European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the...

download European Citizens' Panel: Final Report   "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union less remote from citizens"

of 50

Transcript of European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the...

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    1/50

    HOW THE PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY TOOLBOX

    CAN MAKE THE EUROPEAN UNION

    LESS REMOTE FROM CITIZENS

    HOW THE PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY TOOLBOX

    CAN MAKE THE EUROPEAN UNION

    LESS REMOTE FROM CITIZENS

    This report is supported by:

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    2/50

    2

    Copyright: ECAS 201 0Design by Alicia Karpetsky

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    3/50

    3

    TABLE OF CONTENTS:

    5 INTRODUCTION

    7 THE NEED FOR AND THE ADVANTAGES OFCITIZEN PARTICIPATION

    14 WHAT TECHNIQUES OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATIONARE AVAILABLE?

    24 WHAT HAS BEEN THE EXPERIENCE SO FARWITH CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AT THE EUROPEANLEVEL?

    33 HOW COULD A CITIZEN PILLAR BE BUILT INTO EUPOLICY-MAKING?

    45 CONCLUSIONS

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    4/50

    4

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    5/50

    5

    I N T RO D U C T I O N

    This report is a follow-up to the European Citizens Panelsproject involving ECAS, partner organisations and citizens infour EU Member States.1 Randomly selected citizens,representative of the national population, came together incitizens panels to discuss how they would like to be involved

    in EU decision-making. There, theydiscussed with both each other andwith experts what formats and onwhat issues of EU policy-making they

    would like to be consulted. They alsoconsidered what information they needed and other issuesimportant for effectively involving citizens in policy-making.After meetings in the four countries, a European event tookplace on 26th February 2010 in Brussels, bringing all thecitizens together. This final event also involved citizens fromother projects, experts and representatives of the EUInstitutions. In parallel, ECAS organised an expert panelinvolving practitioners, the partner organisations, experts

    and academics to help test the citizens recommendationsand to identify opportunities for action.

    To our knowledge, this is the first time that citizensthemselves have been asked to consider how bestparticipatory democracy deliberations shouldbe organised rather than specific issues.Though the issue might appear theoretical, the

    debates and the recommendations drawn up bythe citizens show that they can indeed graspcomplex or abstract issues and, moreimportantly, that they are enthusiastic to be involved in EUdecision-making in a constructive and transparent manner.

    1 ECAS is grateful to the Europe for Citizens programme, the Economic and

    Social Committee and the Rowntree Charitable Trust for their support for

    this project, and to all those in volved in drafting thi s report. The four national

    panels took pl ace in Bulgaria, Germany, Hungary and Latvia.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    6/50

    6

    At the same time, this report draws on a number of other

    sources. Prior to the European Citizens Panels project, theEuropean Commission organised a workshop for its ownservices, which involved a number of external expertsconsidering the results of the first series ofEuropean participatory democracyprojects2. This report also draws on thediscussions held there and, where applicable,on the extensive evaluation report3. Therecommendations from citizens, experts, and

    Commission officials all point in the same direction.

    This report is structured into four parts:

    - First, there is a summary of the background andbenefits offered by citizen participation. It sets outthe institutional context at the European level andthe advantages for the European Institutions ofbuilding a citizens pillar in decision-making.

    - Secondly, a brief selection of the differentparticipatory democracy techniques available isgiven. These range from large-scale andtechnologically sophisticated approaches, such asthe European Citizens Consultations method, tomore discreet and intense consultative mechanismssuch as citizens juries. This is a fast-moving state

    of the art system, particularly with the developmentof e-participation and social networks. The EuropeanCommission should create a network of experts andpractitioners to identify the most important

    2 Citiz ens consultations Le arning from the past, lookin g towards the future

    workshop on the 27th November 2009, organised by the Directorate General

    for Communicati on.3 Evaluation of Plan D/Debate Europe projects by Eureval, Matrix and Rambll -

    Management

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    7/50

    7

    innovations relevant for its work, and adapt thesetools into processes for its use.

    - Thirdly, there is a review of the achievements so farwith citizens participation projects at theEuropean level, under the CommissionsPlan D for Democracy, Dialogue andDebate and its Europe for Citizensprogramme. European participatoryprojects have been shown to work whenreviewed across a number of dimensions

    and that they have an important, valuable andbeneficial role to play in EU decision-making.

    - Finally, there is a proposal for building on the firstexperimental wave of European projects with a morestrategic approach, using guidelines and a checklistfor building a citizens pillar in EU policy-making.

    The report ends with five recommendations for thenext steps to be taken to turn, an experiment into astrategy.

    I . THE NEED FOR AND THE ADVANTAGES OF CITIZENPARTICIPATION

    There is no doubt that the Commissions own evaluation ofparticipatory projects and the EuropeanCitizens Panel project both came at theright time: A new European Parliament waselected in June 2009 and a new EuropeanCommission took office in February 2010;policies are being revised, both because ofthese institutional changes and because ofthe entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. An

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    8/50

    8

    important aspect of the Treaty is that it incorporates theCharter of Fundamental Rights. In Article 11, the Treaty

    introduces the principle of participatory democracy:

    Article 11

    1. The Institutions shall, by appropriate means, give citizensand representative associations the opportunity to makeknown and publicly exchange their views in all areas of Union

    action

    2. The Institutions shall maintain an open, transparent andregular dialogue with representative associations and civilsociety.

    3. The European Commission shall carry out broadconsultations with parties concerned in order to ensure thatthe Unions actions are coherent and transparent.

    4. Not less than one million citizens who are nationals of asignificant number of Member States may take the initiativeof inviting the European Commission, within the framework ofits powers, to submit any appropriate proposal on matterswhere citizens consider that a legal act of the Union isrequired for the purpose of implementing the Treaties.

    The European Parliament and Council of Ministers are givingpriority to negotiating the Commissions draft regulation oncitizens initiatives (COM(2010)119 final) to implementconditions for the one million signatures under Article 11.4.However, no one thinks this is the only way to involve citizensin European policy-making. This report focuses on other waysto do so.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    9/50

    9

    Amongst the advantages claimed for citizens deliberationsare, importantly, offering different tools with which to bridge

    the gap between citizens and policy-makers:

    - Participatory democracy techniques can contributeto overcoming a two-speed Europe for citizens.Results of referenda and European elections showthat important sections of the population seethemselves as outsiders when it comes to Europe,European issues and European integration. This isexpressed not least in high rates of abstention, no

    votes in referenda and growing nationalism andeuroscepticism4.

    - Citizens deliberations are a contribution todemocracy because they are a form of activecitizenship. They create conditions of access toinformation and expertise andenable people, in ideal conditionsof participation, to engage withpolicy-making. They do not seekto replace the right and duty ofelected representatives andthe executive to take decisions they seek to complement it, enabling betterdecisions to be made with greater acceptance andstronger implementation.

    -In other cases, the motive for involving citizens is forthe value of their input for better regulation andimplementation. Politicians are conscious of theneed to test the waters of public opinion, and arerecognising the need to do so at an early stage.

    4 See ECAS 25 Questions and Answers on What Way Out of the

    Constitutional Impasse? that explores the socio economic splits between

    urban and rural areas, high and low income, and euroscepticism among young

    people.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    10/50

    10

    There is often a very fine dividing line between publicacceptance and rejection, especially when complex

    and controversial issues are at stake issues suchas scientific and technological choices, resourcedecisions or ones with as yet unknown implicationsand effects.

    - Indeed, a win-win situation can be achieved in thefollowing central ways:

    Citizens are the first to benefit becausethey actively engage in the democraticprocess. Few turn down the invitation toparticipate in a debate about Europe, andwould never have expected such aninvitation to do so from this particularsource. As the participants of the EuropeanCitizens Panels themselves said whenabout their motivation to participate, theyare often initially sceptical, but becomemore enthusiastic as discussions get underway: Feelings included hope andsurprise, feeling positive about theprocess, and curious as well as[] anxious []5 Theopportunity for debate withpeople from all walks of life andpeople from their own and

    other countries, often goeshand-in-hand with the positive realisationthat there are numerous possibilities fordefining common European positions andagendas, and identifying shared experiencesand expectations.

    5 Conclusions of the Citize ns Panels discussed at the final European event on

    26 February 2010 in Brussels.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    11/50

    11

    For some citizens, including those involved in

    the European Citizens Panels, these arequite literally life-changing experiences. Theylift them out of their traditional attitudesthat Europe is not interested in itscitizens, and that they, thecitizens, cannot change anything.As one participant of theEuropean Citizens Consultationssaid: I became interested in Europe

    when Europe became interested inme. More importantly, theseeffects are felt beyond the smallcircle of those directly involved inparticipatory projects. They talk to familyand friends about their experiences,colleagues and the media, and therefore,indirectly, reach a far wider circle.

    Officials and politicians gain new insightsfrom the process. At the very least, thequalitative and, more active approach ofcitizen deliberation will teach them morethan opinion polls ever can. These passive,static snap-shots of opinions, and choicesamongst pre-determined options at a givenpoint in time, often leave many questions

    unanswered and the finer points and trade-offs unexplored. To an increasing extent, EUpolicy-makers face issues which are complex,controversial or divisive, and which areunpredictable in terms of public opinion.These are often important and emotiveissues for citizens, especially if they areable to see the link between the policy underdiscussion and their own situation, that of

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    12/50

    12

    their family or immediate neighbourhood,making their inclusion in the policy-making

    process increasingly central for itssuccess. Participatory democracytechniques have shown that citizens areoften able to open the eyes of experts andpoliticians to new ways of looking at familiarproblems, and changing the perspective, sothat solutions are found.

    For the EU Institutions, hampered by their distance

    both perceived and real from citizens, and wherethe distance between policies and citizens everydaylives are even more abstract than at a national andregional level, the gains are all the greater.

    - The European Commission is not electedand therefore has an institutional interest inincreasing its legitimacy by relating directly tocitizens and civil society. As the initiator oflegislation and policy, the Commission has the primefunction among the Institutions for citizensconsultations. This is also recognised by Article 11of the Lisbon Treaty with citizens initiativesaddressed to this Institution. It would be a strongstarting point for participatory democracydeliberations. Inevitably, Commission policy-makingdraws on expert committees and is

    under pressure from lobbies withvested interests. This does notguarantee proposals in the Europeanpublic interest. Using the lay citizenexpertise generated by the powerfultechniques available can help to achieve such abalanced outcome.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    13/50

    13

    - The European Parliament forces a paradox ofdeclining voter participation in European elections

    which fell to below 50% on average in the June 2009elections, whilst its actual powers are increasing. Inthe European Citizens Panels project, emphasis wasplaced by citizens on the role of MEPsand the importance of engaging withthe European Parliament and not just during elections. When agreeingon legislation with the Council ofMinisters, it is rightly the citizend

    and the end-users perspective, whichare stressed by the EuropeanParliament. Citizens deliberations runby this Institution could thereforestrengthen its position in negotiations with theCouncil, and increase its legitimacy. In the EuropeanCitizens Panel project, people were both critical ofthe lack of sense of any real European campaignduring the elections, and recommended a muchcloser interaction with their MEPs betweenelections.

    - The Council of Ministers often appears the mostremote of the EU Institutions, as if citizens have noplace in the meetings of heads of government orministerial meetings. Being aware of this, and of theneed to involve citizens more with European policy

    issues, some governments particularly when theyhold the Presidency of the Council do organise civilsociety events and outreach activities. Thesehowever, are often one-way information eventslimited to representatives of organised civil society.These welcome tentative beginnings should be builtupon by the Council to help anchor the work beingdone in both in the home/host country and acrossEurope.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    14/50

    14

    I I . WHAT TECHNIQUES OF CITIZ EN PARTICIPATIONARE A VAILABLE?

    This brief summary of techniques, drawn from differentsources, shows that depending on the purpose of a citizenconsultation exercise, a technique is bound to be available6.

    Some are large-scale, involving thousandsof people over a brief period in time such asa weekend; others are small-scale butmore time consuming for those involved. Insome processes, the emphasis is placed

    on interaction among citizens toencourage active citizenship or community cohesion; inothers, the dialogue between citizens and experts is a keybenefit. There are also differences in the extent to which thetechniques are based solely on face-to-face communicationand debate among citizens, or are able to incorporate andaccommodate advanced information and communicationtechnologies so as to reach larger numbers of participants.Random selection of participants is also a feature of many of

    the techniques highlighted here.

    The selection of the appropriate technique or mix oftechniques depends on what outcome is to beachieved. In addition, such a consultation should notbe seen as a stand-alone activity. It must be atransparent process, with clear information for allinvolved about where to key-in with other decision-

    making and implementation processes and what willhappen with the outcomes of the process. This was

    6 IFOK GmbH consultation contribution as part of the European Citizens

    Panels; Danish Board of Technology; INVOLVE publicati on; Governance of the

    European Research Area: The Role of Civil Society; Citizens as partners

    OECD Handbook for governments on information, consultation and public

    participation in policy-mak ing; Participatory and deliberative methods

    toolki t. How to connect with citi zens - A practiti oners manual presented at

    the EFC annual General Assembly, May 2006 Brussels.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    15/50

    15

    one of the central recommendations and key demands madeby citizens from all countries involved in the European

    Citizens Panel, when asked what would motivate them totake part and what was important for them in suchparticipative processes: good feedback from the EU abouthow it will use, accept or reject the citizens ideas7

    Although, this does not apply to all.

    The selection of techniques below is neither comprehensivenor exhaustive. The selection serves to highlight a wide

    variety of techniques already available, seeking to give a feelfor what citizens consultations can look like.

    European Citizens Consultations

    Citizens Consultations are based on the model and methoddeveloped by America Speaks, the 21st Century Town HallMeeting. They are structured, dialogue events which involve

    facilitation both in plenary amongst all participants, and attable level where participants sit in small working groups.Citizens work at tables and in plenary to deliberate anddevelop answers to a question. They aresupported in this by both professionalfacilitation and through the use of moderntechnology, such as electronic voting, tohelp the group arrive at a consensus. As

    deliberations are professionally facilitatedand take place in small working groups typically 8-12 people it is possible for every citizen tobecome involved in the discussion and to make their voiceheard. A central editorial team collates the citizens inputsfrom their tables and these are voted on in the plenary,before the results are then discussed in the next dialogue

    7 Conclusions of the Citiz ens panels

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    16/50

    16

    step. Creative elements or shared activities can also beintegrated into the method, ensuring that the event is both

    fun and productive! Experts and other stakeholders can alsobe involved in the process. The format also lends itself to theintegration of online elements, thus enabling it to reach a fargreater number of people than those attending the

    conference despite, the number ofparticipants varying from 100 to2,000 participants at any one givenevent. In addition, European CitizensConsultations are uniquely placed to

    enable deliberations across theboundaries of language and geography. The use of bilingualtables with the attendant facilitation and interpretationsupport enables a truly European debate to take place.

    European Citizens Consultations are able to generate high-quality, detailed and very concreteresults often in the form ofrecommendations for action. They

    energise participants by giving them afeeling that their voice has been heardand they have made a contribution tothe results being developed. Citizens Consultations areparticularly well suited for situations where a large number ofpeople should be involved in preparing a political decision.

    Additional benefits of this format also include:-

    A visually attractive event, good for drawing mediaattention;- Complex issues can be dealt with;- A variety of views can be accommodated; and- As everyones voice is heard and part of the shared

    solution, a number of trade-offs in deliberation aredone away with.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    17/50

    17

    Citizens juries

    This is a method of obtaining informal citizen input intodecision-making and in particular to explore values. Theprocess is very different from the large-scale citizensconsultations and aims at acquiring informedrecommendations about a specific policy or decision problemfrom a group of representative citizens. The jury is composedof 12-24 randomly selected citizens who deliberate the

    evidence presented to them and arrive ata shared conclusion or recommendation.

    This, they do on a previously fixed set ofquestions. A professional facilitatorsupports the jury whilst citizensautonomously deliberate the question.

    They have access to experts that represent all relevantpositions from whom they hear evidence and whom they cancross-examine. On the strength of this information, the jurythen develops recommendations for action. Often an advisorycommittee gives advice concerning the selection of the

    experts and the questions to be asked.

    Citizens juries lend themselves to situations whereconsensus is being sought on a critical or controversial issue,and it is important that sufficient time is given to the jury toget to grips with the issue. The outcome of the process is arecommendation for action from the citizens; based upon theevidence they have been given. This is often an expression of a

    preference between a small numbers of predetermined policyoptions.

    Citizens juries are a low-cost approach to participation bylay people, which generates consensus. They can helpincrease the legitimacy of decisions or policy proposals andhave the benefit that citizens have time to informthemselves and develop informed opinions and decisions.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    18/50

    18

    Consensus Conferences

    Consensus Conferences were originally developed in Denmarkas a way to assess the impacts of various technologies,making it a well-suited and tested method by which to find outpeoples views about a new technology and to place that in asocial context.

    During a Consensus Conference, a random selection of people usually 10 to 30 lay people are asked to draw upquestions about an often-controversial issue. They then pose

    these questions to experts and draw up recommendations asa joint report. The citizens areautonomous in framing the problem andselecting the experts they steer thedialogue themselves and are at the heartof the process. They choose thequestions, the experts and draw their ownconclusions. The final report does not, as

    the name would suggest, have to necessarily represent a

    consensus citizens can develop a number of contradictoryor differing positions. The process usually takes threemonths and the citizens prepare the conference over twoweekends. The conference, in which the experts are quizzed,and the writing and presentation of the report, usually takefour days.

    The format enables citizens to grapple with controversial

    issues in a deliberative,structured way and, becauseparticipants set the agenda,define the problem and steer thedialogue; they really are at theheart of the method. However,there is no guarantee that theywill necessarily arrive at acoherent set of positions on which action can be taken.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    19/50

    19

    Deliberative Polling

    Deliberative Polling is a method which measures a groupschanges in opinion, and seeks to draw conclusions aboutpublic opinion on the strength of these changes. It istherefore a way of complementing traditional opinion polls. Arepresentative panel of citizens are asked a series ofquestions before being invited to a one or two-day dialogue

    event. There, they receive informationmaterials and discuss the issue in smallgroups. The participants engage in

    dialogue with competing experts andpolitical leaders based on questions theydevelop in small group discussions withtrained facilitators. At the end, they are

    asked the same questions as they were at the beginning soas to see how, if at all, their answers and opinions havechanged. The resulting changes in opinion can be seen as theconclusions the general public would reach, if people had theopportunity to become more informed and more engaged on

    the issues.

    The objective of the method is to identify what, if any,changes in public opinion would occur if the general public wereable to become more informed about an issue, and to engagewith it. It can be used for securing a detailed, representativesample of public opinion and when this is to be integrated intopolicy-making. It is well suited to uncontroversial issues and

    to ones where a change in opinion is to be expected following adeliberation. The results of the exercise are usuallyexpressed as changes in opinion amongst the participants ofthe poll. These changes can often also be expressed asstatistics and so can be compared or followed over time. As aresult, it is not that well suited for issues, which mightchange during deliberation or identifying consensus. However,it has a role to play if the development of well-informed

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    20/50

    20

    opinions on issues, which do not change over time, is thedesired outcome.

    Scenario-building exercises and workshops

    Scenarios are narrative descriptions of potential futuresthat focus attention on relationships between events anddecision points. Scenario workshops evaluate possible future

    developments and the scenario technique isapplicable for economic, technological andsocial developments. Scenario workshops are

    a good way of identifying possible futures andworking to develop actions on the strength ofwhat might happen. Often participants need

    to have an interest in the field or a good degree ofprevious/specialist knowledge to be able to participate fully,though this is not always the case.

    Typically, during such a process an analysis of the status quois first conducted. The main influencing factors and key data

    are collected what would happen if this changed, what is theinfluence of this issue, how this actor or organisation coulddisrupt events, etc. With these possible forces of influencemixed in together, participants develop visions for the futurebased on what might happen if a factor came into play or atrend played out. The method encourages participants tothink creatively, weighing up different trends. For this reasonit can also lend itself to achieving a broader, more creative

    frame of reference amongst the participants.

    A whole series of additional techniques have been developedto achieve structured brainstorming about the differentscenarios: future wheels, envisioning workshops, expertpanels, or focus groups. All can be highly relevant to an EUuncertain of its future direction and where decision-makingalways follows a long time horizon.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    21/50

    21

    Participatory budgeting

    Participatory budgeting has spread from Porto Alegre andother Latin American cities to a significant number ofEuropean destinations, and even to China. In this method,citizens deliberate how to allocate a budget or parts of abudget. In doing so, they select their priorities for theallocation of limited resources, spending priorities etc. andare able to give important feedback and input on policyoptions for decision-makers. Participatory budgeting is oftenconducted at the local level with a variety of motives:

    democratic participation, but also to increase transparency,combat fraud and ensure that limited resources are bettertargeted to real needs. Though this brings the advantage ofgiving citizens very direct control ofthose areas of policy decided at thelocal level, it also limits the scope oftheir involvement to those policy areascovered by local resources; or to asmall proportion of a total budget when

    this is covered largely by nationalcontributions. For example, schoolmeals and facilities could be under localcontrol, but the teachers salariescould be excluded. At first sight, thistechnique would not be relevant to theEU budget. However, the Europeanregional, social and rural development funds are closest to

    citizens, but not necessarily perceived as such. There is noreason why a proportion of them could not be given over toparticipatory budgeting.

    Participatory budgeting is an approach worth examining forapplication to appropriate parts of the EU expenditure. Giventhe lack of connection between the European budget and thetaxpayer, and the importance attributed to different policyareas implicit in the allocation of resources, participatory

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    22/50

    22

    budgeting offers a very real and important opportunity forthe EU to identify citizens priorities for its actions.

    In all instances, the right approach is the strategic one. It isnot a question of selecting a particular tool from the toolbox;often several are necessary, involving citizens andstakeholders, experts and policy-makers, hence therecommendation for using a checklist. As the citizensthemselves recognised in the conclusions of the CitizensPanel project, participation is a challenge, which can result insuccess or failure.

    Apart from weighing up the benefits and pitfalls of citizenparticipation, EU policy-makers have to be aware that, withthe lack of a European public sphere, ordinary people have realdifficulty relating to the EU Institutions. In the CitizensPanel project and final conference held on 26 th February2010, people stressed that they do not know where to find

    channels of communication towards the EU, andthat it is wrong to expect them to participate

    meaningfully if they have not been informed inthe first place. Their observations alsosuggested that EU communication presents aconfused image, and that they would like aclearer, updated focal point where they couldfollow the progress of particular issues.Information should be better organised atdifferent geographical levels. The responsibility

    of the press was stressed, particularly oftelevision, as the main source of information on Europe. Adistinction is often made between traditional information andcommunication policies, and more modern citizenparticipation techniques. However, the citizens tend to putthese two issues, which experts tend to treat differently, inthe same context.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    23/50

    23

    In conclusion: the EU has a wide range of rapidly evolvingtechniques available. The ones selected here are only an

    exemplary selection, and serve to highlight the availability oftec hniques on different scales for different outcomes. Thereis a growing interest, also among practitioners, in exchangingexperiences on what is new, what works or doesnot work under specific circumstances. There isalso the potential to augment these techniqueswith tailored information technology applicationsto help reach a wider group and to facilitatebetter deliberations. This is particularly

    important for the EU with a population around500 million. With the expansion of socialnetworks and e-participation, a toolkit ofelectronic participation can be developed. With this in mind,the European Commission would be well advised to convene agroup of practitioners, experts and policy-makers to helpfacilitate exchange on the best forms of participation for thechallenges faced by the European Institutions. Such a groupcould help the Commission produce a green paper on the

    future of European citizens deliberations itself subject towidespread consultation. This should lead to building a citizenpillar in E U policy-making.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    24/50

    24

    III . WHAT HAS BEEN THE EXPERIENCE SO FAR WITHCITIZEN PARTICIPATION AT THE EUROPEAN LEVEL?

    In parallel to the work of the Convention on the Future ofEurope which drew up the Constitutional Treaty, the previousEuropean Commission, and in particular its Vice-PresidentMargot Wallstrm, revived the debate on the Unions

    communication policy and ways to overcome theinformation deficit. After a period ofconsultation and a series of conferences on awhite paper involving various stakeholders, the

    Commission produced an action plan. The mainemphasis of this was listening to citizens,communicating in a way, which related moreclearly to peoples everyday concerns and goinglocal. An inter-institutional agreementbetween the Commission, European Parliamentand Council put communication policy on firmer

    ground. Progress has been made with local radio networks,the Europarl television channels and European public spaces.

    With the extensive consultations and time taken to reshapethe EUs communication policy in general, Europeanexperimentation with the participatory toolbox came aboutas a result of the crisis created by the French and Dutch novotes to the Constitutional Treaty. It became vital to re-connect. Thus Plan D for Democracy Dialogue and Debatewas launched. The positive feature was a

    shift from a top-down communicationpolicy, which had been shown to fail, to amore bottom-up approach.

    The first experimental phase of usingparticipatory democracy techniqueshas demonstrated that they work atthe European level. In summing up the results, the EuropeanCommission has concluded, those projects showed that the

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    25/50

    25

    development of participatory democracy in EU-related issues atlocal, regional, national and cross-border level is possible, both in

    terms of quality and logistics.8

    The most extensive of the sixPlan D projects was the EuropeanCitizens Consultations coordinated bythe King Baudouin Foundation.Conducted in 2007 and again in2009, the project was able to furtherimprove the format used. In 2007, aEuropean agenda setting eventinvolving 150 randomly selected

    citizens from all Member Statesidentified the issues important tocitizens and to be discussed at 27national consultations. These events

    involving 30 to 200 randomly selected citizens drew upnational recommendations, which were brought together atanother European event into a series of Europeanrecommendations.

