From public debates over Shin-Kori Power Plant Units 5 and 6 to open discussions on university admissions reform, public deliberation is emerging as a major option in the public decision-making process for not only the central government but also local governments in their resolution of controversial policy issues. However, while many acknowledge the need for public deliberation and share high expectations, there are also those who believe that it can amplify, rather than abate, conflict, and is sometimes misappropriated by policymakers to shift blame or delay decision-making.

Accordingly, this study is based on the recognition that, in addition to a comprehensive understanding of the purpose and process of public deliberation, a rigorous evaluation of past performances must first be acquired to effectively utilize it as a mechanism for conflict resolution.

Led by a theoretical analysis of the roles public deliberation can play in public decision-making, the achievements and limitations of specific cases (as those above) are reviewed to fully examine the applicability of the public deliberation approach. Furthermore, unlike previous studies that focus on qualitative aspects, this study uses quantitative data to empirically analyze how faithful the public deliberation process has been to the original purpose. These are laid out in the following six chapters.

Chapter 1 presents the reasons why this study is needed while Chapter 2 investigates the various forms of public deliberation, starting with 'deliberative democracy,' the theoretical basis, and introduces major cases at both home and abroad. Chapter 3 tackles the theoretical and practical issues surrounding public deliberation, and details the analysis framework which consists of three evaluation criteria―planning, participation, and deliberation―developed from previous studies. Using microdata on the public deliberations for Shin-Kori Power Plant in 2017 and university admissions reform in 2018, Chapter 4 empirically analyzes these cases based on two of the above criteria; participation and deliberation. Indeed, in terms of ‘participation’, the composition of citizen participation groups is assessed to verify whether the standards for representation and inclusiveness are being met, and for ‘deliberation’, an examination is conducted into whether opinions of civic participants are introspectively formed and changed based on sufficient information. Additionally, the effectiveness and problems of the two cases are evaluated from the perspective of formation and confirmation of public opinion, which are the original purposes of public deliberation. Issues related to the third criteria, ‘planning,' were excluded from the empirical analysis due to difficulties in data quantification, but the subsequent sections will provide an outline while presenting the analysis results.

Finally, recognizing that the rapidly growing demand for public deliberation must be met, and that a more systematic approach is needed in terms of planning and management, the last two chapters explore ways in which the public deliberation process can be institutionalized. To that end, Chapter 5 reviews three overseas cases in which the process was established and stabilized as an official system. Comparing the discrepancies and similarities will help create a reference point that can be of great use when designing Korea’s own public deliberation process. Chapter 6 looks into the experiences at home with regards to the legislation of public deliberation, and analyzes the remaining issues and possibility of institutionalization to present policy implications.

Preface
Executive Summary

Chapter 1 Introduction

Chapter 2 Deliberative Democracy and Public Deliberation
　Section 1 Public Deliberation and Deliberative Democracy
　Section 2 Types and Cases of Public Deliberation

Chapter 3 Issues in Public Deliberation Evaluation and Analysis Framework
　Section 1 Issues Surrounding Public Deliberation
　Section 2 Analysis Framework

Chapter 4 Empirical Analysis: Focusing on the Public Deliberations for Shin-Kori Power Plant Units 5&6 and University Admissions Reform
　Section 1 Problem Statement
　Section 2 Overview of Two Public Deliberation Cases
　Section 3 Evaluation of Participation Aspects
　Section 4 Analysis of Deliberative Effects
　Section 5 Conclusion

Chapter 5 Case Studies on the Institutionalization of Public Deliberation Overseas
　Section 1 Introduction
　Section 2 The Bureau of Public Opinion on the Environment (BAPE), Quebec, Canada
　Section 3 Danish Board of Technology Foundation (DBT), Denmark
　Section 4 National Commission for Public Debate (CNDP), France
　Section 5 Comparative Analysis and Implications

Chapter 6 Policy Recommendations for Institutionalizing Public Deliberation in Korea
　Section 1 Possibility and Issues of Institutionalization in Korea
　Section 2 Policy Recommendations for Institutionalizing Public Deliberation

References
Appendices
ABSTRACT