In the context of a sustained backlash against democracy and the potential of its procedural and normative basis to represent individual interests, there has been renewed attention to “innovations” in democratic practice, particularly those that expand direct participation in policy design and incorporate citizen input into political decision-making. Governments, international bodies, and grassroots groups have widely promoted practices such as citizens’ assemblies, participatory panels, and citizen labs as remedies for the perceived shortcomings of representative and deliberative democracy. These approaches are often framed as tools for consensus-building and trust restoration and are considered as such by scholarship. Still, they are less often considered in relation to political dynamics characterised by deep disagreement, polarisation, and contestation. This report considers such “co-created democratic practices” in relation to dissensus. It maps key theoretical perspectives on co-creation, examines how dissensus shapes both the design and outcomes of participatory innovations, and analyses selected case studies from different political contexts. The report argues that the democratic potential of co-creation depends less on its capacity to generate agreement than on its ability to redistribute authority, accommodate conflict, and produce meaningful political consequences in the face of disagreement.