Contribution to the handbook
Set aside · Assessed 2026-10-27
The examples of France, Canada, and Iceland provide general background, but the supplied evidence gives no information about their outcomes or specific design lessons. The records do not materially specify the AI governance system, its risks, alternatives, implementation, or tests.
Does this challenge the goal?
None identified
The question asks for background examples of national citizens’ assemblies and does not contest the goal, beneficiary boundary, assumptions, or desired deliverable.
The supplied records give examples but no outcomes or design detail.
Why this category?
- Peripheral background examples without supplied evidence about outcomes or transferable design implications
- The general description of deliberation formats adds context but no specific system choice
The set-aside judgment concerns contribution to this handbook, not whether citizens’ assemblies are useful in other contexts.
This is an AI assessment of contribution to the goal, separate from whether the question has an answer.
New evidence is being assessed. Any answer below is provisional; parts whose evidence changed or was withdrawn are withheld.
Identify places where citizens’ assemblies have been used for national policy, without implying the examples are exhaustive.
What we can say so far
The authors report that France, Canada, and Iceland have used large citizens’ assemblies to make national policy decisions. These are examples, not an exhaustive list.
What remains open
No material gap is recorded within this part’s current scope.
Conditions and limits
- The examples are reported in the article’s background, not as study results.
- The evidence is based on the readable article text; supplementary materials were not included.
Evidence and related ideas
Supporting evidence, qualifications and context play different roles in this answer.
supports
Examples of national assemblies The authors report that France, Canada, and Iceland have used large citizens’ assemblies to make national policy decisions.
Directly supplies the reported examples: France, Canada, and Iceland.
AI can help humans find common ground in democratic deliberation
Read full source: AI can help humans find common ground in democratic deliberation (opens in a new tab) ↗Read source discussion: AI can help humans find common ground in democratic deliberation →
context
Deliberation and democracy The authors describe deliberation as a free exchange of views, usually in person or online, in an unstructured or partly structured discussion. They present open-minded discussion as important to liberal democracy; citizens’ assemblies are one formal setting, involving small groups of randomly selected, unelected citizens discussing public issues.
Provides background on deliberation and citizens’ assemblies but does not identify places where they were used for national policy.
AI can help humans find common ground in democratic deliberation
Read full source: AI can help humans find common ground in democratic deliberation (opens in a new tab) ↗Read source discussion: AI can help humans find common ground in democratic deliberation →