Through a critical analysis of four types of participatory and deliberative methodologies – Participatory Budgeting, Citizens’ Assembly, Mixed Councils & Conferences on public policies, and Public Debates – the research provides insights into what has worked well and what has not.
Conducted by the CNRS team, the research delves into 21 case studies, evaluating each of them based on democratic performance indicators. These indicators include inclusivity, popular control (the degree of influence citizens have over the decision-making process), reflective judgement (citizens’ ability to make well-informed and thoughtful judgments), and transparency.
Additional evaluation criteria involve time-frame (the duration a particular DI methodology allows for in decision-making), complexity (the suitability of the DI methodology for handling complex issues), conflict management (the ability to mediate between citizens and stakeholders with differing views and interests), scale of the DI, and trust-building (the ability to enhance mutual trust among participants involved in the decision-making process). Moreover, the authors specifically focus on assessing each practice’s capacity to address environmental issues and climate change effectively.
Participatory Budgeting
Participatory Budgeting (PB) stands out as the most widely tested DI methodology globally. It aims to involve non-elected citizens in the conception and allocation of public finances. The research suggests that PB excels in mediating conflicts, enhancing transparency, popular control, inclusivity, community trust, and generating effective policy outcomes.
However, PB falls short in promoting wide timeframes, scalability, and managing complexity. One notable successful case of participatory budgeting was the Puerto Alegre PB experiment in Brazil during the 1980s. A more recent significant PB experiment was conducted by the municipality of Madrid in 2015, introducing the Decidim Madrid multi-use portal of citizen participation that supported digital and hybrid participatory processes, including PB.
Tartu, Estonia, also implemented a participatory budgeting system in 2013, enabling residents to decide on 1% of the city’s investment budget. Throughout the process, transparency and trust-building efforts were made, and citizens were educated about local government and budget administration.
Citizens’ Assemblies
Citizens’ Assemblies (CAs) are assemblies comprising randomly selected citizens who deliberate and make decisions on specific issues, aiming to provide a representative sample of the population. CAs usually excel in allowing long-term policy recommendations, fostering transparency, and ensuring inclusivity when properly implemented.
However, they tend to perform inadequately in enhancing people’s understanding of complex issues and producing binding policy outcomes. Several notable cases of CAs include the Irish Citizens’ Assembly on Climate Change (2016-2018), where 99 randomly selected citizens developed 13 non-binding policy recommendations. The Irish assembly faced criticisms of underrepresentation and participation conditions, but its recommendations had a significant impact on climate policy in Ireland.
The French Citizens Convention for Climate (2020-21), inspired by the Irish assemblies, faced challenges due to strikes, the COVID-19 pandemic, and political tensions, but its proposals gained visibility and influence, though implementation obstacles remained.
Follow us on: