Addressing the challenges of local consultations – an international perspective

Addressing the challenges of local consultations – an international perspective

• 1.
  1 LARIA Annual Conference2015 “HOW DO WE MAKE A DIFFERENCE THROUGH NEW WAYS OF WORKING?” University of York, March 2015 Addressing the challenges of local consultations – an international perspective This work will be conducted in accordance with ISO 20252, the international standard for market and social research
• 2.
  2 Presentation agenda Challenges forlocal consultations Overview of European methods & approaches Detailed case studies Concluding remarks
• 3.
  3 Value for money Value for money Actionability Transparency, inclusiveness, equality Challengesfor local authority consultation activity
• 4.
  4 A wide varietyof non-traditional participative methods Further info: www.partizipation.at/methods.html Advocacy planning Activating survey Dragon Dreaming Cooperative discourse Ephesus Model Worldcafé Fish Bowl Neo-socratic dialogue Planning for real Dynamic Facilitation 3C method Citizen exhibition
• 5.
  5 Italy: Milan’s sharingeconomy The issue: City administration recognised the value of promoting and facilitating a sharing economy Sequence of events: • Steering group drafted proposition document • sharexpo event with variety of stakeholders • Online survey • Agreement on final framework Further info: www.milanosmartcity.org Outcomes and learnings: • Raised awareness and promoted opportunities • Gained buy in from a variety of stakeholders • Created networks, empowering residents • Optimised the use of resources and access to services, spaces, and information
• 6.
  6 Poland – 18consultations across 16 boroughs The issue: strengthen citizen participation in a new democracy Who was involved: a joint effort between local government, researchers, experts, 65 volunteers, and 3,500 residents Methods used: 18 consultations, ca. 351 hours engaging with residents, 75 meetings took place, a wide range of approaches Outcomes & learnings: ● a coordinated, more cost effective effort ● residents shaped local initiatives and policy ● the story of the consultations were gathered in a book ● Example 1: Wola street lighting – in situ observation, accompanied walks, local media, 3D street model, workshops ● Example 2: Warsaw Old Town consultation around regeneration of UNESCO world heritage site, green spaces, and promotion of culture Further info: http://www.konsultacje.um.warszawa.pl/
• 7.
  7 Czech Republic: futurecity game Further info: http://creativecities.britishcouncil.org/urban_co-design_tools/future_city_game Who is involved: Residents from diverse social backgrounds and professional disciplines; a games master who moderates throughout Rules: Over 1-2 days, players compete in teams through three stages – envisioning, testing and presenting – and then vote on the best idea. Benefits: Stimulates original ideas in cities, dynamic, gamified, inclusive, international • Joint venture comprising various stakeholders • Aim: to facilitate creative and cultural activities • Winning idea: design of a cycle path along river lined with sculptures and schedule of cultural events • Aim: to engage residents in the bid for European Capital of Culture • Winning idea: district regeneration, transformation of unused brewery into a social and cultural centre
• 8.
  8 NL: Face yourworld project Amsterdam Further info: www.faceyourworld.net The issue: Design of a local park, to be used by all segments of the local community. Who was involved: Local borough administration, funding from various sources, an urban regeneration organisation Outcomes & learnings: ● Designs were approved and park opened ● Young people influenced their neighbourhood ● Innovative technology facilitated translation of ideas into reality ● Prize for civic value from the environment ministry Methods: ● An empty gymnasium was turned into an urban lab ● Discussions with diverse local residents ● The Interactor design software
• 9.
  9 Outcome & learnings: ●Children’s ideas and were integrated into community planning, e.g. new train stations, housing, infrastructure ● Resulted in new methods and practices for planning efforts Sweden: Involving children in community planning Further info: www.trafikverket.se/PageFiles/157570/children_and_young_people_in_spatial_planning.pdf The issue: Recognising that children need to be involved in physical planning Who was involved: Six municipalities in Sweden took part Methods used: Children were engaged in diverse ways, discussions and activities, making models of urban spaces, drama and photography, creating a book
• 10.
