Citizen Participation USP 550

Document Sample
Citizen Participation USP 550 Powered By Docstoc
					Citizen Participation USP 550
www.BowlingAlone.com
Photo courtesy of Portland Oregon Visitors Association
      Civic Innovation: Symbiotic Relation
        Between Citizens and Leaders


                    Supposed Leader      Citizens
Pioneer Square      Downtown Business    Citizen advisory committee
University District PSU Administration   Student war protest
Mt. Hood Freeway    Mayor Goldschmidt    SE Portland Legal Defense Fund
Urban resettlement  Planners             "hippie" communes
Oregon Bottle Bill  Governor McCall      Oregon Environmental Council
Neighborhood System Mayor Goldschmidt    Corbett Terwilliger Students
Public Beaches      Governor McCall      Save our Sands (SOS)
                    Robert Straub
          Portland Honors
 Best Bicycling city (Bicycling magazine)
 Best Walking City (Prevention magazine)
 Most Sustainable Policies (SustainLane)
 Most Vegetarian Friendly (Vegetarian magazine)
 8th most artists per capita in USA
 Most woman-owned businesses (SBA)
 One of the most attractive for young
  creative class (Rise of Creative Class)
 But also, one of the five best cities for
  elders (AARP)
Creative Class in Portland
 Last year there were twice as many
  people in the 25-39 age group moving
  into the city as leaving
 In all, 23,454 young adults moved in
  while 12,125 moved out. The fourth
  highest net migration in America
      What lures the young
      creatives to Portland
   key attractors are Portland's livability, local recreation
    opportunities, the music and art scenes and other
    "consumption opportunities," for instance, well-
    brewed beer.
   A primary draw of college-educated 25- to 34-year-
    olds is other college educated 25- to 34-years-olds.
   Also mentioned are the city's neighborhoods, mass
    transit system, bike-friendliness and growth
    management policies.
   But the deciding factor is often a more intangible
    sense of political and social tolerance, intellectual
    diversity and entrepreneurial opportunity.
    Portland’s Civic Story
 Over 30 year period Portland created a
  civic story, in part myth, in part reality
 It dictates civic behavior
 Citizens expect to be involved
 Bureaucrats and elected officials expect
  citizens to be involved.
Summary: Community Stories
     Community stories are created based on the
     interaction between the place and its people
    But community stories are also co-opted by
     dominate cultural narratives
    A good community story is socially,
     environmentally, and economically
     sustainable
    Citizens need to feel they are a part of
     creating the story so that the cost of
     governance is lowered.
        Working Together
   DeToqueville accurately predicted that
    America would face a crises. If people did
    not work together to solve problems then the
    government would need to create more and
    more rules, more and more bureaucracy.
   The most expensive governance involves
    governing individuals who only look out for
    themselves
   Many social and environmental problems
    can’t be solved without civic engagement
Community Problem Solving: hardware
     and software solutions
 Problem           Hard solution          Soft solution
                   Defensive spending

