use case

Deliberative Polling towards reimagining a national Constitution

A successful example of a national constitutional reform that invited participation from citizens through stages of deliberations and polling.

source of visual

N Europe, Iceland, Offline
- Where did this use case occur?
November 2019
- When did this use case occur?
The University of Iceland, the Center for Deliberative Democracy at Stanford University, and the Ministry of Justice in Iceland. The project was funded by the Icelandic government and the National Science Foundation.
- Who were some of the key collaborators
233 people participated in the deliberation meeting, which was ~10% of the total survey respondents.
- How many people participated?
Nation/Country, Public
- What are some keywords?

What was the problem?

Following the financial trouble of 2008 and subsequent political turmoil in the country, the Constitutional Council, in 2011, produced a draft constitution in a fully transparent process, during which the public was invited to participate. However, the bill was never voted on in the parliament even though there was considerable support.

How does the community approach the problem?

More than six years after a constitutional bill stalled in the Icelandic Parliament, the Icelandic government wanted to restart the effort to change the constitution using wide public engagement. Iceland government led a process to conduct several deliberative polling processes to develop a new Constitution.

Process

Deliberation / Deliberative Forums

Technique

As described in the image above, the approach can be divided into six phases. The first involved selection of a sample of the population, who are invited to participate in a discussion meeting. The participants are given information on the topics of proposed amendments, with arguments both supporting and opposing each proposition. The participants then engaged in discussions where they have an opportunity to ask experts and policymakers questions. Polling is conducted both prior to and after the deliberations. The results are analyzed to understand citizens’ perceptions and the outcomes are shared broadly in the media.

Tool

No Specified Tools

What were the results?

• Participants showed increased support for various changes to the constitution, such as strengthening the role of parliament and increasing the involvement of citizens in decision-making.
• Participants expressed a desire for a more collaborative and participatory democracy in Iceland. The deliberation helped to increase participants' understanding of the current constitutional framework and the potential for change.
• The results of the deliberation were presented to the Icelandic parliament and helped to inform ongoing discussions on constitutional reform.

In Our Opinions

How participatory was it?

Involve

The deliberative polling only fed valuable inputs into the drafting of the Icelandic Constitution, without additional involvement of the citizens in the Constitution drafting process beyond the exercise.

What makes this Use Case unique?