  10 Germany: engaging diverseaudiences Further info: www.partizipative-methoden.de/en/index.php?page=service-options Activating consultation Approach: communities are consulted, and also encouraged to articulate their interests Sequence of events: ● Preliminary investigation ● Recruiting and open questioning of participants to identify issues, and collecting early ideas for potential solutions ● After survey evaluation, results are fed back Example: later life in Osterholz ● Senior citizens reflected on various themes around housing, mobility, public services ● To address challenges of an ageing society Example: life in Berlin’s Pankdorfer Strasse ● A diverse range of neighbours shared ideas for improvements ● Involvement of multi-lingual volunteers Citizen’s exhibition Approach: combines participatory and aesthetic elements, involves a range of actors, enables a public dialogue around local issues Multi-sequence method: interviews coupled with visual methods, co-creation of content Example: redevelopment of Potsdamer Platz ● use of urban wasteland ● link to city wide and EU wide projects Example: personalised medicine in Bremen ● sharing residents’ views on public health
• 11.
  11 Spain: participatory budgetingin Pamplona The council allocated € 500,000 for a participatory budget, asking residents to propose investment ideas Who was involved: ca. 1,500 residents aged 16+ Methods used: 1. Residents’ ideas were collected via various channels 2. Council technical experts shortlisted 34 viable projects 3. Residents then voted on their preferred options Outcomes & learnings: ● Effective idea generation ● Citizen empowerment
• 12.
  12 NL: 3C methodfacilitates neighbourhood improvement Further info: Frieling et al. (2014) ‘Collaborative Communities Through Coproduction: Two Case Studies’ American Review of Public Administration, 2014, Vol 44(1) 35–58 The issue: Improving ‘liveability’ in two neighbourhoods in the Netherlands Who was involved: Local city councils of Lewenborg and Parkwijk, the social work agency, and a university based consultancy group Methods used: Collaborative Communities through Coproduction (3Cs), a continuous circular process of plan making, implementation and evaluation. Outcomes & learnings to overcome typical dilemmas: ● Involves resident groups that are usually underrepresented ● Participants involved in the planning and evaluation phase to allow for face to face deliberation ● Issues were defined by resident panel to ensure equality of production between residents and experts ● A facilitator encouraged consideration of the long term common good rather than short term goals ● The 3C method facilitated continuous co-production with residents rather than a one-off consultation
• 13.
  13 Denmark: Wind farmsconsultation The issue: The municipalities of Northern Jutland were requested to progress the planning of potential wind farm sites Who was involved: Consultations were held between citizens, politicians and experts. Methods used: ● Creation of a GIS model showing wind farm and landscape ● Public meetings, discussion forums, reports, online maps – genuine dialogue Outcomes & learnings: ● Use of multiple methods and online engagement facilitated inclusivity ● Use of GIS models enabled public to take an informed view of proposals ● Early engagement with wider public to find solutions to controversial issues works Further info: Hansen (2004) ‘Geographic Information and Public Participation in Environmental Decision Making’, http://www.ecoconnect.org.uk/download/Review%20of%20Good%20Practice%20on%20Community%20Engagements.pdf
• 14.
  14 Further resources ● EuropeanInstitute for Public Participation: www.participationinstitute.org ● International Association for Public Participation: www.iap2.org ● International Journal of Public Deliberation: www.publicdeliberation.net ● Urban Ideas Bakery: http://creativecities.britishcouncil.org/urban_co- design_tools/urban_ideas_bakery ● Central and Eastern European Citizens Network: www.ceecn.net ● URBACT: http://urbact.eu/
• 15.
  15 Concluding remarks Value forMoney ● Get volunteers involved ● Mobilise existing assets & resources ● Use online approaches Transparency & inclusiveness ● Communicate clearly & early ● Aim for a range of stakeholders ● Involve end users ● Incentivise, gamify ● Disseminate findings Actionability ● Ensure stakeholder buy in ● Set realistic objectives ● Offer genuine options ● Use co-creation for practical solutions
• 16.
  16 Thank you forlistening 0345 130 4576 [email protected] www.mruk.co.uk Christoph Körbitz Associate Director [email protected] Rachel Cope Director [email protected]