ABSTRACT
Recently, the systemic approach to deliberative democracy has set forth a new way of thinking about the legitimacy of non-electoral forms of representation based on the connection of different discursive spheres. Despite its theoretical potentials, the theory has not been able to either indicate what fosters this connection, or understand the impacts of articulation on the representative process. We present some results of a research study focusing on the Brazilian Social Assistance System and its main participatory and deliberative institutions. We argue that at least two dimensions are responsible for the connection between arenas – institutional design and the circulation of participant – and that these dimensions also present contradictory effects in terms of the legitimacy of representation, including problems related to public accountability and the inclusion of different discourses.
