Knowledge and Communication in Democratic PoliticsCitation formats

Standard

Knowledge and Communication in Democratic Politics : Markets, Forums and Systems. / Benson, Jonathan.

In: Political Studies, Vol. 67, No. 2, 01.05.2019, p. 422-439.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Benson, Jonathan. / Knowledge and Communication in Democratic Politics : Markets, Forums and Systems. In: Political Studies. 2019 ; Vol. 67, No. 2. pp. 422-439.

Bibtex

@article{9db37fcfcd8a43dfb08756457cbb14fc,
title = "Knowledge and Communication in Democratic Politics: Markets, Forums and Systems",
abstract = "Epistemic questions have become an important area of debate within democratic theory. Epistemic democrats have revived epistemic justification of democracy, while social scientific research has speared a significant debate on voter knowledge. An area which has received less attention, however, is the epistemic case for markets. Market advocates have developed a number of epistemic critiques of democracy which suggest that most goods are better provided by markets than democratic institutions. Despite representing important challenges to democracy, these critiques have gone without reply as democratic theorists have tended to exclude markets from consideration. This article responds to these critiques and argues that there are good epistemic grounds for granting a much greater role to democracy than its market critics have claimed. It argues that there is a broad range of goods, including important ethical goods, which are better provided by democracy than markets due to the particular epistemic burdens they create.",
keywords = "Hayek, deliberative democracy, deliberative systems, epistemic democracy, markets",
author = "Jonathan Benson",
note = "Funding Information: I would very much like to thank Miriam Ronzoni, John O?Neill, Billy Christmas and Paul Gunn for their feedback on previous versions of this article. I would also like to thank two anonymous referees and the journal editors for their very helpful comments and suggestions. The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Economic and Social Sciences Research Council (grant number ES/J500094/1) Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} The Author(s) 2018.",
year = "2019",
month = may,
day = "1",
doi = "https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321718772711",
language = "English",
volume = "67",
pages = "422--439",
journal = "Political Studies",
issn = "0032-3217",
publisher = "John Wiley & Sons Ltd",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Knowledge and Communication in Democratic Politics

T2 - Markets, Forums and Systems

AU - Benson, Jonathan

N1 - Funding Information: I would very much like to thank Miriam Ronzoni, John O?Neill, Billy Christmas and Paul Gunn for their feedback on previous versions of this article. I would also like to thank two anonymous referees and the journal editors for their very helpful comments and suggestions. The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Economic and Social Sciences Research Council (grant number ES/J500094/1) Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s) 2018.

PY - 2019/5/1

Y1 - 2019/5/1

N2 - Epistemic questions have become an important area of debate within democratic theory. Epistemic democrats have revived epistemic justification of democracy, while social scientific research has speared a significant debate on voter knowledge. An area which has received less attention, however, is the epistemic case for markets. Market advocates have developed a number of epistemic critiques of democracy which suggest that most goods are better provided by markets than democratic institutions. Despite representing important challenges to democracy, these critiques have gone without reply as democratic theorists have tended to exclude markets from consideration. This article responds to these critiques and argues that there are good epistemic grounds for granting a much greater role to democracy than its market critics have claimed. It argues that there is a broad range of goods, including important ethical goods, which are better provided by democracy than markets due to the particular epistemic burdens they create.

AB - Epistemic questions have become an important area of debate within democratic theory. Epistemic democrats have revived epistemic justification of democracy, while social scientific research has speared a significant debate on voter knowledge. An area which has received less attention, however, is the epistemic case for markets. Market advocates have developed a number of epistemic critiques of democracy which suggest that most goods are better provided by markets than democratic institutions. Despite representing important challenges to democracy, these critiques have gone without reply as democratic theorists have tended to exclude markets from consideration. This article responds to these critiques and argues that there are good epistemic grounds for granting a much greater role to democracy than its market critics have claimed. It argues that there is a broad range of goods, including important ethical goods, which are better provided by democracy than markets due to the particular epistemic burdens they create.

KW - Hayek

KW - deliberative democracy

KW - deliberative systems

KW - epistemic democracy

KW - markets

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85046716542&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321718772711

DO - https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321718772711

M3 - Article

VL - 67

SP - 422

EP - 439

JO - Political Studies

JF - Political Studies

SN - 0032-3217

IS - 2

ER -