의제형성형 공론화 참여자의 정치적 효능감 결정요인 분석

초록

Most public deliberation initiatives conducted in South Korea have taken the form of deliberative polling, primarily designed to determine support for or opposition to specific policy alternatives or to select among competing options. Accordingly, prior studies examining the effects of public deliberation have largely focused on the deliberative effects of “deliberative polling”. Empirical research exploring the impacts of alternative deliberative mechanisms beyond deliberative polling, however, remains notably limited. To address this research gap, this study empirically analyzes the effects of agenda-setting deliberation on participants’ political efficacy, drawing on the case of the “Gyeonggi International Airport Construction Deliberation” conducted in Gyeonggi Province in 2024. Specifically, the study examines how participants’ perceived mutual respect, trust in government, and the quality of deliberation influence political efficacy. The findings indicate that higher levels of perceived mutual respect among participants, stronger trust in government, and higher quality of deliberation are all positively associated with political efficacy. Based on these findings, this study offers concrete policy implications for the effective design and implementation of agenda-setting deliberation as an emerging deliberative model that contributes to expanding the deliberative democratic public sphere.

키워드