 Crime             Police                 Community policing
                   Security systems
                   Prisons
 Water pollution   Sewer system           Storm water disconnect
 Waste             Collection/            Recycling
                   incineration
 War               Pentagon spending      Diplomacy
                                          “welfare” spending
 Child care        Private providers      extended family
                                          Neighbors
 Commuting         More/better highways   car pooling
                                          Flex car
                                          Mass transit
 Property loss/    Insurance              Neighborliness
 Health care                              Barn raising
                                          Preventative health
                                          Social network support
                                          care giving
Elements of a Healthy Civic
      Infrastructure
   Opportunity
   Effective actions            These Audiences
                                   Young
   Deliberative
                                   Elder
    Democratic dialogue
                                   New comers
   Civic Space
                                   Disadvantaged
   Global & Local                 Challenging groups
   Civic Schools                  Diverse population
   Facilitative leadership
   Sustainable civic
    story
            Learning Goals
   Understand History and theory of collective action
    and civic engagement
   Understand symbiotic relationship between citizens
    and government
   Appreciate the value of involving citizens in most all
    aspects of planning
   Understand the Current conditions of Civic life in
    America
   How to plan for involving citizens in public policy
   Develop skills in facilitating group process
   Learn and reflect from field experiences and
    practitioners
What is citizen participation?
   Formal process government uses to involve
    citizens in public policy
   But also involves inter-agency and inter-
    group relationships
   There are levels and types of citizen
    participation
   Civic Engagement refers to broader spectrum
    of people’s involvement in civic life or civil
    society
     Bureaucratic view of Citizen
           Participation
   Improved Quality of decisions
   Minimizing Cost and delay
   Long Term Consensus Building
   Increased ease of implementation
   Avoiding “worst-case” confrontations
   Maintaining credibility and legitimacy
   Anticipating Public Concerns and Attitudes
   Because its required
    Citizen Participation (Sherry Arnstein)

   It is the redistribution of power that enables the have-
    not citizens, presently excluded from the political and
    economic processes, to be deliberately included in
    the future. It is the strategy by which the have-nots
    join in determining how information is shared, goals
    and policies are set, tax resources are allocated,
    programs are operated, and benefits like contracts
    and patronage are parceled out. In short, it is the
    means by which they can induce significant social
    reform which enables them to share in the benefits of
    the affluent society.
Summary Theoretical Writings
    Sidney Tarrow: Social movements
    DeTocqueville: Roots of American democracy
    Daniel Kemmis: Direct and Representative forms of democracy
    Jeffrey Berry: Growth of citizen interest groups
    Robert Putnam: Civic engagement and social capital
    Siranni and Friedland: Civic innovations
    Morris Fiorina: excesses of democracy
    Fischer: intractable problems and role of science
    Day: How to evaluate citizen participation
    Tauxe: Limits of rational planning process
    Beatley: Representation
    Innes: communicative planning theory
         First Premise
   Knowing Home
       The Story of Portland
 Why is Portland where it is?
 What is Portland’s civic story?
 Where did the story come from?
 Is the story created by insiders or
  outsiders?
 Is the story sustainable? (socially,
  economically, environmentally)
    Knowing your home
 In group answer as many of questions
  as you can in ten minutes
 Do musical chairs/groups, in new group
  come up with 10 characteristics of
  Portland culture
    Monk Magazine critique of Portland


   Uncrowded feeling                      Keep it old, not make it new
   Omnipresent trees                      No sales tax
   Open/green spaces                      Self service gas
   Latte Drinkers                         Beat up and decorated cars/car art
   Book readers                           Not as exquisitely manicured as
   Video watchers                          Seattle
   Looks like Pittsburgh (more than       Light bulb joke: one to screw it in,
    Seattle)                                and two to file an environmental
   Urban Outpost in largely agrarian       impact statement
    state                                  The Beirut of America (George
   Jag City                                Bush)
   I scrounge, therefore I am             Anarchist Activism
   Stridently informal
    Monk Magazine critique of Portland
                (cont..)


