Report Title here Transitions to participatory democracy: How to grow public participation in local governance Riley Thorold - RSA
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
In partnership
Report
Title here
Transitions
Sub-title here
to
participatory democracy:
Author name June 2021
How to grow public participation
in local governance
Riley Thorold
JUNE 2021
Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance
Acknowledgments Contents
Page no.
I am grateful to our partners the Centre
for Progressive Policy for their support,
without which this work would not be i. About us 2
possible. Thanks also to all Inclusive
Growth Network members for their input 1. Scope of work and research approach 4
and to Garance Choko for her inspiration
and ideas. Particular thanks go to Alexa
Clay for her support, guidance and 2. Defining and designing public engagement 6
encouragement throughout this project
and to Amanda Ibbett, James Morrison
and Eden Lew for all their efforts during 3. Transitioning into the future: building
the report production process. I would participative systems 13
also like to thank those listed below, all of
whom inspired different aspects of this
report through conversations and email Micro transitions 15
exchanges. Any errors are my own.
Meso transitions 20
Coryn Barclay, Fife Council
Clare Mansfield, Kingston London Macro transitions 26
Borough Council
4. Conclusions 32
Cllr Saima Ashraf, London Borough of
Barking and Dagenham
Avril McIntyre, Community Resources
Pam Crosthwaite, North Ayrshire Council
Cllr Joe Cullinane, North Ayrshire Council
Evelyn O’Donnell, Glasgow City Council
Graham Smith, University of Westminster
Panthea Lee, Reboot
Jez Hall, Shared Future CIC
Tim Hughes, Involve
Atte Ojanen, Demos Helsinki
Claudia Chwalisz, OECD
Matt Leighninger, Public Agenda
Frances Foley, Compass
Louise Crow, mySociety
Richard James, Intensive Engagement
Limited
Perry Walker, Talkshop
Anthony Zacharzewski, The Democratic
Society
Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance 1
i
About us
REALISING W
e are the RSA. The We define our ambitions as:
royal society for arts,
manufactures and
commerce. We’re Our vision
committed to a future that works for
everyone. A future where we can all A world where everyone
participate in its creation. is able to participate in
The RSA has been at the forefront of creating a better future.
significant social impact for over 250 years.
Our proven change process, rigorous
research, innovative ideas platforms and Our purpose
diverse global community of over 30,000
CHANGE
problem solvers, deliver solutions for Uniting people and ideas
lasting change.
to resolve the challenges
We invite you to be part of this change.
Join our community. Together, we’ll of our time.
unite people and ideas to resolve the
challenges of our time.
Find out more at thersa.org
We are
A global community of
proactive problem solvers.
About our partner
L
aunched in September 2020, the
Inclusive Growth Network (IGN)
is an ambitious initiative hosted by
the Centre for Progressive Policy,
supported by delivery partners Metro
Dynamics and The royal society for arts,
We are the RSA. The royal society manufactures and commerce (RSA), and
funders The Joseph Rowntree Foundation
for arts, manufactures and commerce. (JRF). The IGN’s membership comprises
12 places – combined authorities and local
We unite people and ideas to resolve councils – who are leading the drive for
inclusive local economies across the UK.
the challenges of our time.
2 Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance 3
1 Introduction to the project
Scope of work methods to be straightforwardly deployed,
but is part of a cultural shift for distributing
and research power and agency that is highly contextual
RESEARCH
and messy.
approach While recognising there is no single
approach to growing resident engagement,
APPROACH W
orking alongside the UK our research has highlighted several broad
Inclusive Growth Network transitions in local policy and practice
the RSA has spent the last that can help local authorities to enhance
six months exploring how resident participation. We describe these
local places can advance and embed the transitions, alongside practical guidance
use of participatory democracy. The work and priority recommendations, in the
has been shaped by five primary research second section of this report. In the
questions: first section, we set out an approach to
designing particular engagement exercises
• How can we make the political that properly accounts for the contextual
and business case for participatory nature of local democracy.
democracy?
The recommendations and guidance
• How can we manage a community contained in this report are targeted
process effectively, authentically and primarily at local and combined authority
ethically, including reaching the most officers and councillors who are interested
marginalised groups? in creating more vibrant and participatory
• How can we demystify the different local democracies, but we hope the insights
methods of citizen involvement? will also be of interest to other audiences,
SCOPE OF
What helps us decide what is the best including process designers, facilitators,
approach in each situation? advocates, local communities and
• How can we help create an inclusive researchers. While some of the guidance
WORK
democratic recovery from the impact is specific to local and regional democracy,
of Covid-19? lots of the suggestions apply to national
• How can we create the right and even transnational participation.
governance structures and institutional
context for these processes?
Our research has involved (i) interviews
with UK and international practitioners,
academics, VCSE representatives, public
sector leaders, local and combined
authority officers and local politicians;
(ii) a participatory workshop with IGN
members; (iii) a steering group session
with a subset of the network; and (iv)
desk research exploring international best
practice and guidance for community
engagement.
Our research has shown local democracy
to be a complex and dynamic system,
rather than a set of discrete institutions and
processes. Participatory democracy is not a
product to be ‘pulled off a shelf’ or a set of
4 Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance 5
2 Introduction to participatory democracy
Defining and designing
public engagemment
Defining and
designing public
engagement
Figure 1: Key of terms
Footnotes on following page.