    In 2 009 the E uropean Citizens Consultations integrated anonline phase into the design to identify the aspects ofEuropes economic and social future, which were important tocitizens. This enabled far greater participation throughtwenty-seven national websites. Randomly selectedparticipants at national consultations involving 30 to 100people drew up their recommendations, with the mostimportant selected through online debate and voting, before

    being debated with European decision-makers at theEuropean Citizens Summit.

    This decentralised approach can be compared to the morecentralised pan-European deliberative polling organised byNotre Europe with a random sample of some 400 citizens

    8 Communication from the Commission Debate Europe building on the

    experien ces of Plan D (COM (2008)158/4).

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    26/50

    26

    gathering together for three days and debating face-to-face.Other projects have also been developed with the

    participation of foundations and the support of the EuropeanCommission.9

    On the 27th November 2009, the European Commission (DGCommunication) organised a seminar onthe basis of an extensive evaluation of thePlan D and Debate Europe activities. This200-page report has the advantage ofcritically highlighting what worked and

    what did not, although it tended tooverlook the extent to which this was afirst experimental phase, largelyunplanned, when the European Commissionneeded to show that it could react to acrisis. The yardstick of institutionalisedprocesses cannot measure such projects and initiatives. Italso covered some 107 projects, only a small proportion ofwhich followed the strict methodology of citizens

    deliberations based on random selection of representativegroups.

    Based on the partners and experts involved in the EuropeanCitizens Panel and the discussions of the evaluation report,there is a rather clear indication of what has worked so farand where further progress should be made:

    What has worked well:

    - Creating delivery mechanisms. In this first phase,delivery mechanisms were created which did notexist before or which were not tailored to the

    9 Meeting of Minds, organised by the King Baudouin Foundation; Future of

    rural policies in Europe, organised by t he Foundation for Future Generations.

    The Danish Board of Technology is running a citizen consultation project in

    selected Member States on the future of EU research policies.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    27/50

    27

    European context. Due to the interest shown byfoundations in the participatory toolbox, it has now

    become easier to identify and set up networks oforganisations among all or groups of Member States.Harmonised approaches have been worked on andtested to overcome the technical, linguistic andlogistical problems: recruitment of citizens,ensuring impartial facilitation of their debates,working with several languages and the use ofelectronic communication tools. In internationalterms, this has been a first.

    - Participation of citizens. Citizens are keen to beinvolved in a substantive debate on policy issues andoptions. Not least the participants ofthe European Citizens Panel showed thiswith their initial scepticism soon turninginto differentiated and enthusiasticdebates. The need to provideappropriate preparatory information andthe right use of experts are importantprerequisites for this, as recommendedby the citizens at the European CitizensPanel.

    The discovery of sharing common everyday concernswith other people from different backgrounds andacross borders has facilitated debate and the

    framing of agreed recommendations, as well asenabling an engagement with issues at a verypersonal level. Even the seemingly abstract topic ofthe European Citizens Panel - participating citizensshaping how participation can work - caught peoplesimagination.

    - Outreach and press coverage. The larger-scaleprojects have reached many more people than those

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    28/50

    28

    directly involved, largely due to the result oftraditional media activity. This is increasingly

    augmented by the potential to use e-participationand social networks. Events that give journalists anopportunity to interview an ordinary citizen, agovernment Minister and Members of the EuropeanParliament make for a European story with humaninterest.10 The fact that the European CitizensConsultations happen at the same time acrossdifferent Member States, and are visuallyinteresting events, help maximise impact and press

    coverage.

    What progress still needs to be made:

    - Improving the quality and depth of recommendationsAs the previous section has shown, there is often atrade-off in citizens deliberations between theprocess of democratic participation on the one handand the output and its contribution to policy-makingon the other. Plan D and Debate Europe were moreabout the first than thesecond, particularly in thecontext of the crisis andimpasse round theconstitutional Treaty.These were agenda-setting

    events. The evaluationreports of the Plan D andDebate Europe projects proposes that futureprojects would do well to concentrate on one issuewhich is controversial, complex, affects citizens

    10 Even the relatively small-scale European Citizens Panel project led to a

    seven-minu te long report on Bulgarian tel evision news after the final e vent on

    the 26thFebru ary 2010.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    29/50

    29

    everyday lives, and is on the EU agenda. It should alsobe an issue in which the citizens recommendations

    will then have a role to play in further policy-makingprocesses their contribution should be givenspace.

    - Creating a better connection between citizensdeliberations and decision-makers

    Plan D and Debate Europe were centred on threebroad themes relating to a period of reflection on

    the future of Europe: Europes economic and socialdevelopment; feelings towards Europe and theUnions tasks; Europes borders and its role in theworld. The design of projects should have beenshared between DGs Communication, Education and

    Culture and other departmentsresponsible for the substantiveissues so that the interlocutors ofthe citizens were the decision-makers. Participation of politiciansand members of the executive inresponsible citizens deliberations

    was high, but not organised according to topic.

    It very often seems that in order to reduce the

    democratic deficit at the European level, citizenshave to be educated and better informed, in order

    to better understand the complexity of Europeanpolitics. This is true. However, it is also true thatEuropean politicians and civil servants should beeducated in order to better understand the needsand values of European citizens, and to incorporatethe principles of participatory governance in theiractual practices. This dimension is insufficientlytaken into account.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    30/50

    30

    (Excerpt from an expert contribution quoted in theevaluation report.)

    The following extract from the evaluation reportechoes the recommendations made by the citizensparticipating in the European Citizens Panel thecall for clear institutional follow-up andtransparency about where the process of citizenparticipation links into other decision-makingprocesses.

    The important characteristic of a participationprocess is its link with the policy-making process andits potential as a vertical accountabilityinstrument. Thus, the presence of policy-makers(politicians or high-ranking officials) may beinteresting since they can provide both relevantinformation and symbolic legitimacy tothe process. However, this will only be

    the case if these politicians are involvedin the specific policy-making of thesubject being discussed and they cananswer, discuss and be questionedthrough the process.

    No rule makes it clear how to integratewhat has been done in the decision-making process. In the worst case,

    these activities could be just words without anyimpact on European public policies this woulddiscredit the participatory frame. At least, someaccountability should characterise the processthrough adequate information concerning the waycitizens proposals have been (or have not been)taken into account.

    (Excerpts from the expert contributions.)

