Expanding "Public Participation" in Hard Times
by Tom Atlee (July 2009)
Most governing bodies face a situation of rapidly growing governance
challenges while resources needed to address these challenges shrink
significantly.
In my own networks I hear increasing concern that
economic, social, and environmental crises may combine into disasters
that overwhelm traditional democratic institutions and leadership.
Public officials seem increasingly interested in public
participation -- from the Obama administration down to my hometown
of Eugene, Oregon. But I hear complaints about lack of adequate
resources to manage it. It seems to me there are powerful inexpensive
approaches -- both face-to-face and online -- that can be leveraged
to engage people in ways that actually lighten the load and expense
of government, especially when we tap into people's existing passion
to make a difference.
In a project like Eugene, Oregon's current program
to create a plan to address climate change and the energy crunch,
public activity may well be central to its success. The public can
get involved in action even while they participate in formulating
the City's plan. There's no need to wait through a period of "all
talk and no action."
I have come to believe that in the current climate,
those communities and institutions will do best who most successfully
create conditions within which their constituents can actively and
successfully self-organize. This means they not only function with
less resources and management from the top, but also can effectively
contribute to -- and rework as necessary -- the creation and implementation
of government policies and programs.
This prospect, which in more affluent, stable times
may have seemed an idealistic form of participatory democracy, is
beginning to look more like a necessity as we confront conditions
of real resource scarcity. I think this is one reason why "public
participation" is becoming a more mainstream topic in government
circles. (Another reason is the hope of reducing the tendency of
a stressed public to blame "the government".)
To the extent we choose to move in this direction
consciously, we need to extend our vision of participatory governance
to embrace citizen engagement not only in decision-making but also
in action and the kind of review, evaluation and course-correction
that characterize collective learning. Collaboration would come
to mean real ongoing partnership between officials and community
because the situations we face are simply too challenging to handle
otherwise.
The International Association for Public Participation
has a "Spectrum
of Public Participation" showing increasing levels of public
engagement in decision-making. I imagine a parallel spectrum articulating
levels of public engagement in ACTION -- perhaps ranging from compliance,
to partnership in implementation, to government-catalyzed but self-organized
citizen and community action, extending to government-facilitated
activity that builds the community's CAPACITY to organize itself
independent of government. Perhaps most important of all, at every
level of participatory decision-making and action, we need to articulate
how the public participates in reviewing the effectiveness of chosen
policies and actions, and revising those policies and actions accordingly.
I stress this last dimension of public participation
because our success as communities and societies in the face of
challenges depends so much on the wisdom of what we do and our resilience
in the face of shifting realities. As officials, practitioners,
and communities, we need to get it right as much as possible the
first time -- AND we need to be able to learn well and change course
when we don't or when conditions change.
This realm of "collective
intelligence" -- wise responsiveness -- is rich territory
for collaboration and participation. It will involve ongoing learning
about how to weave the potential contributions of diverse stakeholders,
experts, officials, and "ordinary people" into more or
less coherent systems that act effectively together instead of descending
into conflict, confusion, and wasted energy.
As collective intelligence and community wisdom come
to be seen as vital aspects of public participation, the role of
government will necessarily shift. Effective management and leadership
become less a matter of telling people what to do when and more
a matter of being effectively catalytic, evocative, inspirational
and facilitative -- helping existing potential energy, wisdom and
collaboration find creative expression for community benefit.
Those who take this challenge seriously will invest
existing management resources -- staff time, tax money, networks,
political capital, etc. -- in building the capacity of their communities
and constituents to handle their own affairs well in challenging
times and to share responsibility for stewarding "the commons".
I see a number of dimensions of what this might mean,
in terms of practical approaches (note: any unfamiliar processes
referred to here can be explored through Google or Bing or searches
on websites like co-intelligence.org
or the National Coalition
for Dialogue and Deliberation):
:
* CATALYZE PARTICIPATORY CONVERSATION:
Use and experiment with non-directive participatory conversations
to engage the passionate co-creativity of communities, diverse stakeholders
and ordinary citizens. So-called "emergent processes"
like Open Space, World Cafe, Future Search, and Dynamic Facilitation
provide productive channels for existing passions and creativity
-- and even conflict -- with little effort to direct the outcome.
Programs can start with simple, powerful do-it-yourself processes
like Open Space and World Cafe that participants can then carry
into their neighborhoods, networks and organizations. Meanwhile,
government can build community facilitation resources -- including
communities of practice -- to cover a broader range of processes
the community needs. Government can also play a critical role in
ensuring the continuous affordable availability of venues for public
events and conversations.
* SUPPORT ONLINE CONNECTIVITY: Actively
promote coherent collective use of existing online conversational,
networking, social, and collaborative resources to engage citizens
in addressing thorny issues and emerging crises. Where a government
does not have resources to build multi-dimensional effective public
participation into their own websites, they can use their websites
to tell the public how to use Facebook, Twitter, chats, free conference
call lines, GoogleDocs, MeetUp.com, YouTube, WiserEarth, and other
online resources to better work together on local issues and participate
in local government work.
* HELP COMMUNITY SHARE THE LOAD:
Invite and enable citizens and community groups to take on more
of the actual work of governance -- from solving problems to gathering
and evaluating information to implementing policies and programs.
