Date of Award

Spring 2026

Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Department

School of Public Service

Program/Concentration

Public Administration and Policy

Committee Director

Adam Eckerd

Committee Member

Ron Carlee

Committee Member

Edward Martin

Abstract

Citizen advisory boards (CABs) are widely used in local government as institutional mechanisms for participatory governance and public input. While these bodies are intended to promote inclusive and deliberative decision-making, persistent socioeconomic inequalities raise concerns about whether CABs mitigate or reproduce disparities in participation and influence. This dissertation examines how socioeconomic status (SES) shapes deliberative decision-making within CABs and whether this relationship operates indirectly through board-level social capital.

Integrating perspectives from participatory governance, deliberative democracy, and social capital theory, the study conceptualizes deliberative decision-making as a collective, board-level process shaped by relational and institutional dynamics rather than individual attributes alone. Social capital is examined as a multidimensional construct encompassing bonding, bridging, and linking ties within and beyond CABs. Using survey data collected from 123 members of 26 CABs across California municipalities with populations between 60,000 and 200,000, individual responses are aggregated to the board-level and analyzed using descriptive statistics, bivariate analysis, and regression-based techniques to examine indirect relationships using an intervening explanatory framework rather than formal causal mediation.

The findings indicate that variation in deliberative decision-making within CABs is most strongly associated with board-level social capital, providing empirical support for theoretical expectations, while SES exhibits a more limited and indirect relationship. Bridging and linking forms of social capital are found to be statistically consistent with an indirect explanatory relationship between SES and deliberative quality, while bonding social capital alone does not consistently enhance deliberation. CABs characterized by broader cross-group connections and stronger institutional linkages report higher levels of inclusive dialogue, perceived influence, and deliberative effectiveness, including in lower-SES contexts.

These results suggest that the deliberative capacity of CABs depends less on socioeconomic composition alone and more on the relational and institutional contexts that structure participation. By clarifying how different forms of social capital condition deliberative processes, this study advances empirical understanding of participatory governance and offers practical insight for the design and support of advisory institutions seeking to foster inclusive and meaningful citizen deliberation.

Rights

In Copyright. URI: http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s).

DOI

https://doi.org/10.25777/crw9-sj54

ISBN

9798197810434

Download

Share

COinS