Skip to Main content Skip to Navigation

Écrire, parler, documenter : enjeux normatifs et pratiques situées de l'expression dans les procédures de débat public

Abstract : Writing, speaking, documenting: normative issues and located practices in the procedures for public debate This paper provides an insight into the forms of politic mediation in participatory procedures that link online discussion's devices and face-to-face's devices. Both consist of assemblies of heterogeneous and sequenced formats (blog, forum, e-participatory assembly, etc.). The devices happen to standardize production of the debate and the debate-reflecting traces (Bonaccorsi, Julliard, 2010). We will use two empirical examples discussed in the context of a collaborative research (The formats of expression by citizens in local procedures for consultation, Concertation, Decision, Environment 2 Program funded by the Ministry of Ecology, Energy and Sustainable Development and Territorial Development) considering that within these procedures, devices and formats materialize various conceptions of public debate (Monnoyer-Smith, 2009; Street, Wright, 2007). We examine at first the European project Ideal-EU, in which, in 2008, Tuscany, Catalonia and PoitouCharentes organized a Participatory Electronic Assembly (APE) on Climate Change and developed a participatory website (www.idealdebate.eu). This project was part of the "eParticipation 2007" program and was funded by the European Commission (DG Information Society) as. We examine at second the conciliation procedure set up by a special Commission for Public Debate (CPDP) in 2009 to determine the transformation of the waste treatment center in Ivry-Paris XIII. This consultation also organized the terms of face-to-face debates (meetings) and online debates (http://www.debatpublictraitement-dechets-ivry.org/). In both cases, the participatory web site seemed to occupy a specific place. The call for proposals of the European program stressed the need, for the funded actors, to make a website as part of deliberative procedures, while the proposition of various modes of expression - including a blog - was, according to the CPDP, an indispensable guarantee for the proper conduct of the debate. From an ethno-semiotic approach, we discuss the various mechanisms put in place in these procedures as evidence of a definition of participation produced by the stakeholders. This definition is first negotiated and discussed in the set design, technical or editorial, which are of course also constrained by economic factors or calendar. The computer media, in particular, are characterized by their indexical value. On the first hand, the technical and editorial choices mobilize images (the imaginery of network, the imaginery of participation, and so on.). On the other hand, it promotes activities - writing, reading, validating, measuring, classifying - and "sets up a dense network of writing" (Aim, Jeanneret, 2007). For their part, public meetings and APE are instrumented, framed and scripted. We study the stakes of these techno-semiotic devices by focusing on how they "norm" and regulate the action by offering models of speaking and reading to produce, to shape and to archive the debate (facilitators, summaries, and reports for example) (Aldrin, Hube, 2011). In other words, we analyze public speaking of participants, in the web sites as well as in public meeting and at the EPA, as "allowed speaking": the device, online or face to face, establishes the rules (Flon, Jeanneret, 2010). But the device is also produced by the actions it makes possible - even if they have not been envisaged in its project. We analyze the discursive and symbolic dimensions of these devices in questioning the forms of participation produced. This is not to assess a difference between the aims (that of the institution, that of the participants) or to measure the effectiveness of the format of expression. We observe the linguistic and semiotic signs to understand how the definitions of participation produced by the stakeholders are interpreted by participants. In this, the proposed approach differs from that adopted by our colleagues : they compared modes of justification of the actors in their speeches (Wojcik, Talpin, 2009) or the quality of online discussions and face-to-face (MonnoyerSmith , Wojcik, 2011) to assess the "ideal" conditions of involving. Our approaches completement each other. The "participation" we observed is defined at the junction of its interpretations by the participants in the procedure which are, at some point, the conditions of possibilities for public debate. Our methodology to study this issue adds semiotic analysis to ethnographic investigation (interviews and observations): we see the modalities of debates (participatory websites, public meetings) as places of public speaking, more or less nested according to the procedures. The participants and their speech circulate between the different places. We wish to avoid two aporias. The first would be to focus only on the discursive exchanges, which is to think that the formats of deliberation are naturals and "non semiotizated" (Doury, Marcoccia, 2007). The second would be to consider these devices as "formatting" places and to ignore the possibility that individuals can produce something different than what the devices propose. Our Communication will be structured in three parts: First, we propose a global characterization of the two participatory procedures by highlighting the "intersemioticity" involved in the devices that articulate face-to-face interaction and on line communication: two modalities which have heterogeneous semiotic statutes. Secondly, this characterization allows us to detail finely models and standards: what are the forms of speaking which are suggested, indicated by the different formats? Finally, we question how participants interpret the proposed arrangements and "cope with" models and standards of enunciation. We pay particular attention to the traces of their paths in the devices. We describe the circulation of their speech into different formats and in over time, reflecting a tactical use of modes of expression available in the devices
Document type :
Conference papers
Complete list of metadatas

https://hal.univ-lille3.fr/hal-00826063
Contributor : Compte Laboratoire Geriico <>
Submitted on : Monday, July 22, 2013 - 4:13:13 PM
Last modification on : Friday, October 4, 2019 - 1:25:48 AM
Document(s) archivé(s) le : Wednesday, April 5, 2017 - 3:55:33 PM

File

axe_3_colloque_cmn_bonaccorsi_...
Explicit agreement for this submission

Identifiers

  • HAL Id : hal-00826063, version 2

Citation

Julia Bonaccorsi, Virginie Julliard. Écrire, parler, documenter : enjeux normatifs et pratiques situées de l'expression dans les procédures de débat public. Communiquer dans un monde de normes. L'information et la communication dans les enjeux contemporains de la " mondialisation "., Mar 2012, France. pp.243. ⟨hal-00826063v2⟩

Share

Metrics

Record views

620

Files downloads

630