Sometimes this can be designed into a process so citizens contribute
to governance without even realizing it, while they're having meaningful
fun. For example, in Eugene's participatory community planning process,
we plan to immerse commission members and decision-makers in a community-wide
World Cafe, followed by a creative participatory prioritization
process focusing on "What should we be doing in this community
to address climate change and peak oil?" This immersive experience
will give officials a dynamic experience of community ideas, energy,
and priorities without resource-intensive compilation efforts that
generate piles of paperwork they then have to plow through.
* TAP POSITIVE POSSIBILITY: Use participatory
approaches that tap into the energizing power of positive possibility
-- from inspirational engagements like visionary backcasting and
Transition Town initiatives to exploratory approaches like Appreciative
Inquiry and Asset Based Community Development, to behavior-change
support programs like Positive Deviance and the Low Carbon Diet.
All these approaches help people engage with situations more as
opportunities to build better lives and communities than as problems
to be solved.
* ALIGN WITH EVOLVING PROFESSIONS:
Encourage, use, and participate in emerging movements among the
information, knowledge and communication professions involved with
computer technology, journalism, media, public relations, academia,
research, group process, etc. As their professions are shaken by
changes in technology and systemic challenges, some professionals
are re-visioning their missions beyond objectivity and critique
to focus on serving community well-being, promoting community engagement
and capacity, and achieving deeper understanding of the foundational
values and dynamics of their work. Notable examples include Journalism
that Matters, Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility,
community science and research (e.g., the Loka Institute), The Art
of Hosting, and explorations of the underlying "pattern language"
for various fields. Such pioneers can help create innovative public
participation infrastructure to support ongoing community-wide collective
intelligence. For example, imagine journalists committed not to
stories of conflict, but to building community awareness of and
participation in exciting public conversations, community action,
and positive possibilities.
* TAP CREATIVE ENERGY: Engage natural
existing sources of creative, evocative energy in calling the community
into volunteer action, participatory governance, mutual support,
visionary activism, and self-organizing activity. Latent sources
of often "free" creative energy include youth, artists,
writers, musicians, performers, and entrepreneurs who often just
need an invitation and honored role to eagerly make a difference.
(Note how Obama inspired and used this latent power in his campaign.)
Also invite existing networks of common interest and activity --
religious congregations, schools, clubs, ethnic groups, community
groups, neighborhood councils, professional organizations, unions,
etc. -- to make a positive difference in the community by helping
engage their members in inclusive public participation efforts.
Often invitational processes work better by engaging network hubs
in recruiting from their networks than by broadcasting invitations
broadly through mass media. Government can even sponsor gatherings
of such people to explore what THEY would like to do to better their
community. Another related effort:
* TRANSFORM UNEMPLOYMENT: Help unemployed
people engage in fruitful volunteer activity -- including active
support for the functions above -- while co-creating mutual support
systems and exploring together entrepreneurial possibilities that
make innovative contributions to social transformation. In Journalism
that Matters' Open Space gatherings, for example, unemployed journalists
have linked up with community bloggers to create new and exciting
forms of journalism.
There could of course be many more approaches to this.
But these exemplify the expanded, out-of-the-box thinking about
public participation -- and, yes, the pioneering courage -- that
it will take to meet the twin challenges of rising crises and dwindling
resources. The risks of failure are very real, so this kind of innovation
and experimentation will probably flower most where leaders or officials
have concluded that business as usual does NOT work, that they don't
know what to do, and that they are willing to let go of old ways
and open up new questions and new avenues of engagement in search
of new forms of energy and wisdom.
As I try to live into these possibilities myself,
I find I am challenged to use more of these principles in my own
work, not just what I invite others to do. My life is disturbed
and stimulated by questions like:
- What does this vision of participation imply for advocates of
participation like myself and my colleagues?
- How do we empower the self-organization of those we seek to
help? How do we create conditions in which our clients turn more
to each other than to us, and then do effective work together?
(Do we have the courage and mutual support to nurture that?)
- How do we better steward our professional commons -- our connections
and networks, our collaborations, our reputations and markets,
and our collective knowledge base of insights, perspectives, skills,
and methodologies?
- How do we, as learning communities of practice, more effectively
respond to changing conditions and nurture a spirit of innovation?
- What forms of business-as-usual impede our own ability to give
our gifts, thrive, and evolve -- individually and collectively?
I think we are all called to become more competent
with sharing, with collective inquiry, with ALL forms of participatory
life, and with the experimentation and innovation needed to call
forth the self-organizing capacities of organizations and communities.
I don't see this as just another good idea or challenge.
I believe it is a real calling. In times of crisis and scarcity,
our work could make all the difference in the world, quite literally.
FURTHER RESOURCES
Home || What's
New || Search || Who
We Are || Co-Intelligence
|| Our Work || Projects
|| Contact || Don't
Miss || Articles || Topics
|| Books || Links
|| Subscribe || Take
Action || Donate || Legal
Notices
If you have comments about this site, email cii@igc.org.
Contents copyright © 2004-2009, all rights reserved, with
generous permissions policy (see Legal Notices)
|