Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Accelerating the public’s learning curve on wicked policy issues: results from deliberative forums on euthanasia

  • Research article
  • Published:
Policy Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The concept of wicked problems has been increasingly recognized in policy studies over the last decade. However, 40 years after the concept was introduced, the bulk of the available research still seems to follow the same approach: Issues are identified as being wicked problems, and rather similar models are theorized to address them. We argue that the research on wicked problems would benefit from a stronger empirical slant; the current research adopts just such an empirical approach in focusing on the role of citizens in tackling wicked policy issues. More specifically, the mechanisms of deliberative democracy are analyzed. This is important because wicked policy issues are commonly associated with fragmentation and incoherence. Deliberative mechanisms are then thought to lead toward public judgment, a form of shared understanding where citizens strive to understand the complexity of the issue and, working together in deliberation, seek the best ways to address it. Drawing on the outcomes of four deliberative forums on euthanasia conducted in Finland in November 2013, the current research analyzes whether the deliberation process helped the participants to progress on the public’s learning curve and whether it was ultimately likely to foster authentic public judgment on a particular wicked policy issue.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackoff, R. L. (1974). Redesigning the future. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alink, F., Boin, A., & T’Hart, P. (2011). Institutional crises and reforms in policy sectors: The case of asylum policy in Europe. Journal of European Public Policy, 8(2), 286–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • APS. (2007). Tackling wicked problems: A public policy perspective. Australian Public Service Commission Commonwealth of Australia. http://www.apsc.gov.au/_data/assets/pdf_file/0005/6386/wickedproblems.pdf. Accessed February 9, 2015.

  • Atlee, T. (2004). Critiquing America speaks’ process and alternative approaches as paths to “collective intelligence”. Group Facilitation: A Research & Applications Journal, 6(Spring), 93–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bächtiger, A., Niemeyer, S., Neblo, M., Steenbergen, M. R., & Steiner, J. (2010). Symposium: Toward more realistic models of deliberative democracy. Disentangling diversity in deliberative democracy: Competing theories, their blind spots and complementarities. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 18(1), 32–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balassiano, K. (2011). Tackling “wicked problems” in planning studio courses. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 31(4), 449–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batie, S. S. (2008). Wicked problems and applied economics. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 90(5), 1176–1191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackman, T., Greene, A., Hunter, D. J., McKee, L., Elliott, E., Harrington, B., et al. (2006). Performance assessment and wicked problems: The case of health inequalities. Public Policy and Administration, 21(2), 66–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boudreau, J. D., & Somerville, M. A. (2014). Euthanasia and assisted suicide: A physician’s and ethicist’s perspectives. Medicolegal and Bioethics, 4, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carcasson, M. (2013). Tackling wicked problems through deliberative engagement. Colorado Municipalities. October, 9–13.

  • Carson, L. (2011). Dilemmas, disasters and deliberative democracy: Getting the public back into policy. Griffith Review, 32(winter), 25–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson, L., & Blakely, B. (2013). What can Oregon teach Australia about dying? Journal of Politics and Law, 6(2), 30–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carson, L., & Hart, P. (2005). What randomness and deliberation can do for community engagement. Paper presented at International Conference on Engaging Communities, Brisbane, Australia. http://www.activedemocracy.net/articles/engag-comm.pdf. Accessed February 9, 2015.

  • Carson, L., & Hartz-Karp, J. (2005). Adapting and combining deliberative designs. In J. Gastil & P. Levine (Eds.), The deliberative democracy handbook (pp. 120–138). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, S. (2003). Deliberative democratic theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 6(1), 307–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, M., & Stewart, J. (2000). Handling the wicked issues. In C. Davies, L. Finlay, & A. Bullman (Eds.), Changing practice in health and social care (pp. 377–386). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conklin, J. (2005). Dialogue mapping: Building shared understanding of wicked problems. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coutaz, M. (2014). Too old, too expensive? The impact of health costs on senior citizens in Switzerland. European Geriatric Medicine, 5(1), 39–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, A. M., Pinfield, S., & Smith, J. (2014). Moving a brick building: UK libraries coping with research data management as a ‘wicked’ problem. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. doi:10.1177/0961000614533717.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coyne, R. (2005). Wicked problems revisited. Design Studies, 26(1), 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crosby, N., & Nethercut, D. (2005). Citizens juries: Creating a trustworthy voice of the people. In J. Gastil & P. Levine (Eds.), The deliberative democracy handbook: Strategies for effective civic engagement in the twenty-first century (pp. 111–119). San-Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Devaney, J., & Spratt, T. (2009). Child abuse as a complex and wicked problem: Reflecting on policy developments in the United Kingdom in working with children and families with multiple problems. Children and Youth Services Review, 31(6), 635–641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. S. (2010). Foundations and frontiers of deliberative governance. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J., & Niemeyer, S. (2006). Reconciling pluralism and consensus as political ideals. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 634–649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, D. G. (2010). Argument and ethnopolitical conflict. Communication and Measures, 4(1), 98–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elstub, S. (2010). The third generation of deliberative democracy. Political Studies Review, 8(3), 291–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esterling, K., Fung, A., & Lee, T. (2010). The difference that deliberation makes: Evaluating the “our budget, our economy” public deliberation. Chicago: John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishkin, J. S., He, B., Luskin, R. C., & Siu, A. (2010). Deliberative democracy in an unlikely place: Deliberative polling in China. British Journal of Political Science, 40(2), 435–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleck, L. M. (2012). Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine: Wicked problems, ragged edges and ethical precipices. New Biotechnology, 29(6), 757–768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fung, A. (2003). Recipes for public spheres: Eight institutional design choices and their consequences. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 11(3), 338–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gastil, J., & Richards, R. (2013). Making direct democracy deliberative through random assemblies. Politics & Society, 41(2), 253–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grint, K. (2005). Problems, problems, problems: The social construction of leadership. Human Relations, 58(11), 1467–1493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (2004). Why deliberative democracy?. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1999). Moral consciousness and communicative action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hänninen, J. (2012). Eutanasia—Hyvä kuolema [Euthansia—A good death]. Helsinki: Duodecim.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattori, K., McCubbin, M. A., & Ishida, D. N. (2006). Concept analysis of good death in the Japanese community. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 38(2), 165–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Head, B. (2008). Wicked problems in public policy. Public Policy, 3(2), 101–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heimer, C. A. (2013). ‘Wicked’ ethics: Compliance work and the practice of ethics in HIV research. Social Science and Medicine, 98, 371–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendriks, C. M. (2006). Integrated deliberation: Reconciling civil society’s dual role in deliberative democracy. Political Studies, 54(3), 486–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herne, K., & Setälä, M. (2005). Deliberatiivisen demokratian ihanteet ja kokeilut [Ideals and experiments of deliberative democracy]. Politiikka, 47(3), 175–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holm, S. (2010). Euthanasia: Agreeing to disagree. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 13(4), 399–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horn, R. E., & Weber, R. P. (2007). New tools for resolving wicked problems: Mess mapping and resolution mapping processes. http://stanford.edu/%7erhorn/a/recent/Clmrgy.pdf. February 9, 2015.

  • Jentoft, S., & Chuenpagdee, R. (2009). Fisheries and coastal governance as a wicked problem. Marine Policy, 33(4), 553–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jylhänkangas, L., Smets, T., Cohen, J., Utriainen, T., & Deliens, L. (2014). Descriptions of euthanasia as social representations: Comparing the views of Finnish physicians and religious professionals. Sociology of Health & Illness, 36(3), 354–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreuter, M. W., De Rosa, C., Howze, E. H., & Baldwin, G. T. (2004). Understanding wicked problems: A key to advancing environmental health promotion. Health Education & Behavior, 31(4), 441–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, G. L., Woo, I. M. H., & Goh, C. (2013). Understanding the concept of “good death” among bereaved family caregivers of cancer patients in Singapore. Palliative and Supportive Care, 11(1), 37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, K., Cashore, B., Bernstein, A., & Auld, G. (2012). Overcoming the tragedy of super wicked problems: Constraining our future selves to ameliorate global climate change. Policy Sciences, 45(2), 123–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ludwig, D. (2001). The era of management is over. Ecosystem, 4(8), 758–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lukensmeyer, C. (2005). A town meeting for the twenty-first century. In J. Gastil & P. Levine (Eds.), The deliberative democracy handbook (pp. 154–163). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malone, E. F., & Malone, M. J. (2013). The “wicked problem” of cybersecurity policy: Analysis of United States and Canadian policy response. Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, 19(2), 158–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansbridge, J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S., Christiano, T., Fung, A., Parkinson, J., et al. (2012). A systemic approach to deliberative democracy. In J. Parkinson & J. Mansbridge (Eds.), Deliberative systems (pp. 1–26). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mansbridge, J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S., Estlund, D., Føllesdal, A., Fung, A., et al. (2010). The place of self-interest and the role of power in deliberative democracy. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 18(1), 64–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marcous, I., Mishara, B. L., & Durant, C. (2007). Confusion between euthanasia and other end-of-life decisions. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 98(3), 235–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. S., & Gonzalez, M. (2013). When death is the destination: The business of death tourism—Despite legal and social implications. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 7(3), 293–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrell, M. E. (2010). Empathy and democracy: Feeling, thinking, and deliberation. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nie, M. (2003). Drivers of natural resource-based political conflict. Policy Sciences, 36(3–4), 307–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norton, B. G. (2012). The ways of wickedness: Analyzing messiness with messy tools. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 25(4), 447–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Offe, C. (2011). Crisis and innovation of liberal democracy: Can deliberation be institutionalised? Czech Sociological Review, 47(3), 447–472.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul, C., Nicholls, R., Priest, P., & McGee, R. (2008). Making policy decisions about populations screening for breast cancer: The role of citizens’ deliberation. Health Policy, 85(3), 314–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prasser, S. (2012). Euthanasia: Tackling a ‘wicked’ policy problem. Health Matter, 62(Winter), 20–22.

  • Raisio, H. (2010). The public as policy expert: Deliberative democracy in the context of Finnish health care reforms and policies. Journal of Public Deliberation, 6(2), 1–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raisio, H., Ollila, S., & Vartiainen, P. (2012). Do youth juries enhance youth political and societal participation? Lessons from the Vaasa experiment. Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration, 15(3), 41–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed, P. M., & Kasprzyk, J. (2009). Water resources management: The myth, the wicked, and the future. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 135(6), 411–413.

  • Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, N. (2000). Wicked problems and network approaches to resolution. International Public Management Review, 1(1), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rurup, M. L., Smets, T., Cohen, J., Bilsen, J., Onwuteaka-Philipsen, B. D., & Deliens, L. (2011). The first five years of euthanasia legislation in Belgium and the Netherlands: Description and comparison of cases. Palliative Medicine, 26(1), 23–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scarre, G. (2012). Can there be a good death? Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 18(5), 1082–1086.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Signal, L. N., Walton, M. D., Mhurchu, C. N., Maddison, R., Bowers, S. G., Carter, K. N., et al. (2013). Tackling ‘wicked’ health promotion problems: A New Zealand case study. Health Promotion International, 28(1), 84–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silvoniemi, M., Vasankari, T., Vahlberg, T., Clemens, K. E., & Salminen, E. (2010). Physicians’ attitudes towards euthanasia in Finland: Would training in palliative care make a difference? Palliative Medicine, 24(7), 744–746.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, L. E. D., & Porter, K. S. (2010). Management of catchments for the protection of water resources: Drawing on the New York City watershed experience. Regional Environmental Change, 10(4), 311–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Southgate, E., Reynolds, R., & Howley, P. (2013). Professional experience as a wicked problem in initial teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 31(1), 13–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg, A. (2012). What is a “good death”? Notfall Rettungsmed, 15(8), 658–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, J. (2012). Learning to deliberate. In G. M. Carney & C. Harris (Eds.), Citizens’ voices: Experiments in democratic renewal and reform (pp. 3–7). Galway: ICSG.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoppelenburh, A., & Vermaak, H. (2009). Defixation as an intervention perspective: Understanding wicked problems at the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Journal of Management Inquiry, 18(1), 40–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, D. F. (2008). Deliberative democratic theory and empirical political science. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 497–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trankle, S. A. (2014). Is a good death possible in Australian critical and acute settings? Physician experiences with end-of-life care. BMC Palliative Care, 13, 41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Brussel, L., & Carpentier, N. (2012). The discursive construction of the good death and the dying person. Journal of Language and Politics, 11(4), 479–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Bueren, E. M., Klijn, E.-H., & Koppenjan, J. F. M. (2003). Dealing with wicked problems in networks: Analyzing an environmental debate from a network perspective. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13(2), 193–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verbakel, E., & Jaspers, E. (2010). A comparative study on permissiveness toward euthanasia. Religiosity, slippery slope, autonomy and death with dignity. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(1), 109–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters, G. (2004). Is there such a thing as a good death? Palliative Medicine, 18(5), 404–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, E. P., & Khademian, A. M. (2008). Wicked problems, knowledge challenges, and collaborative capacity builders in network settings. Public Administration Review, 68(2), 334–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiang, W.-N. (2013). Working with wicked problems in socio-ecological systems: Awareness, acceptance, and adaptation. Landscape and Urban Planning, 110(1), 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yankelovich, D. (1991). Coming to public judgment: Making democracy work in a complex world. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yankelovich, D. (1995). The debate that wasn’t: The public and the Clinton plan. Health Affairs, 14(1), 7–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yankelovich, D. (2011). How to achieve sounder public judgment. In D. Yankelovich & W. Friedman (Eds.), Toward wiser public judgment (pp. 11–32). Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yankelovich, D. (2015). Wicked problems workable solutions: Lessons from a public life. London: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Kone Foundation for funding this research and Lyn Carson, Maija Setälä, Salla Kyrönlahti, and Tomi Niemi for their valuable assistance during the project. We are also grateful to three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Vaasa, Box 700, 65101, Vaasa, Finland

    Harri Raisio & Pirkko Vartiainen

Authors
  1. Harri Raisio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pirkko Vartiainen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Harri Raisio.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Raisio, H., Vartiainen, P. Accelerating the public’s learning curve on wicked policy issues: results from deliberative forums on euthanasia. Policy Sci 48, 339–361 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-015-9221-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-015-9221-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation