Citizen participation check tool

VERSION BÊTA | À NE PAS DIFFUSER

A tool to help you ask yourself the right questions before implementing a citizen participation process

Start

The participation therapist

ABOUT

This tool has been created by Christophe Gouache, designer-researcher from Strategic Design Scenarios and Lead Expert of the URBACT Active Citizens network (network of 8 cities from 7 European countries working on participatory democracy). This tool has been developed thanks to the experience and lessons learnt from the Active Citizens network and years of field experience with local authorities in Europe.It is meant to help civil servants and/or elected officials in reflecting about citizen participation (opportunities, format, etc.). This tool can be used as a check list of questions to ask yourself before setting up any participatory process. This tool is experimental and free to use. Please don't hesitate to share feedback about it by sending an email to christophe@strategicdesignscenarios.net.

START NOW

about this tool

return

I GET IT !

– WARNING –

The Participation Therapist is here to help you ask yourself the right questions before designing a participatory approach... You will therefore have to make choices over the questions, however, the tool does not record your choices, so don't hesitate to take note of them as you go along (or to take screenshots of the tips).

Progression 12,5%

First... Do you think (and truly believe) that adding a citizen perspective to your project/subject is a good thing to do and that it could enrich your project/subject?

return

NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT!

YES, CLEARLY!

TO GET STARTED...

WHAT'S THE PROBLEM?

Ah... Looks like we might have an issue here...

return

"I have been asked to set up a participatory process but i don't think it's a good idea."

Click on the card that best fits your situation

"Citizen participation? Hell no!"

return

play

“Citizen participation slows down every process or project’, ‘citizen participation is useless because citizens are not experts!’, ‘it’s too complicated to work with citizens’, ‘citizens are better at complaining, than at finding solutions’, ‘citizens have no interest in public actions & matters’, ‘no need for citizen participation, we already work with NGOs, unions and associations of consumers’, ‘with citizens, conversations always remain superficial and without depth’…There are many reasons, pretexts, arguments for not doing citizen participation... and they've all been gathered into a game!Citizen participation? Hell no! is a card game created by Christophe Gouache for the Active Citizens URBACT network. The game is meant to put everything on the table, to speak out, frankly, honestly, about all the reasons, pretexts, arguments for NOT installing participatory processes... We know from experience that acknowledging and identifiying these difficulties contributes to better taking care of them, and even trying to solve, deal, respond or counter them. So... we invite you to try the game and see!

Citizen participation?Hell no!

Often, we think it's not a good idea just because we are not aware of the spectrum of possibilities. Indeed, do you know all the forms of participatory processes? You know that you can invent your own? Indeed there is no single recipe for participation. You can invent the format you think is the most pertinent, coherent, achievable, useful, etc. A citizen-based process can take weeks and months, but it can also just take a few days or a couple of hours depending on what you do. Everything is possible. This Participation Therapist is here to enable you to better judge what would make sense in terms of participation process. But it's also fine if by the end of the check you come to the conclusion that implementing a participatory process, in your situation, does not make any sense.

YOU'VE BEEN ASKED TO SET UP A PARTICIPATORY PROCESS BUT DON'T THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA?

return

CONSULT THE THERAPIST

Progression 25%

* There is no right or wrong answer to any of the questions.

a research project

other

A PUBLIC CHOICE

A PUBLIC SERVICE

AN URBAN PROJECT

A public policy

return

A STRATEGY, A PLAN

WHAT TYPE OF PROJECT DO YOU WISH TO INVOLVE CITIZENS IN?

Progression 37,5%

Experimentation, test phase

Choice, decision and arbitration phase

Evaluation phase

return

Ideation phase, brainstorming

Diagnosis, investigation phase

Nowhere. It did notstart yet.

AT WHAT STAGE ARE YOU IN YOUR PROJECT?

Progression 50%

<- There are no wrong choice! ->

return

A SMALL SAMPlE OF CITIZENS (QUOTA, SPECIFIC PROFILES, ETC.)

the largest possible number of citizens (NUMEROUS, DIVERSE)

WHO DO YOU WISH TO INVOLVE IN YOUR PROCESS?

examples: Citizens' Assembly, Citizens' Convention, Mini Jury, Focus Group, Representative Sample, Neighborhood Table, Call for Citizen Volunteers, etc.

return

Depending on projects, you might wish to involve only a small sample of citizens (5, 15, 30 inhabitants?) rather than a big crowd. When you do so, you need to consider the characteristics you're looking for: it might be specific ages, specific socio-economic levels, specific education levels, gender, geographical location, social practices, etc. Whether you're gathering a small group or a big crowd, you shall always ensure to have a variety of voices in your process. Within the group, everyone must also be able to express themselves and contribute fairly (not just those who speak louder than others).Keep in mind that it's your duty and responsibility to ensure that the citizens who contribute are as heterogeneous as possible. You could, for example, consider having some (or all) of your citizens drawn at random from the population, or call for volunteers and then select the profiles to get as much diversity as possible...

Continue

A SMALL SAMPLE OF CITIZENS

Keep in mind that it's your duty and responsibility to ensure that the citizens who contribute are, on the other hand, as heterogeneous as possible. If 80% of your participants are retired, white people, that's probably not a good reflection of your population... In the same way, you need to make sure that the citizens taking part are not only those who are militants or activists, but also "ordinary", "lambdas" citizens who are not politically or socially involved.

If you want to reach as many citizens as possible, the specific profile of each participant is generally of little importance (compared to a representative, statistical sample). In fact, what we're looking for is to reach or involve as many citizens as possible. But to reach a crowd of citizens, it is often necessary to go beyond the usual format of workshops and/or neighborhood meetings... You can multiply the number of meetings/workshops, but also set up your process outside, in the public space, join a popular festival to reach people randomly, but also to implement combined participatory methods to multiply the participation channels (for example, combining participation in the street + series of evening workshops + online platform, etc.). Keep in mind that it's your duty and responsibility to ensure that the citizens who contribute are, on the other hand, as heterogeneous as possible. If 80% of your participants are retired, white people, that's probably not a good reflection of your population... In the same way, you need to make sure that the citizens taking part are not only those who are militants or activists, but also "ordinary", "lambdas" citizens who are not politically or socially involved.

return

examples: Collection in public spaces, online consultation, major events, G1000, door-to-door, series of participatory sessions, citizen meetings, etc.

Continue

THE LARGEST POSSIBLE NUMBER OF CITIZENS

return

In participatory approaches, it's always the same users who are consulted and get involved... These are the "usual suspects". We see them all the time, but what's important is to get the voices of those who don't come, those who don't feel legitimized to express themselves...*.

We have to go beyond the "usual suspects!"

The "usual suspects ?"

return

* Think of all the profiles you can't get involved in... An active worker, a single parent, an precarious person, a racialized person, an LGBTQIA+ person, an immigrant person, etc. If you want to involve them, it's up to you to invent adhoc participation methods.

OKAY, I'LL BE CAREFUL

Progression 62,5%

recommendations, citizens' expertise, knowledge and experience

citizens' choices, decisions on a project/subject

citizens' ideas, solutions, even projects

PUBLIC OPINION, PEOPLE'S IMPRESSIONS

return

WHAT KIND OF CITIZEN INPUT DO YOU WISH TO GET?

return

Go to next question

You're looking for citizens' point of view? You wish to see if they would approve or disapprove a decision, a project? This type of inputs can usually be found in consultation process, non-binding referendums or voting process. This type of participation can be tricky depending on how it is announced. Indeed, you need to make sure to announce clearly and transparently the rules from the very beginning: for example: "This process is only meant to collect citizens' views regarding the question X but the results will not have, in any case, legal and binding power." This type of process is usually done to check the citizens' position regarding a question, a project, prior to its implementation and/or development. Make sure that you give the right informations, context and data for citizens to be able to formulate their opinions beyond their gut feeling only.

