ABSTRACT
The paper presents lessons from applications of Horst Rittel’s argumentative model of planning, enhanced with systematic evaluation of planning arguments. It discusses refinement of the approach itself, as well as issues regarding its application to small- and large-scale online planning and policy-making discourse projects.
Specific problems discussed include the design of large-scale platforms for the discussion of issues of global significance: the need for adequate software programs for such online discussions to integrate handling and display of discussion contributions, state of discourse mapping, and processing the evaluation of contributions, as well as how to deal with incompletely articulated arguments, representation of complex systems modeling contributions to the discussion, and the problem of linking decisions to the merit of discussion contributions. Development of a game to familiarize users with the argumentative approach could lead to potential uses of “civic credit” participants build up with discussion contributions, such as providing incentives for constructive participation, and better control of power in societal governance.
