Understanding the empirical and normative complexity of deliberation:

why ethnography is useful

Marion CarrelUniversity Lille 3-CeRIES (Lille)

Centre d’étude des mouvements sociaux-EHESS (Paris)

Citizens in the Making – Tampere – May 2016

This talk is based on the paper:

Marion CARREL, « Politization and Publicization: the Fragile Effects of Deliberation in Working-Class Districts », European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology, vol.2, Nos 3-4, Sept-Dec 2015, p. 185-188.

Marginalized individuals in deliberation processes:

• Empowerment or reinforcement of stigmatization?

• The use of ethnography to take us beyond this binary confrontation: – Explore citizenship in its relational dimensions (Clarke,

Coll, Dagnino, Neveu 2013 ; Carrel, Neveu 2014) – Monitor the emergence of public issues while preserve

an interest in structural data (Luhtakallio, Eliasoph 2014)– Dialogue between description and theory (Frega 2015;

Berger, Charles 2014; Carrel, Cefaï, Talpin 2012)

Deliberation and poverty:Four main theoretical issues

• Conflict and dissent in citizenship (Rancière)• Deliberation in small group vs public space

(Chambers)• Participation and representation (Sintomer)• Knowledge and power, the role of language

(Bourdieu, Ricoeur)

The fieldwork: an empowerment workshop on social housing

• Design – A group of 13 participants: 7 professionals and 6 applicants for

social housing (financial compensation)– 12 days of work spread out over a 6 months period– Demand: social department of a French city– Animation: Suzanne Rosenberg and colleague– Output: information leaflet on the application process for social

housing and propositions to the city and state

• Methodology– Observation and interviews– The case of Lila

The deliberative experience: from violence to argued conflict

• Anger and incomprehension on each side: « This is impossible », « you are lying », « you’re only here for your personal interest »

• The inquiry (Dewey): Slow elaboration of narratives, collective investigation on Lila’s dossier

• Awareness of institutional dysfunctions and political dimension of social housing

The deliberative experience: fragile effects on participants

• Empowerment

« At the employement agency I said: ‘This isn’t right’. That’s what changed for me » (Laure)

• Beginnings of politization

« The workshop was like a wake-up call (…) I am ready for action» (Lila)

The deliberative experience: a temporary form of counter-power

• Deliberative counter-powers (Fung, Wright 2003)

• The political objectives of Celine, co-director of the social department, to bring issues of social justice in the public arena

• Organizational changes and public claims

The double pitfall of deliberative processes

• Institutional resistance and political exploitation

« I don’t want to provide an alibi for public housing agencies and elected representatives who have no housing to offer» (Yacine)

• Absence of durability of collective action: Lila’s withdrawal

Six months after, Lila had given up trying to denounce the injustices of social housing beyond her immediate circle of friends and family.

Concluding comments (1)• The ideal of inclusion and social change: « opening

deliberation to non-argumentative and critical forms of expression » (Young); « deliberative activism » (Fung)

• The importance of the political objectives pursued

• The importance of organization through collective action

• Empowerment requires time (Eliasoph): Twelve days are not enough?

Concluding comments (2)

• Empowerment is a social construct

• In order to understand it better, researchers needs to link up fields often considered as disconnected:– Conflictual, bottom-up approaches to citizenship

(social movements)– Institutional apparatus (participatory democracy)– Day-to-day practices (ordinary citizenship)