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    31/50

    31

    - Improving follow-up to the recommendations andfeedback to citizens

    The European Institutions have started toexperiment with participatory democracytechniques, but have not yet considered, except ona case-by-case basis, the key question of how theoutput they generate should feed into the decision-making process. As the OECD Handbook quote belowputs it in one of the ten tips for government:

    When governments involve citizens in policy-making, theycreate expectations. Governments need todemonstrate to citizens that their inputs are valuableand that they are taken into account when making policy.If they fail to do so, citizens may prove unwilling tospend their precious time responding to futuregovernment invitations.

    The Handbook also makes the point that just oneexperiment is not going to be enough andspill over into sudden belief that the publicauthority is to be trusted and participatorydemocracy is working. One recommendationmade by citizens participating in the EuropeCitizens Panel was the establishment of aclearing house for the recommendations

    made, via which citizens from across Europecould receive timely, transparentinformation about the progress of theirinputs and recommendations.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    32/50

    32

    The progress and contribution made by citizenparticipation and deliberation have significantly

    outweighed these weaknesses, which are inherent inthe nature of Plan D and Debate Europe. Citizensdeliberations have shownthat they work at the localand European levels - now itis a question of examininghow they could become amore organised feature, builtin to the EUs consultation,

    agenda setting, policy-making and implementationmechanisms. These areas were all highlighted aspoints in the decision-making process at which theyfelt citizens have a role to play and shouldparticipate.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    33/50

    33

    IV. HOW COULD A CITIZEN PILLAR BE BUILT INTO EUPOLICY-MAKING?

    In considering how to mainstream deliberations in EU policy-making, it does not seem desirable to include or exclude areas

    of activity in advance or tolimit citizens involvementonly to a particular stage inthe decision-making process.The approach can be flexible,but an organising framework

    is necessary.

    In terms of Article 11 of the Lisbon Treaty, the EUInstitutions have to maintain a regular dialogue with citizensand civil society. The principle of participatory democracytherefore applies to all those Institutions, even thoughArticle 11 makes a special mention of the Commission as theinitiator of policy and legislation, which is therefore the keyInstitution for early consultation. With its mention of

    citizens, Article 11 implies that citizens deliberationsshould be added to the Commissions minimum standards ofconsultation, largely directed at stakeholders. In developinga framework on the basis of Article 11, there are a number ofreference points for building citizens deliberations inEuropean policy-making:

    - The Charter of Fundamental Rights has becomelegally binding with the entry into force of the LisbonTreaty and is to be applied in all EU policies. Itprovides a framework of traditional and more modernrights and is a statement of values.

    - The Lisbon Treaty provides a more coherent EUarchitecture with the abolition of the pillars and aclearer picture of who decides what. In Article 5, thenew Treaty on the European Union provides a basic

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    34/50

    34

    organisation/division of EU competence. There is aclear distinction between areas of exclusive EU

    competence; of competence shared with MemberStates or of areas in which the EU has only asupporting role. This is already an indication as towhether citizens deliberations should be organisedat a E uropean, national or regional level.

    - There are organising frameworks for activities suchas the Europe 2020 with its priorities, the 5-yearprogramme of the

    Commission, its annualprogramme and those of theCouncil Presidencies. TheEU financial perspectives -2007-2013 are beingrenegotiated for the period2014-2020 and this is animportant opportunity for involving citizens.

    - The Europe for Citizens Programme with itspriorities and statements of values agreed betweenthe Commission and stakeholders is a useful point ofreference. From the Citizens Panel project, a usefulindicator was provided of the range of policy areas towhich citizens want to contribute.

    The decisions of citizens deliberations need to be adapted to

    the particular decision-making processes of the issuesselected and accompany them so as to have a chance ofmaking an impact. Some argue that the EU should take a leadas a modern administration and stimulate citizensparticipation more generally. However, the EU has to showthat it can follow up citizens recommendations, and notdisappoint their expectations; therefore, citizenparticipation has to be related to what can be delivered.Within this overall framework, three points need to be

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    35/50

    35

    considered for a more strategic organisation of citizensdeliberations:

    - Identifying the broad categories of use of citizensdeliberations for European policy-making;

    - A checklist for their application on a case-by-casebasis; and

    - Last, but not least, questions of cost.Categories of use of citizens deliberations for Europeanpolicy-making

    There are four main categories of use for citizensdeliberations:

    - Citizens deliberations as part of the formation offuture priorities for the EU

    The tools indicated here are powerful and creativeand will bring fresh thinking to EU affairs often

    dominated by input from experts andstakeholders, who tend to overlook thecross-cutting issues or those notdefined by specific academicdisciplines. It is possible to extrac tfrom almost any participatory processfresh thinking and new ways of lookingat problems. There are techniques for

    building scenarios with the input from citizens, andinvolving them in assessing EU challenges andpriorities in a longer-term perspective. Involvingcitizens in the large, strategic road maps for theUnion, such as that of drawing up the EU 2020strategy, would be highly recommendable.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    36/50

    36

    - Broad agenda-setting in policy areasThere is no doubt that there is a case for large-scalepan-European events covering all 27 Member

    States to give a stronger feedbackand resonance to citizens concernsthan is possible through opinion pollsalone. Taking broad themes such asthe EUs position on climate changefollowing the 2009 Copenhagensummit, the need for a common

    European energy policy or even thefuture international role of the EU,such agenda-setting, large-scaleevents have an important role to playin enabling the Institutions to identify

    citizens priorities and expectations for the EU as awhole, its role and for the important points ofemphasis within a policy area. A multi-mediaapproach to citizens and stakeholders discussingthe same issue at the same time across Europe canhave a significant impact. Broad agenda-settingevents could be linked to European years, such as2011, the year of volunteering. The emphasis hereis mostly on process and involvement of a largenumber of citizens to identify broad themes andpathways, rather than on detailedrecommendations. The target for such agenda-

    setting events could be European Commissioners,Members of the European Parliament and theCouncil Presidency. Conducting such consultationsin a timely fashion prior to large decisions being madeis an important time for large-scale, pan-Europeandebates.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    37/50

    37

    - Citizen participation in consultations on greenpapers and draft legislation

    The European Commission has developed an opensystem of consultation to gather the views of

    stakeholders which are based onspecific questions and optionsand which are advertised onYour Voice in Europe.11 Manyconsultations are too technical,late-in-the-day of policy

    formulation and uncontroversialto make citizen involvement

    really meaningful. Sometimes, however,consultations touch on themes for which thecollective views of citizens would provide a valuableinput. Controversial, divisive issues can soon andeasily lead to irretraceable positions amongst theparties involved, with conflicts hardened intoinaction. Involving citizens on such issues can offerboth a fresh perspective and legitimacy forconstructive engagement in the resolution of anissue be it issues such as GMOs or the use of fossilfuels and stem-cell research.Other examples where citizen consultations can addvalue to specific policy proposals are on Regulationsor Directives which involve information and labellingschemes for consumers and users, trade-offs

    between price and environmental or animalprotection, or ethical questions in research and theuse of new technologies. Here, certain techniquesare available such as citizens juries and consensusconferences which would involve a smaller group ofcitizens working over a longer period of time withinput from experts to produce in-depth

    11 Commission minimum standards of c onsultation December 2002.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    38/50

    38

    recommendations on a narrow set of policy optionsor their technical implementation options.