   Grizzly, gritty and loose around the       Down Home
    edges                                      Not too jaded
   Lack of anal retentiveness                 Not too crowded
   Happy Face and Bill Nye (Seattle)          Not too frenetic
    Vs. Drugstore cowboy and Tanya             Not too homogenized
    Harding
                                               big city attractions without big city
    troll like creatures and web-footed        headaches
    homeless
                                               cheap jazz
   lonely end of the road desperados
                                               Safe
   Seattle is wacky weird, Portland just
    plain weird                                mass transit
   Church of Elvis and John Callahan
Abbott on PDX civic character
    Weak Political parties                  Citizen advisory committees
    Nonpartisan city and county              important source of ideas for
     elections                                public action
    Low church attendance                   Government regarded as open,
    A low generosity index                   honest, accessible
    Ethnic groups have limited              Public life takes place around a big
     political salience or cultural power     table
    labor unions are weak                   Anyone accepted as long as they
                                              accept rules (are polite)
    Elections won more on issues than
     personalities                           Oregon a place where strong
                                              individualism tempers and
    Causes for everyone: tree huggers,       challenges strong communities
     salmon savers, peace workers and
     homeless advocates, etc.
            Abbott Cont..
 The civic movement is fragile. It is continually under challenge--
  not from machine politics as in Boston or Chicago, but from the
  values of privatism.
 With all its virtues, the Portland style tends to muffle radically
  dissenting voices who are unwilling to work on the “team.” There
  is an inability to hear new ideas until they fit the mold.
    Portland Neighborhoods
   Neighborhood map
    What forges the character of a
           neighborhood?

   Land                       Ethnicity
   Water                      Business &
   Elevation                   business district
   Housing stock              Schools
   Transportation             Churches
   Jobs                       History
   Income
   Martial/family status
January 14, 2009
       Housekeeping
 Reserve library material
 Negotiating requirements of class
What is citizen participation?
   Formal process government uses to involve
    citizens in public policy
   But also involves inter-agency and inter-
    group relationships
   There are levels and types of citizen
    participation
   Civic Engagement refers to broader spectrum
    of people’s involvement in civic life or civil
    society
     Bureaucratic view of Citizen
           Participation
   Improved Quality of decisions
   Minimizing Cost and delay
   Long Term Consensus Building
   Increased ease of implementation
   Avoiding “worst-case” confrontations
   Maintaining credibility and legitimacy
   Anticipating Public Concerns and Attitudes
   Because its required
    Citizen Participation (Sherry Arnstein)

   It is the redistribution of power that enables the have-
    not citizens, presently excluded from the political and
    economic processes, to be deliberately included in
    the future. It is the strategy by which the have-nots
    join in determining how information is shared, goals
    and policies are set, tax resources are allocated,
    programs are operated, and benefits like contracts
    and patronage are parceled out. In short, it is the
    means by which they can induce significant social
    reform which enables them to share in the benefits of
    the affluent society.
Tarrow: Power in Movement
What is a Social Movement?
   movements are collective challenges by people with
    common purposes and solidarity in sustained
    interaction with elites, opponents and authorities
Tarrow: Changes that Constitutes Modern Forms
of Collective Action


     Modular character of the protest/collective
      actions
     Possibility of sustaining collective action
     Appearance of deliberate organizations for
      organizing
     Increased capacity of movements to spread
     State or elite incorporate or legitimize actions:
      such as right to public assembly
    Development of Modular
           Actions
   Older forms singular/isolated
   Barricades, Petitions, Strike
   Petition: Manchester Anti-slavery, 20% of city
    population
   American tea party: The boycott
   Barricades of the French revolution,
    Tocqueville’s description (p. 44)
Resource Theory of Social
      Movements
   social movements form when ordinary citizens,
    encouraged by leaders, respond to changes in
    opportunities that lower the costs of collective action,
    reveal potential allies and show where elites and
    authorities are vulnerable
Case Study: Gay march on
          DC
    DeTocqueville’s America
   Viewing birth of democracy, wondering:
   As people can no longer be self sufficient
    where will they turn?
   If people turn to government then society will
    be more regulated and restrictive
   Importance of civic associations to keep a
    democracy innovative and not over-
    procedural
January 21
Summary Theoretical Writings
    Sidney Tarrow: Social movements
    DeTocqueville: Roots of American democracy
    Daniel Kemmis: Direct and Representative forms of democracy
    Jeffrey Berry: Growth of citizen interest groups
    Robert Putnam: Civic engagement and social capital
    Siranni and Friedland: Civic innovations
    Morris Fiorina: excesses of democracy
    Fischer: intractable problems and role of science
    Day: How to evaluate citizen participation
    Tauxe: Limits of rational planning process
    Beatley: Representation
    Innes: communicative planning theory
Kemmis: Character of American
         Democracy

 Tension between Federalist and
  Republican perspective on democracy
 In America the individual rights are held
  higher than creating the common good
 Concerned more to promote individual
  liberty than to secure public justice
 To advance interests rather than to
  secure public good
         Interest Groups
   Special-interest groups--also called
    pressure groups or lobbies --are
    collections of individuals who join
    together to pursue common interests
    and to influence public policy.
Institutional changes that Furthered
       Citizen Interest Groups
    Growth of government itself until Reagan days
    Closer relation between government and nonprofit sector including
     advocacy groups
    “supply side” to interest group formation; not only do groups demand
     new programs but new programs demand new groups.
    New government agencies and laws that gave citizen groups tools
     (EPA and EIS/Clean air and Water Acts)
    Changes in court system that allowed public interest litigants to sue
     without direct economic causes. 30
    Decentralization of congress in terms of increase in committees gave
     such groups wider access.
     Post-materialist Values
   Those with postmaterialist values often ask that
    business be restricted in its pursuit of greater wealth
   in Silent Revolution, Inglehart contends that growing
    up under conditions of affluence has led to an
    increased sense of economic security in western
    democracies. So Europeans place a higher value on
    quality of life issues. Less concern about jobs, more
    about policy objectives.
Citizen Group Perspective on Role of
            Government

   for corporations, trade associations, and professional
    associations, government’s primary duty is to nurture
    individual industries and maintain a growing economy
   For labor, government’s job is to improve workers’
    standard of living
   for citizen groups, government should be doing more
    than helping people and corporations to make more
    money.
History of Citizen Participation
  Maximum feasible participation (60s)
  Environmental Impact Reviews (69)
  Citizen Interest Groups
  Public Meeting & Public Information
   laws
  Rise of nonprofit sector
  Rise of professional CP practitioners
           Diane Day Issues

 Pluralist-elitist debate (Jefferson-Madison)
 Bureaucracy and democracy tension
 Science and technology
 Limits of rational system of planning
 Difficulty of evaluating outcomes
    Bureaucracy and Democracy

   That the interests of citizens are brought
    to the public table via the electoral
    system, and yet the actions that result
    from electoral dictates are carried out by
    bureaucrats working within a
    specialized, departmentalized
    bureaucracy.
Weber described the ideal bureaucracy
  designed to maximize values of:

  Efficiency
  Routine
  Hierarchical Authority
  Expertise
  Impersonality
Tensions between Rational Planning and
          Democratic Values

    Democratic forums inclusive while planning is
     selective
    Public gets excluded because of specialist language
    Democratic forums cumbersome, planning demands
     flexibility and speed
    Scientific knowledge alone can not determine values
     questions
    Planners in contradiction space: citizens demand
     flexibility and routine and equality
Understanding Putnam
       What is civil society?
   Civil society is the domain that can potentially
    mediate between the state and private sectors and
    offer people a space for activity that is simultaneously
    voluntary and public. It is a space that unites the
    virtue of the private sector--liberty--with the virtue of
    the public sector--concern for the general good. That
    is, it is public without being coercive or bureaucratic
    and voluntary without being privatized or
    commercial.
      What is social capital?
   According to Coleman, social capital is not human capital,
    anymore than it is economic capital. "It is present," he said,
    "and yet not tangible, in all social interactions." Social capital,
    according to Coleman, "comes about through changes in the
    relations among persons that facilitate action. If physical capital
    is wholly tangible, being embodied in observable material form,
    and human capital is less tangible, being embodied in the skills
    and knowledge acquired by an individual, social capital is less
    tangible yet, for it exists in the relations among persons."
     What is social capital?
   If physical capital is wholly tangible, being
    embodied in observable material form, and
    human capital is less tangible, being
    embodied in the skills and knowledge
    acquired by an individual, social capital is
    less tangible yet, for it exists in the relations
    among persons.
   Example, a park that is safe in a
    neighborhood vs. having to secure it with
    police
     Bourdieu’s: Inherited Social
               (class definition)