Public opinion, people's impressions

return

Go to next question

Citizens have a wide range of expertise. Either because of their own abilities and experiences (professional, personal, etc.), but alsobecause of their empirical knowledge of their cities and expertise in the use of public services (schools, job centers, etc.), facilities or infrastructures (swimming pools, libraries, etc.), or public policy measures (calls for projects, subsidies, etc.).Depending on what subject you're working on, involving citizens might be a good way to enlarge perspectives over a problem and gather recommendations rich in diversity. For example, citizens are usually good experts of their own neighbourhood: they're familiar with mobility practices, security (accidents, safety feeling), social cohesion, shops, etc. As direct users of public space their expertise might be very useful when re-designing a square, a park, a street. They also have valuable experience of public services and their recommendations can be very useful in improving public action (complex social aid processes, confusing tax declaration procedures, badly designed administrative forms, etc.).

Citizens' recommendations

return

Go to next question

You wish citizens to propose ideas? To come up with solutions? To suggest projects? This type of input is very useful in the ideation/co-creation phase of a public policy, an urban project or a public service, but also upstream of a project to explore desirable scenarios... because it expands the scope of possible solutions (politicians and civil servants are not the only ones able to come up with solutions). Collecting citizens' ideas can be very useful in situations in which you're looking for fresh and alternate perspectives. Keep in mind that ideation can be stimulated with creativity tools but also good benchmarking. Calls for citizen projects, participatory budgets, etc. can also be useful instruments for enabling citizens to implement some of their ideas and/or projects.What matters is to get as many good ideas as possible, regardless of where it comes from. So the more people contribute, the better.

Citizens' ideas, solutions, even projects

return

Go to next question

You wish to give citizens decision powers? You want them to choose? Be very careful, honest and transparent about your process. Do you ask them for their preferences (for guidance only)? Or do you ask them to actually decide (or co-decide)? The first one means that citizens' choices are only used as an indicator or support for later political decision making. While in the second case, citizens are given real decision-making power, and the results of these decisions must be respected. In France, in 2005, a referendum regarding the European Constitution was launched. Citizens massively rejected the constitution. But the government decided not to take the citizens' choice into account and decided to approve the constitution anyway, regardless of the results of the referendum. This was felt by everyone as a democratic masquerade and led to a loss of trust.If you give real power decisions or just indicative ones, it does not really matter. Both are acceptable as long as the rules are very clear from the beginning. And that they are not changed without discussion...

Citizens' choices, decisions

Progression 75%

return

PUNCTUAL PARTICIPATION (WORKSHOP, MEETING, event, FOCUS GROUPS, ETC.)

TO WHAT DEGREE DO YOU WISH TO INVOLVE CITIZENS?

lengtHy PARTICIPATION (series of meetings, council, PERMANENT committee, etc.)

return

Go to next question

For citizens, participating to public processes can be tiresome, complicated, time-consuming, constraining, etc. Whether you run punctual participation or lenghty formats, you need to take care of citizens who participate. That means having the reflex of basic hospitality rules such as offering drinks and food, proposing a pleasurable experience, designing a process that is respectful of people's time and energy (avoiding never ending meetings that last hours and hours but also stressful events in which time has not been well evaluated and citizens are pressurized). Punctual participation is great because it allows citizens to come and go, to give a light contribution... it can be an interview of 5 min in the street, a little survey of 15 min, a small workshop or focus group of 1 or 2 hours... and then it's over. From a few minutes to a day, one-off participation has the advantage of being light and therefore more inclusive (it reaches more people than the "usual" participative citizens). Punctual participation can be a great addon for policy making processes as it allows 'injecting' citizens inputs into policies without having to set up big complicated processes.

