Rights statement: The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Qualitative Research, ? (?), 2021, © SAGE Publications Ltd, 2021 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Qualitative Research page: https://journals.sagepub.com/home/qrj on SAGE Journals Online: http://journals.sagepub.com/
Accepted author manuscript, 212 KB, PDF document
Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Final published version
Licence: CC BY: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Taking deliberative research online
T2 - Lessons from four case studies
AU - Willis, Rebecca
AU - Yuille, Andy
AU - Bryant, Peter E.
AU - McLaren, Duncan
AU - Markusson, Nils
N1 - The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Qualitative Research, ? (?), 2021, © SAGE Publications Ltd, 2021 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Qualitative Research page: https://journals.sagepub.com/home/qrj on SAGE Journals Online: http://journals.sagepub.com/
PY - 2023/8/1
Y1 - 2023/8/1
N2 - Researchers using deliberative techniques tend to favour in-person processes. However, the covid-19 pandemic has added urgency to the question of whether meaningful deliberative research is possible in an online setting. This paper considers the reasons for taking deliberation online, including bringing people together more easily; convening international events; and reducing the environmental impact of research. It reports on four case studies: a set of stakeholder workshops considering greenhouse gas removal technologies, convened online in 2019, and online research workshops investigating local climate strategies; as well as two in-person processes which moved online due to covid-19: Climate Assembly UK, a Citizens’ Assembly on climate change, and the Lancaster Citizens’ Jury on Climate Change. It sets out learnings from these processes, concluding that deliberation online is substantively different from in-person meetings, but can meet the requirements of deliberative research, and can be a rewarding and useful process for participants and researchers alike.
AB - Researchers using deliberative techniques tend to favour in-person processes. However, the covid-19 pandemic has added urgency to the question of whether meaningful deliberative research is possible in an online setting. This paper considers the reasons for taking deliberation online, including bringing people together more easily; convening international events; and reducing the environmental impact of research. It reports on four case studies: a set of stakeholder workshops considering greenhouse gas removal technologies, convened online in 2019, and online research workshops investigating local climate strategies; as well as two in-person processes which moved online due to covid-19: Climate Assembly UK, a Citizens’ Assembly on climate change, and the Lancaster Citizens’ Jury on Climate Change. It sets out learnings from these processes, concluding that deliberation online is substantively different from in-person meetings, but can meet the requirements of deliberative research, and can be a rewarding and useful process for participants and researchers alike.
KW - Deliberative research
KW - online research
KW - deliberation
KW - case studies
KW - COVID-19
KW - environmental impact of research
U2 - 10.1177/14687941211063483
DO - 10.1177/14687941211063483
M3 - Journal article
VL - 23
SP - 921
EP - 939
JO - Qualitative Research
JF - Qualitative Research
SN - 1468-7941
IS - 4
ER -