Deliberation in public governance: a comparative legal analysis of practices in foreign states and Ukraine

The article examines deliberative governance in the public sector through a comparative legal analysis of practices in foreign countries and Ukraine. It reveals the conceptual foundations of deliberative governance as a tool for enhancing the democratic legitimacy of public authority by ensuring transparency, citizen participation, and the substantiation of public decisions. The experience of the Federal Republic of Germany, France, Canada, the European Union, Spain, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom regarding the institutionalization of deliberative procedures in public administration is analyzed. The main models of deliberation implementation are identified: mandatory public consultations, public debates, participation in rule-making, and Citizens’ Assemblies. Common features of foreign practices are outlined, including the recognition of deliberation as a condition for the legitimacy of public decisions and the need for clear procedural regulation. The state of normative consolidation of deliberative mechanisms in Ukraine is analyzed, based on the provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine concerning popular sovereignty, human dignity, the rule of law, citizen participation, and the openness of government activities. The fragmentation of existing deliberative practices in Ukrainian public governance is identified, and the necessity of improving the normative regulation of participationprocedures, ensuring institutional guarantees of good-faith communication, and expanding opportunities for judicial control over the implementation of procedural fairness principles is emphasized. Attention is drawn to universal challenges in the institutionalization of deliberative governance, such as deliberative overload, pseudo-deliberation, non-inclusivity of communication, lack of procedural sincerity, and conflicts with the principle of efficiency. It is argued that overcoming these risks requires the development of clear procedural standards, the definition of areas where deliberation is mandatory, and the creation of conditions for real citizen participation in decision-making processes. It is emphasized that the implementation of deliberative governance should become one of the key directions for the development of democratic constitutionalism and the improvement of public administration in Ukraine.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Analytical and Comparative Jurisprudence
Published
2025-07-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.24144/2788-6018.2025.03.2.19
Primary Topic
International Arbitration and Investment Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Deliberation in public governance: a comparative legal analysis of practices in foreign states and Ukraine

В. К. Колпаков
Analytical and Comparative Jurisprudence
International Arbitration and Investment Law
article

Deliberation in public governance: a comparative legal analysis of practices in foreign states and Ukraine

В. К. Колпаков
article en

Abstract

The article examines deliberative governance in the public sector through a comparative legal analysis of practices in foreign countries and Ukraine. It reveals the conceptual foundations of deliberative governance as a tool for enhancing the democratic legitimacy of public authority by ensuring transparency, citizen participation, and the substantiation of public decisions. The experience of the Federal Republic of Germany, France, Canada, the European Union, Spain, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom regarding the institutionalization of deliberative procedures in public administration is analyzed. The main models of deliberation implementation are identified: mandatory public consultations, public debates, participation in rule-making, and Citizens’ Assemblies. Common features of foreign practices are outlined, including the recognition of deliberation as a condition for the legitimacy of public decisions and the need for clear procedural regulation. The state of normative consolidation of deliberative mechanisms in Ukraine is analyzed, based on the provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine concerning popular sovereignty, human dignity, the rule of law, citizen participation, and the openness of government activities. The fragmentation of existing deliberative practices in Ukrainian public governance is identified, and the necessity of improving the normative regulation of participationprocedures, ensuring institutional guarantees of good-faith communication, and expanding opportunities for judicial control over the implementation of procedural fairness principles is emphasized. Attention is drawn to universal challenges in the institutionalization of deliberative governance, such as deliberative overload, pseudo-deliberation, non-inclusivity of communication, lack of procedural sincerity, and conflicts with the principle of efficiency. It is argued that overcoming these risks requires the development of clear procedural standards, the definition of areas where deliberation is mandatory, and the creation of conditions for real citizen participation in decision-making processes. It is emphasized that the implementation of deliberative governance should become one of the key directions for the development of democratic constitutionalism and the improvement of public administration in Ukraine.

Analytical and Comparative JurisprudenceVol. 2(3)
Human Growth Foundation (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 74%
International Arbitration and Investment Law
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.