Punctual participation

return

Go to next question

Depending on the topic, subject or project, long run participation processes can be useful and even necessary. Yet, it is important to identify here 2 types of processes: the ones that are long but non-permanent (meaning they'll come to an end at some point, e.g. an ephemeral Citizens' Assembly destined to disappear once its advice or recommendations have been issued) and the ones that are permanent. The Irish Constitutional Convention (2012) or the French Citizens Climate Convention (2019) are good examples of the first case. These deliberative 'mini-publics' are working for a rather long period of time with several meetings to generate proposals, recommandations, etc. and then, once done, dissasemble. Alongside, you have 'permanent' participation, such as neighborhood councils, citizens' committees, youth councils, etc., made up of residents who are there, potentially, for several years. They usually are consulted on a regular basis by the local government regarding district projects, and sometimes are given specific responsibilities, roles and/or dedicated budget to carry on actions. Being an active and engaged citizen can be a lot of work. And usually not compensated work. So be careful not to over 'exploit' citizens or over-solicit them. Take care of them. They're precious. Make sure you apply basic hospitality rules and recognition (drinks, meals, comfort, friendliness, respect, possible compensation, etc.).

Lengthy participation

Progression 87,5%

Yes, it's complex and requires citizens to develop their skills

It requires a bit of info and knowledge but clearly not much

return

No, it's easy and does not require any particular info or knowledge

DO CITIZENS NEED TO BE INFORMED, TRAINED, ENLIGHTED TO BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE/DELIBERATE?

No prior information, training, reading, etc. is required to participate in your process. Citizens can come as they are, without worrying about knowing anything specific about the subject. BUT, make sure throughout the process that citizens are comfortable, understand what's expected of them, and what's at stake. Make sure you use clear, visual language, and don't hesitate to take time to explain things again if some are misunderstood. It's your duty to be inclusive and therefore accessible to all, which means taking into account language and cultural issues, as well as the feeling of illegitimacy that some citizens may have.

CONCLUDE

return

No, it's easy and does not require any particular informations or knowledge

During the process, you'll need to provide participants with some basic information, context and data, but nothing extraordinary or particularly complex. However, make sure that all participants understand the information provided to them. Ask them if they understand. You can even ask them to explain again, in their own words, what they understood from what you presented to them. Don't hesitate to use examples, diagrams, visuals, figures, case studies, etc. to maximize comprehension. Not everyone has the same educational and cultural background, make sure to be accessible to all.

CONCLUDE

return

It requires a bit of informations and knowledge but clearly not much

Your topic is complex (whether technical, legal, systemic, etc.) and needs to be explained in depth to ensure that participants acquire knowledge and understanding of the overall situation, the issues at stake... In this case, take the time to explain things. Bring in experts, witnesses, etc. Be sure to set aside time for Q&A, debates and discussions. Also consider the timing of your process. It's sometimes useful to split your process into several meetings to avoid the feeling of being overwhelmed by informations that you don't have the time or the ability to metabolize. Finally, make sure you use accessible and clear language. Ask citizens if everything is clear or if they are in difficulty. This is your responsibility.

CONCLUDE

return

Yes, it's complex and requires citizens to develop their skills

Progression 100%

I GET IT !

return

If you've asked yourself all the previous questions and were able to choose options you should now have a clearer view of what your participatory process could look like, who are the people you're looking for, the types of inputs you'd like to get, the format, etc. Remember that each process is unique and that you can be creative about the methods and formats. Democratic innovations are generated by people who dare to try, experiment new ways of giving voice, space and power to citizens. The more our democracy re-invents itself, the more dynamic and lively it will be. BUT remember also, that it's not because you wish to develop citizen participation that it means you should turn every single policymaking process and project into a participatory process. You have to do it when you judge it the most useful, pertinent and necessary. Finally, consider evaluating your process...

YOU'RE GOOD TO GO! BUT BEFORE YOU LEAVE...

We hope the Participation Therapist was helpful. Don't hesitate to send us comments and feedbacks by sending an email to christophe@strategicdesignscenarios.net if you have any suggestions to improve the tool.

Thank you.