This interrelation of Genres and Discourses inevitably offers possibilities for a circular impasse, and conversely, for learning, innovation and change. It is often the narrow conception of the potential Genres of public participation that is a key factor in maintaining the established Discourses which devalue and sideline public participation. The sometimes dominant assumption that Public Participation can mean only (a) oppositional public meetings, (b) letter-writing and website responses, or (c) a simplistic referendum, is very powerful. It rests on, and then maintains, the assumption that public participation in decision-making is about adding up individual opinions, as opposed to engaging in a debate about the complex issues in order to identify the important questions and reach informed judgements (Rawles, 1998; O扤eill, 2001). It maintains the sometimes dominant institutionalised Discourses around public participation, in which public participation is construed as being of limited value, potentially dangerous, and contrary to the desired goal of basing decisions on 憇ound science? Social and institutional change therefore involves changes in the Discourses, Genres and Styles around public participation.
In terms of social learning, innovation and change, it is clear that direct experience of taking part in a public consultation events can radically impact on the ways in which both institutions and publics come to talk about public participation. Moreover, the direct experience of public exclusion from a particular decision-making processes can have a similarly radical impact. Such experiences can prompt reflection and learning about the current practices and the potential role and value of public participation. And as we have found in the context of GM crops, the experience of public exclusion can sometimes also prompt an explicit reflection about the wider nature and functioning of democracy.
In this way, experiences of public participation, or of the absence of it, can become moments of discoursal realignment and innovation. In particular, they can prompt social and institutional shifts in the subject positioning of experts, authorities, self and the public. The contribution of this research of citizenship as a communicative achievement is that it can potentially offer detailed empirical and theoretical insight into these important aspects of current social change.
References:
Archer, Margaret. 2000 Being Human: The Problem of Agency Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Bernstein Basil. 1990 The Structuring of Pedagogic Discourse London: Routledge
Billig, Michael. 1995 Banal Nationalism. London: Sage
Bora, Alfons & Heiko Hausendorf 2001a "Communicating Citizenship in decision making procedures. Towards an interdisciplinary and cross-cultural perspective? Outline of an international and interdisciplinary workshop at the Centre for Interdisciplinary Research (ZiF), Bielefeld, June 2001. IWT, Bielefeld University, PO Box 10 01 31, D-33501 Germany.
Bora, Alfons, Ingrid Furchner, Heiko Hausendorf, Peter M黱te, 2001b "State of the art report: Currents of thought on the main issues of the PARADYS project". IWT, Bielefeld University, PO Box 10 01 31, D-33501 Germany.
Bora, Alfons & Heiko Hausendorf 2000 揂nnex 1?of the final PARADYS research submission to the EU. IWT, Bielefeld University, PO Box 10 01 31, D-33501 Germany.
Bourdieu, Pierre 1977 Outline of a Theory of Practice, tr. Richard Nice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre 1984 Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, tr. Richard Nice, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Bourdieu Pierre & Wacquant L 1992 An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology Cambridge: Polity Press
Chouliaraki Lilie & Fairclough Norman 1999 Discourse in Late Modernity Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press
Fairclough, Norman 1992 Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Fairclough, Norman & Wodak, Ruth 1997 揅ritical discourse analysis?in T van Dijk ed. Discourse as Social Interaction London: Sage pp 258-284
Fairclough Norman 2001a 揟he discourse of New Labour: critical discourse analysis?in M Wetherell et al (eds) Discourse as Data: a Guide for Analysis. London: Sage & Open University
Fairclough Norman 2001b The dialectics of discourse Textus 14, pages 231-242
Laclau E 1996 揥hy do empty signifiers matter in politics??in Emancipations London: Verso
MacIntyre, Alasdair 1985 After