6 Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance 7
Introduction to participatory democracy
Question Key considerations
Where? Internal factors to consider include: the buy-in of key decision-
makers, the availability of support, resources and skills in the
What is the context in which authority, where agency and levers for change exist in the
Involve have proposed four key sets of
Planning a public questions that can help organisers to
engagement is taking place? What
internal and external factors might
council and/or its partners, how quickly a decision needs to be
made and by what mechanism the public input can influence
engagement exercise consider and address the key variables that influence the ability of the organiser the decision-making process.
influence the design of public engagement: to realise their desired outcomes and
There are many variables that combine
why? where? who? how?8 purpose for engagement? How might External factors to consider include: current and past
to determine what the best approach
the organiser address or mitigate any engagement efforts, potentially controversial topics in
to public engagement may be in any
problematic or challenging contextual the community, barriers to resident participation, existing
situation. Is the issue high or low-stakes?
factors? relationships and networks in the community and major
Does it require thick or thin engagement?
political/economic trends and events.
How many people need to be involved?
Does the issue lend itself to a deliberative Once the question of who has been answered, it is important
process? Who?
to consider how that target group can be engaged. What are
Who needs to be involved in the the barriers that need to be scaled and assets that can be
Question Key considerations process, internally and externally, for utilised to enable their participation? What does this imply
Leighninger and Nabatchi list some general goals for the organiser to (i) be able to realise about the optimum approach to recruitment and/or marketing
Why? their purpose and outcomes; (ii) feel
engagement.9 The list is high-level and inevitably inexhaustive, and comms?
Organisers should start by asking but provides a solid starting point for addressing the ‘why?’ confident that the process can have
themselves why they are engaging influence; (iii) feel satisfied that those We consider how to tackle barriers to resident participation
question:
with residents: what can participants most impacted by the process have a and the challenge of bringing key decision-makers on board in
help the authority with? What can
the authority help participants with? 1. Participation leaders want to gather public input,
feedback, and preferences.
voice in it?
How?
section 2 of this report.
Process design generally works best as a collaborative
2.
What are the desired outcomes of Participation leaders want citizens to generate new enterprise. External partners and internal stakeholders (ie
the process? ideas or new data. How can a process be designed councillors) can bring valuable perspectives to the design
so that it engages the right people, process (councillors, for example, are often best placed to
3.
The purpose for engaging with the Participation leaders want to support volunteerism and accounts for the local context and
public and desired outcomes, once advise on how processes can be designed to have political
citizen-driven problem-solving. delivers outcomes that contribute
established, should shape how influence) and engaging them early can help secure their buy-
towards the overall purpose of
organisers answer the subsequent
three questions. 4. Participation leaders want to make a policy decision.
engagement? What methods and
in.
Organisers might also find it helpful to consider different
5. Participation leaders want to develop a plan or a tools can support these aspirations?
engagement methods and tools that have worked elsewhere.
budget. However, these methods will always need to be adapted
and tailored to particular contexts, rather than applied
Each of these general goals can then be translated into more
mechanistically.
specific outcomes; what kind of feedback is required? What
data in specific is needed? What kind of policy decision needs
to be made? etc.
Towards an inventory of
1 Nabatchi, T and Leighninger, M (2015) Public Participation for 21st Century
Democracy, Wiley, Hoboken: New Jersey. methods
2 CitizenLab (2020) What is the Difference Bbetween Citizen Engagement
and Participation? www.citizenlab.co/blog/civic-engagement/what-is-the- To support process designers, we have
difference-between-citizen-engagement-and-participation/ compiled a list of tried and tested public
3 Ibid. engagement methods.10 This should not
4 Organizing Engagement, Types of Engagement: Thick, Thin, and be used as a shortcut to bypass the four
Conventional [online] organizingengagement.org/models/types-of- planning stages we set out in the previous
engagement-thick-thin-and-conventional/
section – the purpose and context of
5 It is not always easy to discern which issues cause most contention and
concern among the public, so it can help to work with residents to draw
engagement remain paramount – but may
this distinction. offer inspiration and ideas to participation
6 Deliberation is useful for high-stakes, complex issues where a wide range leaders, helping them discover, adapt and
of different perspectives need to be considered. combine different engagement methods
7 Chambers, S. (2003) Deliberative Democratic Theory. Annual Review of and tools to fit their purpose and context.
Political Science, 6(6): pp307–326.
10 For other helpful engagement methods directories, see Involve’s Methods
8 Read more about how to approach each of these questions in the Involve
database. Available at: www.involve.org.uk/resources/methods. Also see
Knowledge Base [online] www.involve.org.uk/resources/knowledge-base/
the Engage2020 Action Catalogue. Available at: actioncatalogue.eu/search
building-back-how-do-we-involve-communities-covid-19-response-and-3
9 Nabatchi. T and Leighninger. M (2015) Op cit.
8 Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance 9
Introduction to participatory democracy
Figure 2: Inventory of methods
Purpose High/low-stakes Thin/thick Participant
Methods Policy stage Cost (£-£££) Size of group Length Example(s)/resources
(1-5) issues engagement selection
Policy Representative
Surveys/polls 1 Varies Both Thin Varies Short UK Polling Report
development sample
Policy Representative
Focus groups 1 £-££ Both Thin 6-12 2 hours How to run focus groups
development sample
Throughout Representative
Citizens’ panel 1-2 £-££ Both Thin Usually thousands Ongoing Barnet Citizens’ Panel
policy process sample
Targeted
Citizen report cards Audit 1 ££ Both Thin Varies Short sample (service More info
beneficiaries)
Problem reporting
Audit 2 Varies Both Thin Unlimited Short Self-selecting FixMyStreet
forums
Crowdsourcing Agenda-setting 2-3 £ Agenda-setting Usually thin Varies, often large Varies Self-selecting yrpri
Crowdfunding Implementation 2-3 £ Both Usually thin Varies, often large Varies Self-selecting Ioby
Policy
Online networks 1,3 £ Both Usually thin Large Ongoing Self-selecting Labour Policy Forum
development
Participatory Ideally Walsall Participatory
Agenda-setting 1,2,3 ££ Both Thick Varies Self-selecting
appraisal ongoing Appraisal Network
Policy
Democs 2-3 £-££ Both Medium 6-8 Up to 1 day Self-selecting Talk Shop
development
Thick for core 5-15 core group
Appreciative inquiry Agenda-setting 2-4 £-££ Agenda-setting group, thin for engaging with 3 months + Self-selecting More info
rest larger network
Targeted
Varies, usually
Participatory audit Audit 2-4 ££ High Thick Multi-year sample (service World Bank Case studies
15-30
beneficiaries)
Policy Usually self-
Charrettes 2-3,5 ££-£££ High Thick 25-500 3-5 sessions Glasgow Thriving Places
development selecting
Future search
Agenda-setting 1-3 ££-£££ Agenda-setting Thick 25-100 2+ days Multi-stakeholder Future Search Network
conference
Participatory PB Chicago
Decision-making 2-3,5 ££-£££ Both Thick Unlimited 1+ days Self-selecting
budgeting Other examples
Consensus Policy 10-20, open to Representative
1-5 £££ High Thick 3+ days Participedia
conferences development observers sample
Multi-stakeholder,
Poverty Truth Policy including people
1-5 £££ High Thick 20-50 1+ year West Cheshire PTC2
commissions development with experience
of poverty
Citizens’ juries Decision-making 1-5 ££-£££ High Thick 12-24 2+ days Random sample More info
Citizens’ assemblies Decision-making 1-5 £££ High Thick 50-250 3+ days Random sample Citizens’ assembly tracker
10 Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance 11Introduction to participatory democracy
Box 1: Notes on Figure 2
Methods: an inexhaustive, but varied, range of tried and tested methods that produce
different outcomes and apply at different stages in the policy cycle.
Policy stage: (i) agenda-setting; (ii) policy development; (iii) decision-making; (iv) audit.
BUILDING
Purpose: here we use the following classifications, as listed above:
1 = Participation leaders want to gather public input, feedback, and preferences.
2 = Participation leaders want citizens to generate new ideas or new data.
PARTICIPATIVE
3 = Participation leaders want to support volunteerism and citizen-driven problem-solving.
4 = Participation leaders want to make a policy decision.
5 = Participation leaders want to develop a plan or a budget.
SYSTEMS
Cost: due to the number of variables involved, it is impossible to provide an accurate
summary of costs beyond what we provide here. Readers are advised to follow-up with
their own research.
High/low-stakes issues: definitions provided above. Agenda-setting is treated as a separate
category (agenda-setting processes are often designed to ascertain which issues are high/
low-stakes). When running engagement on a low-stakes issue, organisers may choose thin,
self-selecting, low-commitment forms of engagement. On high-stakes issues, however,
organisers should choose a more targeted recruitment approach, seek more informed, thick
participation, and consider sharing more decision power with participants.
Thin/thick engagement: definitions provided above. There is a spectrum between thin and
thick engagement – the categorisations below are necessarily simplified. When it comes
to choosing between thin and thick forms of engagement, there tends to be a three-way
trade-off between breadth (how many people can participate), depth (how informed
and intensive the engagement is) and cost (thick engagement usually costs more than thin
engagement) - hence why most engagement practitioners recommend using both thin and
thick forms of engagement and, when money allows, combining them to capture the dual
benefits of breadth and depth.
Size of group: this is an important design question for organisers to consider. The data
below reflects the average size chosen in past applications of each method.
Length: this is an important design question for organisers to consider. The data below
reflects the average length of time chosen in past applications of each method.
Participant selection: this is an important design question for organisers to consider. The
data below reflects the standard approach taken in past applications of each method.
12 Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance 133 Micro transitions
Transitioning can help local authorities to develop a local
participatory infrastructure to support
into the future: innovative, empowering, inclusive and
impactful forms of participation on a more
building ongoing basis.
These six transitions overlap significantly
participative and cut across different layers of the
system, but can broadly be classified as
systems such:
T
he project of growing local
Under each of these transitions we specify Equalising participation • Compensating participants for
their time. For many people, the
a series of practical recommendations that
participation will require more
agencies can pursue in the short-term. The opportunities for financial barrier to participation is the
than just well-designed methods. most fundamental. Without proper
Just as specific engagement
project of building more participative local residents compensation many young people,
systems will always be a work in progress
exercises should be designed to account In the majority of cases, all residents are carers, single parents and people
and will vary depending on pre-existing
for local context, civic leaders should entitled to participate in local consultation with low income will struggle to get
civic infrastructure and past experiences
proactively work to change the local exercises, however in reality those who do involved. If an issue is important and
of civic engagement, but we hope these
context, to create the conditions under participate – often nicknamed the ‘usual consequential and people are expected
broad transitions and the practical
which participation can thrive. suspects’ – tend to be more wealthy, more to contribute substantial amounts of
recommendations that accompany them
While recognising there is no single can offer inspiration and practical ideas to white and more educated than the wider time to the process, compensating
approach to growing resident engagement, local authorities seeking change. population. Local participation can be a participants (at least on a per
our research has highlighted six broad mechanism for confronting and redressing request basis) should be a priority. If
transitions in local policy and practice that power imbalances, but without a genuine participants come for the money and
commitment to equal access and influence, stay for the experience this should
participatory programmes risk reinforcing be celebrated: these are precisely the
Figure 3: Local infrastructure for participatory democracy existing inequities. When people are simply people who wouldn’t turn up to a
entitled to participate, participation will regular local authority meeting.
predictably become the vocation of an • Supporting people with disabilities
entitled few. and specific access requirements.
Avoiding this outcome will require local This includes physical/virtual access to
authorities to invest considerable time, participation spaces, access provisions
energy and resource into breaking down relating to sensory impairments,
access barriers and equalising participation interpreting and translation services
opportunities. and trained support for individuals with
learning difficulties.
There is no silver bullet solution for
• Utilising the access opportunities
levelling-up local participation. Different
provided by technology
participation approaches will attract
without creating new barriers
different people, suggesting a mixed-
to participation. Covid-19 social
methods approach to local engagement,
distancing measures have pushed
combining different facilitation methods
many engagement processes online
and recruitment models, will be most
and demonstrated not only that
fruitful. However, there are some
virtual participation is possible, but
practical measures that organisers should
that it may be more convenient and
always consider, especially when running
accessible for many people. However,
engagement on high-stakes issues, that will
any moves online should be combined
consistently enhance access:
with focused support and training
for participants who require it and
measures to improve local access to
computers and the internet.
14 Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance 15Micro transitions
• Avoiding self-selection by using • Engaging with people on their benefit from longer-term community
targeted recruitment. Deliberative Box 7: Example: Camden terms and where they feel development work, perhaps including:
processes, user panels, focus groups Conversations: a family-led comfortable. The typical settings for
and other methods of engagement formal top-down engagement (council • The establishment of community
enquiry into child protection
often limit participation to a pre- chambers, local authority meeting support services to help build
services and grow social networks within
selected group. For instance, citizens’ rooms, school assembly halls etc)
assemblies involve a random-stratified In 2017, the Camden Family Advisory can feel overly formal and marked by and between communities,
sample of the local population, built to Board (FAB) - a group of parents and symbols of power and status, which facilitate engagement in traditionally
match pre-determined demographic grandparents with direct experience of will inevitably put some people off. marginalised groups and provide vital
criteria, whereas focus groups often Camden’s child protection system - led an Agencies should engage with people information about local participation
involve participants drawn from enquiry into options for making Camden’s where they feel comfortable – in opportunities.13
a single resident group. Running a child support services more effective local community-led spaces, on street • Supporting communities to create
citizens’ assembly alongside a more and inclusive. As well as co-designing the corners, in booths at street fairs or in their own social and civic spaces.
targeted process and comparing the research approach, six FAB members community WhatsApp groups. Spaces that are created by communities
results can allow agencies to ‘take were supported to conduct interviews In addition to the practical measures listed can be invaluable hubs for community-
the temperature’ of the wider public, and focus group discussions with local above, local and combined authorities led discussion, deliberation, learning,
without muffling the voice of those social workers and managers and residents should also consider how equitable skills development and relationship
communities most impacted by the who had been involved in child protection participation can be embraced strategically building, especially in more fragmented
topic of engagement. services. This research culminated in a as part of a long-term approach to or marginalised communities.
• Using straightforward, non- series of recommendations for Camden placemaking and community development. • Promoting civic education and
technical language. At all stages Safeguarding Children Partnership. participation in local schools and
Camden Conversations is a strong This could start with a thorough audit colleges and/or through specialist
of any engagement process –
example of peer-research methods being of local engagement, helping authorities citizens’ academies targeted at
recruitment/marketing, delivery, and
deployed by a council to (i) empower and to better understand who is currently marginalised segments of the
feedback – organisers should use
upskill local residents and (ii) build upon participating, who is not participating, community.14 This would allow young
simple language to avoid alienating non-
existing community relationships to hear how people are participating and which people to meet local leaders and learn
specialists and those who don’t speak
from different parts of a community.11 engagement approaches have worked well about different local participation
the language fluently.
in the past. While requiring some up- opportunities. A simple digital
• Using trained facilitators to front investment and ongoing light-touch
moderate discussions. For all forms marginalised communities, by engagement platform would enable
channelling their communication and evaluation work, such an audit would young people to regularly have a say
of participation that involve dialogue, show where the organisation’s resources
trained facilitation can help to mitigate marketing via trusted community in local issues as part of their civic
representatives and spokespeople. could be most strategically targeted and education and these classes could
power differences within the group, where future recruitment, sampling and
enabling all participants to work Organisers can also ask people become recruiting grounds for wider
who have previously participated to engagement should be prioritised.12 local engagement activities.
effectively and cooperatively together.
Maintaining a network of trained encourage their friends and family to As part of this audit, local authorities
facilitators, either within the local get involved – a process of recruitment should ask communities why they do or
authority or in the wider community, known as ‘snowball sampling’. For this do not participate in local democracy and
has the potential to transform the to work, local authorities will need to what would encourage and enable them to
quality of participation in a place. win the trust of prospective recruiters participate more.
and should ideally compensate them
• Working with partners from the for their time and effort. The audit would help authorities to
community. Building partnerships and understand where the most marginalised
trust across the local VCSE sector will and disempowered local communities live.
not only give local authorities a better These communities in particular would
awareness of more informal, bottom-
up forms of participation taking place in
their area, but also provide them with 12 Lightbody, R (2017) ‘Hard to reach’ or ‘easy to ignore’? Promoting equality
in community engagement. What Works Scotland.
additional publicity and recruitment
13 Ibid.
opportunities. For instance, authorities 11 Camden Conversations: our family-led child protection enquiry.
14 See Kirklees Council’s Democracy Friendly Schools programme for
might improve levels of engagement, Available at: www.camden.gov.uk/documents/20142/1006758/
a promising attempt to grow “confident active citizens of the future”
Camden+Conversations+-+full+report.pdf/675d7d6c-827b-a4ba-08a9-
particularly among traditionally 1fbaa9378d10
through democratic education in schools. Read more here: www.nesta.
org.uk/project-updates/nesta-democracy-pioneers-democracy-friendly-
schools/
16 Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance 17Micro transitions
Key recommendation build civic skills and confidence and offer Taking this developmental approach to following up on the implementation of
a varied range of participation options engagement will help agencies to build recommendations or continuing to act on
Local authorities should conduct to residents. Each individual participation more sustained participation journeys the issue at hand) or looser platforms into
an audit of local engagement, to event, no matter how small, should be out of discrete initiatives. It will work best which participants are able to direct their
get a better grasp of who is currently designed in such a way as to reaffirm local when local participation has a low floor newfound political energy. Local agencies
participating, who is not participating, relationships, relay helpful civic skills and and a high ceiling – if it’s easy for people could subsequently re-engage this group
how people are participating and which habits and redirect participants to future get involved in a light-touch way, and and involve them in designing, facilitating
engagement approaches have worked well engagement opportunities. subsequently possible for them to build and publicising future processes.
in the past. While requiring some up- and develop knowledge and experience
front investment and ongoing light-touch Whether a people’s gateway into local
Box 8: Example: Barking and and become more deeply involved in local
evaluation work, such an audit would participation is through thin informal
politics if they are able and inclined to do
show where the authority’s resources Dagenham’s Every One Every so. Convenient, low floor gateways to local
exchanges or thick deliberative forums,
could be most strategically targeted and Day initiative local agencies should seek to build
participation might include:
where future recruitment, sampling and residents’ confidence, their ability to
engagement should be prioritised. As Barking and Dagenham’s Every One Every • SMS or app-enabled engagement. participate and their understanding of
part of this audit, authorities should ask Day initiative was founded in 2017 with This could involve (i) ongoing text/ local politics and additional participation
communities why they do or do not the aim of building practical participation WhatsApp messaging between local opportunities. Providing varied
participate in local democracy and what (joint cooking, repairing, playing, learning, decision-makers and resident groups;16 opportunities for local engagement at
would encourage and enable them to gardening, or producing goods for (ii) more structured back-and-forth different levels is the best way for local
participate more. example) into the everyday life of people messaging based on pre-prepared authorities to avoid consultation fatigue
living in Barking and Dagenham. Every One text sequences which provide people while still encouraging regular, ongoing
Every Day is an attempt to turn Barking with information about a local issue participation.
Building sustained and Dagenham into a “large scale, fully and gather their input via text;17 or (iii)
inclusive, practical participatory ecosystem Key recommendation
participation journeys for … the first one of its kind in the world”,
through problem-reporting apps like
FixMyStreet. Based on the data that emerges from
residents as a means to building a participatory
• Highly social or ‘gamified’ the local engagement audit, local
culture in the borough. The first three authorities should develop a series of
Participatory democracy is commonly approaches to local participation.18
years of Every One Every Day saw over ‘participation personas’ (general profiles
associated with formal processes deployed Some people’s primary incentive for
6,000 people participate in over 140 new that show how different residents engage
during particular ‘decision moments’, but it participating might have little to do
projects, comprising 34,000 hours of with local agencies and public life more
is important not to lose sight of the more with shaping local policy. They may
community participation and enterprise. generally). Different participation journeys
informal, relational modes of participation be there for the free lunch or want to
The perceived impact of the initiative can then be designed to appeal to each of
that more accurately reflect most people’s meet their neighbours in a supportive –
among participants is impressive, with 80 these persona types and local agencies can
day-to-day experience of community and potentially fun - environment. Local
percent of respondents reporting higher curate a range of engagement approaches
participation. agencies should consider appealing
trust in neighbours, increased ‘vibrancy’ that will match the interests and priorities
to these motivations in their design
At its best, community participation can of Barking and Dagenham and increased of different people in the community.
and marketing of at least some local
be experienced as an ongoing journey built capacity to make collective decisions, and
engagement events. When designing engagement exercises,
on enduring relationships and, although 70 percent of respondents perceiving
local authorities can and should never increased community capacity to respond • Meeting local residents where they organisers should consider, from an early
seek to assert ‘ownership’ over all forms collectively to social, economic and are at - on doorsteps, in community- stage, how the exercise can enhance
of local participation, there is good reason environmental problems.15 led spaces, at street fairs or in other residents’ skills, build their confidence and
for them to try to establish the conditions informal settings. improve relationships and trust between
and incentives for more ongoing resident When it comes to more formal the local authority and community.
participation. engagement activities, organisers should
make a clear plan for how they intend
It is true that, for many residents,
to stay engaged with participants after
ongoing engagement with local agencies
the event. In the past, citizens’ assembly 16 Anecdotal evidence from our research interviews suggests SMS-enabled
is neither possible nor desirable (it may engagement has, at least in some areas, grown substantially during the
participants have formed alumni groups
feel repetitive or gratuitous, leading to pandemic.
to stay engaged after the process has
‘consultation fatigue’), but it might help 17 Leighninger, M. (2018) How Public Engagement Needs to Evolve, Part 2.
concluded. These can either be task- Available at: medium.com/on-the-agenda/how-public-engagement-needs-
to change things if local authorities invest 15 See Barking and Dagenham’s Every One Every Day. Impact. Available at:
oriented working groups (for instance, to-evolve-part-2-1934f065d09c
over time in local relationships, seek to www.weareeveryone.org/impact
18 For a detailed account of ‘gamified’ approaches to engagement see Lerner,
JA (2014). Making democracy fun: How game design can empower citizens
and transform politics. The MIT Press, London.
18 Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance Transitions to participatory democracy:18how to grow public participation in local goverance 19Meso transitions
Figure 4: Adapted spectrum of participation19
The nature and degree of influence that
Delegating decision- the public can realistically exert over public
making authority to policymaking and decision-making will
depend ultimately on why the authority is
residents inviting public participation. If the authority
Participatory initiatives are only as good as wants to consult the public for feedback
their real-world legacy. Effective processes on existing proposals, the degree of
will tend to have multiple positive impacts, influence will inevitably be much lower
including on the internal culture and than an agency intending to collaborate
practice of public authorities and the with residents in the development of
attitudes and behaviours of participants policy. This variability makes it very
and the wider community. But here we important for organisers to be categorical,
focus on the impact of participation on explicit and transparent about the aims
Accountability and transparency updates about policy change and
administrations’ policy- and decision- and remit of any participation process
cannot simply be achieved through implementation and to clearly publicise
making. Without sincere buy-in by local they run. If participants understand the
communications in the run-up to an and (if necessary) justify the final
powerholders, even skilfully designed, well- terms on which they are participating and
engagement process. As the table above decision.
intentioned engagement activities will be the influence they can expect to have –
implies, it is equally important for public • Be transparent about where
little more than ‘participatory theatre’. even if this is relatively limited in scope
authorities to follow-up with residents responsibility for the decision
– they are far less likely to be dispirited
Even cosmetic forms of engagement during the process to explain what is lies and how the local political
by the process and better able to hold
can enable authorities to familiarise happening and afterwards to explain how system works, including the role
the commissioning authority to account
themselves with different methods and the public input will influence the final of local politicians and other local
if they break the terms of engagement. It
design features of participatory democracy. decision. powerholders. A ‘family tree of local
helps to involve politicians in negotiation
Once authorities have ‘learned the script’, democracy’, as proposed by the
around the appropriate scope and remit Residents will likely be put off from
they may feel more comfortable investing Kirklees Democracy Commission,
of a participation exercise – they will have participating again if the commissioning
greater influence in participatory processes could demonstrate key powerholders
a strong sense of the political constraints authority is not communicative or
or experimenting with more ambitious and significant relationships in local
and leverage points that determine where transparent, regardless of whether they
participatory models. politics.
action is feasible. had any influence over the final decision(s).
However, we would never recommend It is important for public authorities, In some cases, it might also be valuable to
Figure 4 shows how different aims of
running an engagement process on a especially on high-stakes issues, to: support resident-led working groups
participation correspond with different
topic where there is no room for public or scrutiny committees to monitor the
forms of public messaging, helping • Clearly communicate the timeline
influence. If a final decision has already uptake of resident input over time and
organisers to manage expectations and of decision-making, the programme
been made and residents feel that their help communicate progress with the wider
create a degree of accountability in their of implementation and key
voice has been ignored, they will likely public.
public communications leading up to an milestones along the way. One
become disheartened and less willing
engagement process. option would be for public authorities Although organisers will need to prioritise
to participate in the future. Likewise, in
to release publicly accessible certain issues on which higher levels of
instances where public engagement has
calendars showing decision-making shared decision authority is appropriate
led to little change in the past, this needs
timetables, key milestones and any and feasible (public authorities need to
to be acknowledged, and accountability
additional participation opportunities. allocate their limited resources strategically
taken if communities are to trust any future
It is important to provide regular and there are many low-stakes decisions
process.
19 This diagram is adapted from Nabatchi, T and
Leighninger, M (2015) Op Cit.
20 Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance 21Meso transitions
that do not necessarily require such deep North Ayrshire’s locality planning Box 2: Key challenge 1: securing political buy-in for ambitious
and influential engagement), we would partnerships have evolved over
time to equalise the power and forms of resident engagement
encourage local authorities to routinely
consider more empowering forms of responsibility held by elected members
and community representatives. Councillors are essential to the success of participatory processes. As civic leaders and
engagement, as a means to authentically The council’s local grants budget is community representatives, they are the ideal people to champion local participatory
demonstrating and building trust with dispensed through participatory democracy. They are also well-placed to advise on local political constraints helping
residents. budgeting (PB) processes which organisers determine an appropriate scope and remit for engagement. And most
are overseen by these planning importantly, they ultimately decide whether residents’ feedback and/or proposals
From our conversations we have identified partnerships.
three structural/legal shifts that could ultimately influence local decisions. Without broad political support, any significant changes
complement the principles of transparency 3 Local agencies create new to engagement practice within an authority will likely be transient. However, public
and accountability set out above and institutions for public participation. participation can seem a challenge to elected authority and councillors’ traditional role
help to guarantee more impactful public Some local and regional authorities, as the primary – and relatively autonomous – representatives of local residents. Political
engagement exercises: primarily outside the UK, have gone accountability ultimately rests with politicians, so councillors often fear they will be in the
an extra step and created entirely new firing line if a process goes badly.
1 Local agencies commit to giving bodies that can help to ‘institutionalise’
residents greater influence over In trying to bring councillors – and other senior figures in an authority – on board with a
public influence over political decision- participatory process it’s important to consider the following:
local decisions. This is the most making. We consider different
straightforward path towards greater approaches to ‘institutionalisation’ in • How to make a case for participation that aligns with a councillor’s existing
power sharing and might involve: the next section. values. Involve have set out a range of different arguments that can help to persuade
a. Putting options to the community stakeholders.
at an early stage when there
Key recommendation
• It can help to involve councillors in the design process and invite them to
is a greater scope to influence Local and regional agencies should start engagement sessions to familiarise them with the mechanics of the process and its aims
the process. For instance, giving experimenting more routinely with and desired outcomes.
residents the power to set the upstream and empowering engagement
agenda, terms and remit for an approaches that fall towards the higher end • A number of authorities have created public engagement ‘charters’ or ‘ordinances’
agency’s policymaking process. of the participation spectrum. This might to demystify participation and support inter-council advocacy, setting out a (i) shared
include: vision for local democracy; (ii) series of principles that characterise good engagement;
b. Setting conditions under which
(iii) range of methods that have previously worked; (iv) summary of evidence on
the public authority is bound to
• Establishing spaces where the why and when participation is valuable; (v) an outline of roles different stakeholders,
implement residents’ proposals,
power dynamic between residents including councillors, can play in local participation.
or reducing its power to reject
and elected representatives • Participatory processes can give councillors a mandate to act on contentious and
community proposals outright.
is genuinely equal and shared. difficult issues. Understanding which decisions are challenging for councillors and
In Gdasńk, Poland, the mayor is The Locality Planning Partnerships explaining that engagement can provide them with confidence and legitimacy to act,
required to run a citizens’ assembly established in some Scottish local can be key to securing their support.
on any proposals with at least authorities and the mixed deliberative
5,000 signatures. As well as giving committees operating in Brussels both • Councillors are likely to play a subtly different role in a more participatory democracy –
residents agenda-setting power, the they will sometimes enable and convene, rather than always drive change. Councillor
local municipality is also bound to provide compelling prototypes for this
implementing any proposal that kind of collaboration. training, peer-support and induction call help to create new norms, expectations
receives over 80 percent support among • Trialling approaches that put final and standards in the local authority for what characterises a ‘successful’ local politician.
the citizens’ assembly participants. decision-making in the hands of Listening to residents, responding to their concerns and forging relationships within the
the public. For some time, Scottish community should all be seen as core competencies that help councillors to fulfil their
2 Local agencies involve community duties as a local representative.
representatives in existing decision- councils have been deploying forms
making forums. We have heard of participatory budgeting to allocate • Participatory initiatives should not be used for political point-scoring. The
stories of UK councils changing the public money. This has signalled to integrity and legitimacy of participatory democracy depends on it being at least
makeup of ward level decision-making residents a clear intent to build a more somewhat insulated from partisan loyalties. It helps if senior politicians, particularly in
forums to include residents and responsive local democracy, while also the majority party, try to establish consensus and support for participation across the
community figures, thereby creating priming the ground for larger decisions aisle.
a space where the power dynamic is being put in the hands of the public in
more genuinely equal and shared. the future.
