Home > News > Journal of Public Deliberation Moving to Kansas State

Journal of Public Deliberation Moving to Kansas State

The Journal of Public Deliberation (JPD), an online peer-reviewed journal of contemporary scholarship in the field of deliberative democracy published by the Deliberative Democracy Consortium, has found a new academic home.

From the September 24 Kansas State University press release (emphasis mine):

University New Home to Prestigious Democracy Journal

MANHATTAN — Kansas State University has become the new home of the Journal of Public Deliberation, with K-State’s David Procter and Timothy Steffensmeier serving as co-editors.

Procter is a professor of communication studies and director of K-State’s Institute for Civic Discourse and Democracy; Steffensmeier is an assistant professor of communication studies and an associate with the institute.


Procter and Steffensmeier will pursue several initiatives as new editors of the journal. They want it to be the premier, peer-reviewed journal in deliberative democracy. They also want to increase the number of issues published per year, broaden the readership, and increase international submissions and readership.

In addition, Procter and Steffensmeier want to expand the journal’s presence in online deliberation issues, as well as increase essays and articles regarding the value and process of public participation in political governance.

Check out the most recent issue (volume 6, issue 2) of the journal.

JPD is an interdisciplinary effort, and scholars and practitioners from all disciplines are invited to contribute.

The first call for papers from Messrs. Procter and Steffensmeier will be announced November 1, 2010.

Categories: News Tags: , , ,
  1. September 29, 2010 at 7:48 pm

    This is an exciting shift for all of us who have been involved with DDC, JPD, and the Inst. for Civic Discourse at K-State! Please send your good thoughts and ideas to Tim S. and David –

  2. September 30, 2010 at 9:19 pm

    Look forward to the call for papers!

  3. October 6, 2010 at 12:16 pm

    This post leads to a suggestion; it’d be great to have a “roundtable” discussion via conference call with the editors of DDC and the IAP2 journal in order to learn more about the focus of both publications and how they differ/are the same. This would be good for knowing which publication is a good fit for articles some of us may have in process. Perhaps the editors could ask for suggestions for future themes for upcoming issues too?

    Perhaps there could also be a “joint issue,” e.g., different aspects of one topic that’s published simultaneously in both journals. For example, articles on transportation could explore the deliberative elements in DDC and the decisionmaking aspects in the IAP2 journal??

  4. Nancy Glock-Grueneich
    October 6, 2010 at 1:40 pm

    Yes. I’m on the Editorial Board for IJP2. I had a very brief chat with Matt a year or so ago about this possibility and we have discussed it informally on the Board.

    At the moment, of course, IJP2 is a bit in limbo along with everything else as the org transition occurs. IJP2 is currently under the direction of, and continues to be funded by, what will as of Jan. 1 be an International Federation. The question is not so much whether to have this conversation, assuming DDC is up for it, but when, and in what capacity.

    For myself, I would like to see at least the “US” branch of IJP2–whatever that would be–consolidate with JPD, or at least enter into this discussion–but what entity should pursue the discussion from this end, and, as I said, when? It would seem in some ways a good time to do it as JPD is just starting up this new relationship–and we could just have the conversation with our existing Editorial Board. On that basis we could determine whether it makes sense conceptually and editorially (as I am convinced that is is.)

    But would that could mean losing the funding that has paid for an editor up until now? The former editor quit and the IAP2 Board–a bit preoccupied with other things–has not hired a new one, though we have a good one lined up to hire, last I heard.

    I’m drawing a blank as to how to proceed (uncharacteristically, I might add) but am interested in other people’s thoughts. At the very least, I can imagine the following:

    1) The IAP2-USA’s transition team’s finances committee consider the matter from their end
    2) The team as a whole discuss the fate of IJP2 in relationship to IAP2-USA–though there’s already a lot on their plate.
    3) Our editorial board enter into a discussion with JPD’s board just on the merits of the concept in its own right, the implementation details, finances, etc. to be worked out later as the legal entities associated with IAP2/IAP2-USA get sorted out and can act.

  5. October 16, 2010 at 9:06 am

    I think Nancy raises some great points here about combining resources and to explore this possibility could be beneficial to both organizations and the practice overall.

    I would say that as there are distinctions between deliberation and public participation, it would be great if as part of this discussion with JPD if they would be open to adding “and Public Participation” to the title of the journal. This would reflects the spirit of these complementary aspects of engagement.

  1. November 24, 2010 at 4:25 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s