On Agonistic Mini-Publics for Participatory Governance: Reading Agonism as Conflict Regulation in the SER Dialogue

Abstract

Addressing “wicked” governance challenges requires participatory processes that engage diverse perspectives, embrace contestation, and foster innovative solutions. This article examines social and environmental reporting (SER) as a context for exploring how participatory governance can be designed to enable pluralistic engagement. Drawing on critical dialogic accounting and accountability (CDAA), it introduces agonistic participatory governance as a practical framework for challenging hegemonic narratives and rethinking the role of SER. Through an empirical investigation of the SER dialogue—an agonistic mini-public designed to bring together participants with conflicting perspectives on the topic—this study demonstrates how participatory spaces can be constructed to embrace contestation and transformative engagement. Using Q methodology to map the “conflict constellation,” the SER dialogue was structured around the principles of conflict-oriented selection and agonistic procedures. The participants were encouraged to articulate their differences, critically reflect on assumptions, and question dominant narratives, such as the business-case framing of SER. Three key transformative actions are identified: establishing common ground, confronting divergent perspectives, and rethinking narratives. These insights demonstrate how participatory governance can foster pluralism, disrupt entrenched narratives, and reimagine accountability. By advancing CDAA research and offering practical guidance for designing agonistic spaces, this study highlights the potential of participatory governance to address complex issues and drive social transformation.