Municipal, provincial and even central authorities around the world are increasingly resorting to new methods to involve their electorates in consultation and decision making.
In part – as, arguably, in Edinburgh – these are politically motivated moves to stave off voter backlashes in difficult times; in part, they are genuine efforts to bolster democracies against voter indifference, cynicism or disengagement.
For purposes of comparison, we thought it might be interesting to look at six such exercises, starting with Edinburgh’s. Would any of the alternative models appeal to you more?
Budget Information and Engagement Exercise, Edinburgh[img_assist|nid=1259|title=|desc=|link=node|align=right|width=200|height=123]
- Distribution online and via Outlook magazine of 8 themed questions on key budget decisions. Feedback to CEC.
- Six local summits in city Neighbourhood areas. Voting on same 8 questions with electronic keypads. ‘Scribes’ noted debate and fed comments/suggestions into the process.
- Encouragement of smaller summits with responses to 8 questions sent to CEC.
- Citywide Summit and budget meetings held with Edinburgh Youth Forum and Edinburgh Equality Network.
- Encouragement of emails to CEC.
- 900 responses to online survey; 400 responses via Outlook or other; c.300 attended local summits; 120 attended City Summit.
- Find out more about the Budget Information and Engagement Exercise.
Participatory Budgeting, Brazil[img_assist|nid=1260|title=|desc=|link=node|align=right|width=200|height=140]
- First introduced in 1989 in Porto Alegre by a new Workers Party mayor to allow redistributive policies in face of endemic political corruption and clientelism.
- Once a year, 16 area-based popular assemblies vote on local and regional priorities for spending on e.g. roads, sewerage, health services. They elect representatives to a regional budget forum (the greater the turnout, the greater the number of reps) and to a Council of the Participatory Budget (2 reps per area).
- Regional forums prioritise the priorities and monitor City’s implementation of them. CPB decides on funding of the priorities in different areas, with rules focusing resources on areas of relative poverty or weak infrastructure. Mayor submits CPB’s decisions to City legislature for approval.
- System encourages mass participation at the base, and avoids narrow partisanship at the top. Effective in redistributing resources. Now popular across Brazil, with similar experiments spreading to Europe, Asia, Africa and North America.
- Find out more about Participatory Budgeting and its application in Bristol.
Womenspeak and HeadsUp, UK[img_assist|nid=1261|title=|desc=|link=node|align=right|width=200|height=132]
- First organised by the Hansard Society in 2000 and 2003 to gather evidence from politically marginalised social groups: female victims of domestic violence; young people aged under 18.
- In Womenspeak, 200 participants registered on a moderated, secure website. Communicated with each other under pseudonyms and replied to MPs’ questions and observations. These conversations not in real-time, so participants could choose when convenient.
- Useful enfranchisement of normally unheard groups. Requirement for technical and emotional support, plus involvement of trusted third parties (e.g. women’s refuges for access to ICT).
- Find out more about Womenspeak and HeadsUp.
21st Century Town Meeting, USA[img_assist|nid=1262|title=|desc=|link=node|align=right|width=200|height=121]
- Innovation developed by America Speaks in 1990s. One-day events run on condition that 'governmental' bodies agree to attend and respond. Most famous example discussed rebuilding of Lower Manhattan post-9/11.
- Involve 500–5,000 ‘representative’ citizens, initially split into groups of 10–12, discuss issue with aid of independent mediator. Ideas fed into networked computer. Expert team gather/interpret views and broadcast results + supplementary data to all in real-time via giant video screen. Collective voting by electronic keypads.
- Potential for simultaneous meetings in separate locations.
- Large scale stimulates media attention and public interest. Expensive. How truly representative are attendees? Can one trust independence of mediators? Govt decisionmakers may attend and respond, but no guarantee that they will act.
- Find out more about 21st Century Town Meeting.
Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform, British Columbia[img_assist|nid=1263|title=|desc=|link=node|align=right|width=200|height=120]
- Set up by Canadian provincial government in 2004 to circumvent party-political stalemate over review or reform of electoral system. Prior commitment to put recommendations to a referendum.
- 1 man and 1 woman randomly selected from each of 79 electoral districts, plus 2 native Canadians. Over 11 months, 160 participants learned about electoral systems, in 50 hearings took evidence from citizens, special interests and experts, received 1.5K+ written submissions, discussed and debated findings. Finally recommended change to the system, which was rejected in a subsequent referendum.
- Random ‘mini–public’ not as random as it seemed due to self-selection, sampling errors, hidden quotas, but more representative than other democratic institutions. Prepared to learn and think beyond partisan allegiances. Costly in terms of time and budget.
- Find out more about the Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform.
As you might expect, there are extensive academic and lay literatures on public participation, but Wikipedia and peopleandparticipation.net are accessible places to start. AM