Equality and diversity in democracy: how can we democratize inclusively?

• Date: 20 June 2016
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-04-2016-0030
• Published date: 20 June 2016
• Pages: 350-363
• Author: Jone Martinez Palacios
• Subject Matter: HR & organizational behaviour,Employment law,Diversity, equality, inclusion

Equality and diversity in

democracy: how can we

democratize inclusively?

Jone Martinez Palacios

Department of Political Science, University of the Basque Country, Leioa, Spain

Abstract

Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to propose a theoretical framework for democratize inclusively

through participatory and deliberative apparatus.

Design/methodology/approach –The paper draws on literature from inclusion in deliberation,

gender in participation and intersectionality to critically analyze the democratic deepening. By

bringing into dialogue with one another “the norm of parity of participation”(Fraser, 2006),

“communicative democracy”(Young, 1993) and the “matrix of domination”(Collins, 1990) a response to

one of the questions that has been put to European and North American thought in democracy since

the 1960s is proposed: how is it possible to democratize inclusively?

Findings –The reproduction of domination throu gh apparatuses for the extension of democracy is

both possible and probable. So, to democratize inclusively, it is necessary to bring the theories on

vertical and horizon tal inclusion into dial ogue with each other. Wi th the aim of establishin g a

dialogue between the two, it is necessary to export complex thought regarding oppression and

inequality into th e design of deliberati ve and participatory a pparatuses. For that , consider that

designing democratization processes based on the fact that the intersectional experience of

oppression is not an exception but rather an everyday occurrence allows participatory procedures to

be made more inclusive.

Practical implications –This paper proposes a tool designed with a focus on dialogue among the

norm of parity of participation, communicative democracy and the matrix of oppression, based on 11

direct questions for the inclusive design of deliberative or participatory procedures. Facilitators,

experts and social agents involved in deliberative or participatory processes will be able to use this

question-based instrument in their work.

Originality/value –This paper has applied value because it offers a conceptual key to the design of

and thought about participatory inclusive processes. The originality of this approach lies in its shift

away from partial analyses of horizontal and vertical inclusion. It is of use both to facilitators of

participatory processes and educators and researchers concerned with democratization. It offers an

instrument for working on reflexivity with regard to inclusion in democratic extension, based on a

series of key questions that can be used as a checklist. In comparison with other forms of considering

inclusion in democracy, the proposal considered includes complex thought on oppression based on the

critique of simple identity, as well as on an intersectional perspective.

Keywords Participation, Democracy, Deliberation, Intersectionality, Horizontal inclusion,

Vertical inclusion

Paper type Conceptual paper

It’s not necessary to believe that a political consensus to focus on the lives of the most

disadvantaged will happen tomorrow in order to recenter discrimination discourse at the

intersection. It is enough, for now, that such an effort would encourage us to look beneath

the prevailing conceptions of discrimination and to challenge the complacency that

accompanies belief in the effectiveness of this framework. By so doing, we may develop

Equality, Diversity and Inclusion:

An International Journal

Vol. 35 No. 5/6, 2016

pp. 350-363

©Emerald Group Publishing Limited

2040-7149

DOI 10.1108/EDI-04-2016-0030

Received 18 April 2016

Revised 9 September 2016

Accepted 20 September 2016

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/2040-7149.htm

The author wishes to thank the editors and anonymous reviewers for their constructive guidance

and suggestions.

350

EDI

35,5/6