|
|
|
|
| Involving Civil Society in the Work of Parliaments |
| 2.7 Summary of Civic Participation Innovations |
|
Method |
No of citi- zens |
Cost |
Selection Process |
Links to Policy Process |
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
|
Citizens' Jury |
12 - 25 (single jury) 500 or more (if juries run consecutively) 100,000(project with 250 citizens) |
16,000 -20,000 (single Jury) |
SIngle CJs - stratified random
sample
Large projects - random |
Contract with public authority which commits the authority to respond to the citizens' findings. | CJs can be used for a wide range
of Issues and at various levels from very local to national.
Can be empowering for those taking part and an lead on to higher level of civic participation. There is a higher interest in participating in CJs than in CCs. |
Only a small number of citizens
can take part in a single jury so there are problems about the representativeness
of the jury's findings.
If several panels are run at once to increase the number of citizens participating, the cost becomes much higher. |
|
Consensus Conference |
10 - 16 (Plus audience of around 300) |
34,000 (Denmark) 104,000 (UK) |
Two-stage process:
(I) self selecting citizens respond to ads. (ii) final panel selected by socia- demographic criteria |
Linked in Denmark to the Parliamentary Research Committee. | Citizens can have an Input into
policy making on areas of policy that require expert knowledge.
Given sufftcient media attention, the process can be a good way of getting information across to the public and stimulating public debate. |
Only a small number of cItizens
can take part.
The distinction between expert and lay citizens is more marked In this process and problems of ensuring that a balanced is presented to the citizens Is therefore more acute. |
|
Deliberative Opinion Polls |
250-600 |
Stratified random samples | Not yet linked to policy process but may affect public policy (as in Texas example above) | Larger numbers of citizens can
be involved. Those taking part are exposed to a wider variety of views from
fellow citizens.
Flshkin's polls have all been televised so the debate reaches a wide audience. Citizens are not required to achieve consensus so it Is a good way of measuring diversity. |
There is a lower level of deliberation and a lower level of information is given to the citizens than is the case with citizens' juries or consensus conferences. | |
|
Citizens' Panel |
500-3000 (can be more) |
Stratified random samples | Results are presented to the Council and passed on to the Directorates to be taken into account In polIcy formation. | This method is useful for monitoring
citizen opinion over time.
It is cheaper than a one-off survey of public opinion Large numbers of citizens can be involved. |
This is the least 'deliberative' method of those we have considered. Very little, If any, information is sent out to those taking part. Citizens often do not meet face to face, although they can be brought together in smaller groups for discussion. |
|
|
|