This paper is based on work in progress within a COST Action entitled Constitution-making and deliberative democracy. Our working group (about 30 European academics and researchers) aims to provide an updated review of the online consultation platforms used in institutionalised consultations - such as major debate (e.g. le Grand Débat in France), constitutional reform, local consultation in cities - and to see to what extent they are part of a broader consultation process. The analysis is based on the responses of an online questionnaire that will be sent to all the member countries that participate at the COST action plan (around 30). The questionnaire will follow a common and original analytical framework that aims to analyse and evaluate the online consultation/debate processes in the different EU Member States at different levels (local, regional, national and European levels). This analytical grid aims to assess the following criteria (Macintosh, 2007): 1) the articulation of online and offline processes within the participatory project; 2) its sustainability; 3) the institutional purpose; 4) the structuring of the consultation/debate phases; 5) the way in which online platforms are made attractive and inclusive; 6) the civic and political impacts (Elster, 1997). Our main objectives are to provide a list of good practices that can be widely disseminated to practitioners in the field. In other words, we should attempt to ensure that these online platforms are better designed to allow for real mutual deliberation and not what is generally observed, namely a "third space discussion" and "enclave dialogue" (Kersting, 2013).