22 Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance 23Meso transitions
patterns and staff skills and behaviours. government-commissioned Innovation in
Embedding participation The best participatory experiments
Box 4: Innovation without
Democracy Programme (IiDP).22
as standard practice experimentation: The Royal
are catalysts for lasting change in the
Observatory of Madrid There is no single roadmap to
institutions that commission them. A UK
As we argued in the first section of this institutionalisation - it will always
government evaluation of participatory The Madrid Observatory, an ambitious
report, rather than taking a scientific be complex, contextual, and messy.
budgeting – a budgetary approach that is attempt at institutionalising public
approach to method-selection, it is Institutional change should be the
currently being ‘mainstreamed’ by many deliberation, suggests some risks of
advisable for processes to be designed culmination of sustained experimentation
Scottish local authorities - suggested that taking more ‘prescriptive’ approaches
through engagement with a series of open and evaluation, design and redesign.
processes can inspire far-reaching cultural to embedding innovation. Having been
questions about the aims of the process Rather than an end point on a journey,
change in public sector bodies, encouraging instituted in the highest level of municipal
(the why?), the context within which it’s the mainstreaming of participation is a
them to share power more systematically law, the design and terms of reference
being conducted (the where?), the people significant step on the journey towards
with communities.20 of the new body had to be established
that need to have a voice in the process more consistent and empowering
(the who?) and the resources and assets The shift from small grant participatory in advance through negotiation with the local participation. Rather than
the public agency has at its disposal to run budgeting to ‘mainstream’ participatory municipal authority. Although this gave the stifling innovation, it should create
the process and follow-up on its outcomes budgeting in Scotland has been the new body legal status, the absence of prior a more enabling context for future
(the how?). culmination of a sustained period of testing and iteration meant the body had experimentation and learning.
piloting, evaluation, upskilling and learning, shallow roots in the municipal system and
As part of this planning process, organisers lacked sufficient political support. After Key recommendation
through which participatory budgeting
should consider the intended impact of the only a matter of months, the Observatory
tools and methods have been refined and Following international best practice,
project on institutional culture, working was disbanded by the newly elected local and regional authorities in the
government. The Observatory may have UK should experiment with and, over
Box 3: Institutionalising public deliberation fared better had it been proceeded by a time, seek to institutionalise robust
more agile piloting process to refine the forms of public deliberation, either
The creation of new standing deliberative bodies model, grow its legitimacy and build cross- through the creation of new standing
party support. deliberative bodies or the specification
• In Ostbelgien (the German-speaking community of Belgium) a permanent, randoly
selected citizens’ council can set the agenda for up to three separate citizens’ adapted. This spirit of experimentation of definite conditions under which
assemblies each year. persists, even where participatory public deliberation is required of a local/
budgeting has been mainstreamed. Fife combined authority.23 In the UK context,
• In Madrid, a since-disbanded ‘observatory’ of randomly selected residents was the scrutiny function could provide a good
council, for example, have been exploring
instituted to monitor municipal action and recommend improvements. It could also ‘dock’ for new institutions (as suggested
options for sequencing a future visioning
propose city-wide referendums on issues proposed by citizens using the online citizen by the Newham Democracy and Civic
process, a citizens’ jury and a public vote as
participation tool CONSUL. Participation Commission). However, these
a means to allocate large-scale budgets.
• In Toronto, randomly-selected ‘reference panels’ meet every two months for two processes should be designed ground
North Ayrshire Council is similarly up, tailored to local institutional contexts
years. One discusses the city’s public transport and the other discusses planning
exploring ways of applying principles and refined through agile piloting. The
issues.
of participatory budgeting across the institutionalisation of deliberation should
The requirement for deliberative engagement in certain circumstances board, including in the commissioning not preclude or stifle ongoing learning,
and procurement of services, local capital experimentation, evaluation and innovation
• In Oregon, the Citizens’ Initiative Review is formalised in the state’s referendum
spending, service redesign, community and its viability will depend on not being
process. A group of 24 randomly selected residents weigh up the pros and cons
asset ownership and service evaluation overly allied with any one political agenda
of the referendum options and release a statement which is included in the official
participation, creating economies of scale or party.
voters’ pamphlet.
for public authorities. Two of the most
• In the Austrian state of Vorarlberg, 1,000 signatures proposing a particular topic ambitious models forauthorities seeking to
triggers a government-sponsored citizens’ council. hard-wire participatory and deliberative 21 Earlier this year, Newham Council became the first in the UK to commit
processes into their standard decision- itself to a ‘permanent citizens’ assembly’. Newham residents have voted
• In Gdańsk, Poland, the mayor is required to run a citizens’ assembly on any proposals for the assembly to focus first on ‘greening the borough’.
making procedures.21 The mainstreaming
with at least 5,000 signatures. 22 The RSA, Involve, the Democratic Society, mySociety (2020). How to
PB agenda reflects a growing global run a citizens’ assembly: A handbook for local authorities based on the
20 According to the UK PB Network, “the challenge of Mainstream PB trend of local and regional This can Innovation in Democracy Programme. Available at: www.thersa.org/
is to enable citizens to have their say, and be involved at all stages of
the commissioning cycle”. It reflects a goal “for PB to move beyond
help to guarantee and regularise public globalassets/reports/2020/iidp-citizens-assembly.pdf
its predominant model of allocating small pots of money… towards ‘institutionalising’ public deliberation were 23 The OECD have outlined a set of good practice principles for robust
public deliberation. Available at: www.oecd.org/gov/open-government/
repeatedly distributing mainstream public budgets”. Available at: summarised in the final report of the UK good-practice-principles-for-deliberative-processes-for-public-decision-
pbnetwork.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/PB-Mainstreaming.pdf
making.pdf
24 Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance Transitions to participatory democracy: how to grow public participation in local goverance 25You can also read
