Enhancing deliberative quality and exploring the perceived legitimacy of citizens’ juries

This presentation examines the deliberative quality and perceived legitimacy of citizens’ assemblies and citizens’ juries as participatory approaches to environmental policymaking, with a particular focus on Amazon conservation. Drawing on citizens’ jury experiments in Colombia and an online survey of more than 3,000 respondents across Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, the United Kingdom, and the United States, the study compares citizens’ assemblies with expert panels, multi-stakeholder platforms, and traditional party-led decision-making. Results show that participatory approaches are generally perceived as more just, legitimate, and impactful than ruling-party processes, although preferences differ across regions, with stronger support for binding, highly inclusive deliberative bodies in Latin America. The findings highlight the importance of inclusiveness, representation of marginalized groups, deep deliberation, and meaningful influence on policy outcomes for enhancing legitimacy and public trust in environmental governance. The presentation provides insights into the design of deliberative institutions and their potential role in addressing complex sustainability challenges in both the Global South and Global North. -Abstract generated by Copilot AI 2.2