Menu Expand

Deliberative Diplomacy: Performing Democracy Beyond Borders

An Analysis of the American Embassy’s »Going Green« Project

Burmester, Svea

Beiträge zur Politischen Wissenschaft, Vol. 196

(2019)

Additional Information

Book Details

Pricing

About The Author

Svea Burmester ist Politologin und verknüpft in ihrer Forschung demokratietheoretische Fragestellungen mit denen der Internationalen Beziehungen, insbesondere mit Arbeiten zu deliberativer Demokratietheorie, politischer Bildung und der politischen Kultur der USA. Sie wurde an der Leibniz Universität Hannover promoviert. Svea Burmester is a political scientist and researcher of international relations and democratic theory, focusing on deliberation, civic education, and American political culture. She completed her PhD at the Leibniz University of Hanover, Germany.

Abstract

Extending democratic processes beyond borders is possible, particularly in civil society settings. This research project identifies deliberative diplomacy as a promising format, a new form of public diplomacy based on deliberative discourse, i.e. relying on the force of the better argument in favor of the common global good. A comprehensive analysis of the »Going Green« sustainability school project of the Embassy of the United States of America in Berlin, Germany, provides empirical evidence. Furthermore, the analysis identifies a specific window of opportunity in transatlantic relations that allowed this new phenomenon of international democratic exchange to evolve and also elaborates on its theoretical underpinnings in democratic and IR theory. Thanks to its rare insight on the attitudes of adolescents concerning transatlantic relations, environmental sustainability, and deliberation, this book is a significant contribution to the study of deliberation and civic education.

Table of Contents

Section Title Page Action Price
Table of Contents 7
A. Deliberative Diplomacy – Ambitious and Precious 11
B. A Vital Discipline: The Democratic Theory of Deliberation 18
I. The Theory of Deliberative Democracy 18
II. Seizing Deliberation: Empirical Research on Deliberative Democracy Using the Discourse Quality Index and the Deliberative Transformative Moment 27
III. Classroom Deliberation: Hopes and Challenges 34
C. A Means of Foreign Policy: Why Use Deliberative Diplomacy? 39
I. Theories of International Relations 40
II. From a New Public Diplomacy to Deliberative Diplomacy 45
D. A Window of Opportunity: The Presidency of Barack Obama and Environmentalism 52
I. Cultural Codes in Transatlantic Relations 56
II. Environmental Policy and the Idea of Sustainability in Transatlantic Comparison 59
E. In the Field: The American Embassy’s Going Green Project as a Case of Deliberative Diplomacy 70
I. Research Design 74
1. Website 75
2. Transcripts 76
3. Questionnaires 78
4. Interviews 79
II. Deliberative Input: The Going Green Online Platform 80
1. Descriptive Presentation of the Teaching Material 81
a) Introduction: “What is sustainability?” 81
b) Group Work: “Exploring the challenges” 84
aa) First Option: “Plastic / / Recycle” 85
bb) Second Option: “City / / Transport” 89
cc) Third Option: “Food /  / Local” 92
dd) Fourth Option: “Fashion / / Toxic” 96
c) Class Project: “Your sustainability action plan” 99
d) Further Engagement on a Voluntary Basis 100
2. Analysis: Deliberative Quality of the Teaching Material 101
a) Instructions 101
b) Content 102
III. Deliberative Output: Analysis of the Quality of Deliberation in Class 109
1. Deliberative Quality of Group Work Discussions 110
a) Group 01 110
b) Group 02 112
c) Group 03 113
d) Group 04 114
e) Group 05 115
f) Group 06 115
g) Group 07 116
h) Group 08 117
i) Group 09 119
j) Group 10 119
2. Presentations in Class 120
a) Presentation 01 121
b) Presentation 02 123
c) Presentation 03 125
d) Presentation 04 127
e) Presentation 05 130
f) Presentation 06 131
3. Evaluation of the Going Green Teaching Unit in Class 132
a) Group 01 132
b) Group 02 133
c) Presentation in Class 134
IV. Mapping the Results of the Deliberative Output 136
1. Survey Among Students 136
a) English Class Berlin 136
aa) Experiences & Attitudes 138
(1) Personal Contact with the United States 138
(2) Opinions about the United States 139
(3) Commonalities & Differences 141
(a) First Round 141
(b) Second Round 144
(c) Third Round 145
bb) Stereotypes & Transatlantic Norms 146
(1) Introductory Question to “Stereotypes & Transatlantic Norms” 147
(2) Stereotypes 148
(a) Wastefulness 148
(b) Religion 148
(c) Narrow-Mindedness 149
(d) Violence 149
(e) International Law 150
(f) Heartlessness 150
(g) World Police 151
(3) Transatlantic Norms 151
(a) Free Market 151
(b) Freedom of Speech 152
(c) Equality & Rule of Law 152
(d) Democracy 153
(e) Human Rights 153
(4) Cultural Code 154
(5) First Implications for Research and Education 155
cc) Environmentalism 157
(1) Approaching the Topic 157
(2) Awareness of Own Responsibility 158
(3) Assessing Environmentalism in Germany, the U.S., and Students’ Families 159
dd) Evaluation of Going Green 161
ee) Deliberation 162
(1) Deliberation through Going Green 162
(2) Comparing Deliberativeness of Settings 163
ff) Summary: Survey English Class Berlin 164
b) English Class Brandenburg 165
aa) Experiences & Attitudes 167
(1) Personal Contact with the United States 167
(2) Opinions about the United States 167
(3) Commonalities & Differences 169
bb) Stereotypes & Transatlantic Norms 170
(1) Introductory Question to “Stereotypes & Transatlantic Norms” 170
(2) Stereotypes 171
(a) Wastefulness 171
(b) Religion 172
(c) Narrow-Mindedness 172
(d) Violence 172
(e) International Law 173
(f) Heartlessness 173
(g) World Police 173
(3) Transatlantic Norms 174
(a) Free Market 174
(b) Freedom of Speech 174
(c) Equality & Rule of Law 174
(d) Democracy 175
(e) Human Rights 175
(4) Cultural Code 176
(5) First Implications for Research and Education 177
cc) Environmentalism 177
(1) Approaching the Topic 177
(2) Awareness of Own Responsibility 179
(3) Assessing Environmentalism in Germany, the U.S., and the Students’ Families 179
dd) Evaluation of Going Green 182
ee) Deliberation 183
(1) Deliberation through Going Green 183
(2) Comparing Deliberativeness of Settings 185
ff) Summary: Survey English Class Brandenburg 185
c) Comparison Berlin – Brandenburg 186
aa) Shared Findings 186
bb) Contrasting Findings 189
2. Interviews 191
a) Teachers 191
b) Representatives of the Embassy of the United States of America in Berlin 195
F. What Happened Once 199
I. The Going Green project as a Case of Deliberative Diplomacy 199
II. Outlook 206
G. Epilogue 208
Bibliography 213
Subject Index\r 222
Online Only Appendix (https://www.duncker-humblot.de/9783428157204_Appendix) 1