to examine the recent use of deliberative mechanisms in relation to constitutional issues. By comparing the establishment of citizen's assemblies with varying powers to review and make recommendations on electoral reform in the Canadian province of British Columbia and in the Netherlands and then contrasting this with a polity where a highly-majoritarian elite has reneged on pre-election commitments to review the electoral system (the United Kingdom), this article contributes a distinctive perspective to broader debates on public disengagement, deliberative democracy, political geography, majoritarian modification and electoral reform. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]