    - Citizen participation in implementation and follow-upOne of the most promising ideas proposed byparticipants of the European Citizens Panels is theparticipation of citizens in the implementation andfollow-up of policy in addition to earlier stages of thepolicy process. Citizens as watchdogs was one turnof phrase used and one which sums up well their call

    for citizens being able to hold decision-makers toaccount for the decisions they have made in theirname, as well as to take on a more active role in policyimplementation. The idea represents a novelopportunity for active citizen engagement in policyand is one, which would merit further exploration,especially in light of its potential to bridge the gapbetween EU policy and local impacts.

    A checklist for applying citizens deliberations on a case-by-case basis

    Citizens deliberations should be mainstreamed across EUpolicies and become an established, trustedand actively used instrument of policyidentification, formulation and implementation.

    However, shaping the process within which toapply them and what techniques or mixture oftechniques should be used can only beassessed on a case-by-case basis. What isimportant is to offer a set of guidelines forcitizen participation, perhaps linked to andexisting alongside the Commissionsstandards of consultation. In this way, the

    Institutions and citizens themselves would be confident that

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    39/50

    39

    where citizens deliberations are used, they are conductedaccording to agreed standards, that there are agreed

    protocols and channels of communication with theInstitutions, and agreed upon obligations on both sides.Actively managing expectations in this way is important toensuring that citizen consultation is used properly. Such achecklist should include the following points12:

    (i) Choose issues whichare both relevant tocitizens and/or are on

    the agenda of theEuropean Institutions,whilst being sufficientlycontroversial, complex and offer sufficient scopefor citizens to make a contribution so as toencourage debate and in-depth deliberation fromcitizens;

    (ii) Make sure the right tools are selected for theright subjects, that these are embedded in theright processes and that the partners have asolid methodological and organisationalstructure;

    (iii) Respect the subsidiary principle and make surethat the way citizens deliberations areorganised accompanies a particular decision-

    making process at different geographical levels;

    (iv) Require the publication of a plan and road mapfor the project so that citizens know what theyare embarking on and the Institution can plan itsresponse. It is important to manage

    12 We are grateful to the evaluators of the Plan D/Debate Europe projects who

    propose a very similar approach to thi s.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    40/50

    40

    expectations on both sides by embeddingconsultations into clearly defined, outcome-

    orientated processes with their role andinfluence communicated at the outset;

    (v) Seeking balanced and representativerecruitment of citizens is a vital foundationstone to any deliberative process. This willinvolve demographic, geographic and socio-economic criteria which help ensure differentviews are represented;

    (vi) Ensure balance not just in recruitment but alsoin the deliberations, which should be conductedneutrally so as to give all participants an equalsay and ensure that none penalised because ofthe lack of language skills, level of knowledge etc.;

    (vii) Informing and clarifying the scope and legitimacyfor action by the EU on an issue is critical.

    Citizens may not be aware of thescope and limits of EUcompetence in particular. Thismeans enough time being madeavailable for the provision andabsorption of appropriateinformation, tailored to citizens,including experts in the debate

    and encouragement to citizensto inform them;

    (viii) Involving policy-makers isessential at the stage ofdesigning projects and not only at the end of theprocess, not least because policy-makers givethe EU a face, provide insight and information;they enable another perspective to be brought

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    41/50

    41

    into citizens deliberations and considerations,and policy-makers themselves benefit from this

    two-way engagement with citizens;

    (ix) Projects should achieve a high degree ofmultiplier effect: the role of the press isessential in informing more people than the smallnumbers participating directly. E-participation and use of socialnetworks should be linked to citizensdeliberations to broaden the scope of

    those who can become involved,though it should be noted that thesedo not and cannot (yet) replace face-to-face deliberations. Incorporatingthe right online elements into aprocess is important;

    (x) Ensure that the report and recommendations ofcitizens are discussed directly with the

    appropriate policy-makers at differentgeographical levels and in the EuropeanInstitutions. In turn, this dialogue should belinked, where possible, to broader consultationsof stakeholders. It is vital that citizens rec eivean explanation within a reasonable time of whichrecommendations can be accepted or rejectedand how they can follow the issue through the

    subsequent stages of the decision-makingprocess, helping increase transparency.

    Costs

    The OECD handbook Citizens as Partners points out thatinformation, consultation and active participation do requireresources but that the funds needed to achieve significantresults [] are usually small in comparison to the total amount

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    42/50

    42

    spent on a given policy. Beyond this, and with increasingrelevance for todays world of complex policy decision, it

    highlights the opportunity costs of inaction; given theproblems arising from poorly designed and implemented policies,governments find strengthening their relations with citizens to beworth the investment. They also increasingly learn that not engagingin them can create much higher costs, through policy failure in theshort term as well as loss of trust, legitimacy and policyeffectiveness in the long term.

    The evaluation report of Plan D and Debate Europe activities

    proposed creating a new open instrument, i.e. available to allDGs engaged in a policy-making process, and also toRepresentatives in Member States willing to foster public debateon an issue which is high on the EU political agenda. Under such ascheme, relevant departments or national authorities wouldbuy into this instrument in a way appropriate to their needs

    thus enabling a flexible mechanism to beestablished which would enable a speedy,effective, efficient and flexible use of

    citizen consultations for a variety ofpolicy areas. Importantly, theestablishment of such an instrumentwould also enable citizen consultation tobe used more broadly and by additionalactors and would, importantly;significantly reduce the costs ofconsultations through scale and learning

    efficiencies. The same evaluation reportsuggests that the Commission could use calls for tender toobtain offers precisely suited to its needs rather thanproviding grants to civil society organisations. This would givemore latitude to such organisations and networks ofexperienced practitioners for the execution of citizensdeliberations.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    43/50

    43

    A variety of evaluations and sources, together with thelessons learned to-date all conclude that with careful

    planning and strategic thinking the benefits andoutcomes of citizen participation notablyoutweigh the costs. This is in addition to thescale advantages and learning efficiencies, whichcan be drawn on, thanks to the extensive testingand implementation of citizen consultations to-date. As one of the participants in the ECASproject put it: no money, no citizens. Additionalconsiderations which should be born in mind when

    evaluating the costs of citizen consultationsand which speak in their favour:

    - The qualitative, considered and informed outcomes ofcitizen consultations are more valuable to policy-makers than a simple opinion poll. To direc tlycompare the costs does not convey the additionalvalue generated by the former neither that forpolicy-makers nor that for the citizens involved;

    - Working in partnership with regional and nationalauthorities, foundations and private sponsors,especially for pan-European citizens consultations,offers the opportunity for the EU to buildpartnerships and multipliers in Member States,helping to draw on the local context and resourcesto reach citizens. Such large scale consultation

    exercises have been tested and further developed,with scale efficiencies and learning advantageddemonstrably reducing the associated costs, makingtheir roll-out and institutionalisation all the moreappealing for the EU;

    - The media impact and outreach from such citizenconsultation projects has shown itself to besignificant, broadening the reach (and thus reducing

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    44/50

    44

    the per capita cost) to numbers far beyond and wellin excess of those attending these events. The

    human interest angle is particularly attractive formedia, especially local media, with the engagement ofordinary, local citizens in issues of European policy;an exciting and new way for the media to report onEuropean issues;

    - Different scales can be used for citizensdeliberations, with those involving smaller groups ofcitizens from a limited number of Member States

    also having an impact andlasting value both for theindividuals participatingand beyond;

    - There is no substitute forintensive face-to-facedebate among citizens. Itcannot be substituted by virtual technologies,especially whilst knowledge, experience and trust arelimited amongst the citizens asked to participate insuch consultations. However, carefully integratingonline debates into offline, face-to-face debates andprocesses offers new opportunities to reduce thegap between a virtual and physical debate and, aboveall, enabling significantly large numbers of people toparticipate at a reasonable cost.

    Although some might argue that it would be cheaper and takeless time to launch a traditional top-down communicationstrategy or conduct an opinion poll, all the evidence suggeststhat this will not work on its own. Society, and in particular,the younger generation has moved on from the informationage to the participation age.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    45/50

    45

    V. CONCLUSIONS

    This report has shown that there are already a variety ofinstruments available to a European Union, which wants tobridge the gap with citizens. They have been tried and testedand proven to work. More are likely to develop, which will allowfor two-way communication with millions of citizens at evenlower costs. The opportunities to combine on-linecommunications with off-line, in-depth formats offers theopportunity for an even greater number of people to bereached and, if done properly, offers the opportunity for more

    intense online debates- even though they are unlikely toreplace face-to-face debates among citizens.

    As the breadth of literature, evaluations and assessmentsdrawn upon for this report show information, consultation

    and participation, different top-down,bottom-up, centralising or decentralisingapproaches can and should co-exist. Citizenparticipation and participatory

    instruments do not change in any way thefact that it is elected representatives andpublic institutions, which adopt laws andmake collective decisions. What they do

    challenge is the assumption that citizens do not want tohave a say in policy-making and lack the necessary expertiseor have little to contribute.

    This precisely has been shown in the recommendations madeby the citizens participating in the European Citizens Panelproject. The motivation and interest of citizens thatprompted their participation is testimony to this. Citizenscalled for more information about how they could becomeinvolved in European issues and decision-making so that theycan pursue these existing opportunities as well as additional,participatory ones. Also, they see their role at all stages ofthe policy process from the board, agenda-setting stage

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    46/50

    46

    through to designing the implementation of policy andmonitoring its follow-up.

    Participatory instruments and citizens! promote the ideathat input to policy is too important to be the monopoly ofpolicy-makers and their immediate partners. As citizenstaking involved in the project highlighted, partners such asthe media and civil society need to be more involved in bridgingthe gap with citizens and a number of participatory formatslend themselves particularly well to facilitate this and, indoing so, reaching even more people than those taking part in

    off-line events.

    Critical for securing the input and buy-in of citizens is asthe project has shown transparency in the process and

    offering citizens follow-up to theirrecommendations. Be it via clearing house forcitizens recommendations or from the EUInstitutions themselves, citizens want toknow what will happen to the input they have

    given. This fits into calls from experts,practitioners and the reviews of the EUs

    participatory activities that a degree of institutionalisationof participation take place and that a more strategicapproach be taken.

    In front of this backdrop and with a view to the institutionalarrangements at the European level, the following

    recommendations for immediate action emerge:

    (i) The Commission should work on the next stepstowards a strategy for participation, acrossDGs and the Institutions. It should do so with apanel of experts, practitioners, policy-makersand citizens to develop the participatorydemocracy toolbox to make it ready for a varietyof issues and policy areas and stages. It should

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    47/50

    47

    bring together actors within the EUInstitutions already working on the issue of

    participation so as to aggregate theirexperience, best practice and learning, enablingthis to be built upon with other insights. Afterall, citizens want to contribute to a breadth ofEuropean issues, which affect them and want todo so at a number of stages in the policyprocess, as the European Citizens Panelproject as shown.

    (ii) A broader, participatory consultation shouldemerge, with questions about different optionsfor mainstreaminga citizen pillar intoEuropean policy-making. The typeof checklistadvocated in thisreport should be

    included andguidelines for a methodology for designingcitizen deliberations should be developed. Such amethodology would need to be carefullybalanced, providing insight without beingformulaic, given that no two consultations arealike.

    (iii)

    A clearing house of the type recommended bycitizens should be established which can act asa central information point for citizens involvedin participatory processes. Above all, thisclearing house should provide transparentinformation on the follow-up process torecommendations made by citizens and to theirinvolvement in the policy process. This should belinked closely with other Institutions, national

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    48/50

    48

    governments or regions. Citizens see MEPs ashaving a role to play in this and no

    doubt the EU Institutions need tomake follow-up to participationtransparent and a two-way process.

    (iv) A campaign to inform citizens abouttheir existing opportunities toparticipate and become involved inEuropean policy should beconsidered. Especially in light of the

    recent changes introduced byArticle 11, this could represent a first step inmobilising even more citizens to become moreengaged with Europe. Involving the media in this,as recommended by the citizens, will also becruc ial in bridging the gap.

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    49/50

    49

  • 8/9/2019 European Citizens' Panel: Final Report "How the participatory democracy toolbox can make the European Union les

    50/50

    European Citizen Action ServiceAvenue de la Toison dOr 77

    B-1060 BrusselsTel: +32 2 54 8 04 90Fax: +32 2 548 04 99

    E-mail: [email protected]: www.ecas-citizens.eu