   Bourdieu defined social capital as "the sum of
    the resources, actual or virtual, that accrue to
    an individual or group by virtue of possessing
    a durable network of more or less
    institutionalized relations of mutual
    acquaintance and recognition."
    Portes’ Immigrant Community
               Studies
   Portes’ definition: those expectations for action within a collective that
    affect the economic goals and goal-seeking behavior of its members,
    even if these expectations are not oriented toward the economic sphere
   Four types of transactions
   value interjection: Culture norms
   Reciprocity transactions: chits
   Bounded solidarity: often created through adversity/external affects
   Enforceable trust: internal to community, more specific and enforceable
    (credit associations)
    Strong and Weak Ties
  Difference between bridging (or
  inclusive) and bonding (or exclusive)
  social capital
 Bonding capital constitutes a kind of
  sociological super-glue, whereas
  bridging social capital provides a
  sociological WD-40
         Putnam’s definition
   Putnam defines social capital as "networks, norms, and trust--
    that enable participants to act together more effectively to
    pursue shared objectives." The actions or objectives of social
    capital can be political, social or economic.”
   One of Putnam's central premise is that one can assess the
    health of a civil society, the levels and types of civic
    engagement, by examining the social capital elements of the
    relationships between people.
Civic engagement and Trust
   A society characterized by generalized reciprocity is more
    efficient than a distrustful society, for the same reason that
    money is more efficient than barter. if we don’t have to balance
    every exchange instantly, we can get a lot more accomplished.
    Trustworthiness lubricates social life. Frequent interaction
    among a diverse set of people tends to produce a norm of
    generalized reciprocity. Civic engagement and social capital
    entail mutual obligation and responsibility for action.
Factors Putnam noted at first
  Falling voting levels
  Falling trust between individuals and
   government
  Relationship between civic engagement
   and social capital
      Character of Today’s Civic
            Participation
   the more that activities depend on the actions of others, the
    greater the drop-off in participation.
   in other words cooperative forms of behavior have declined
    more rapidly than expressive forms of behavior (e.g. letter
    writing)
   There is more single issue blare and declining civility.
   In 1966, 66 percent of Americans rejected the view that “the
    people running the country don’t really care what happens to
    you;” whereas in 1997, 57 percent of Americans endorsed that
    same view.
 AVERAGE MEMBERSHIP RATE IN 32 NATIONAL CHAPTER-BASED
         VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS 1900-1997

                                                World
                                                War II
Mean
membership
rate for the
20th century

                         World
                         War I


                                        Great
                                     De pre ssion




               1900   1910   1920   1930     1940        1950   1960   1970   1980   1990   2000
         ATTENDANCE AT PUBLIC MEETINGS
          ON LOCAL AFFAIRS COLLAPSES
25%



20%



15%



10%



5%



0%
  1970   1975      1980     1985     1990   1995
                         ENTERTAINING AT HOME
                       BECOMES RARER 1975-1999
              18
 Average
    times     16
entertained
              14
  at home
  last year
              12


              10


               8


               6


               4


               2


               0
               19 70     19 75   19 80   19 85   19 90   19 95   20 00
                             FAMILY DINNERS BECOME
                            LESS COMMON 1977-1999
                 60 %
 “Our whole
family usually
  eats dinner    50 %
                                                                      General ly o r
   together.”                                                         mod eratel y
    (married                                                          ag re e
 respondents     40 %
      only)
                                                                      De fi ni te ly
                                                                      Agree
                 30 %


                                                                      Di sa gree
                 20 %



                 10 %



                  0%
                    19 75     19 80   19 85   19 90   19 95   20 00
                          FOUR DECADES OF DWINDLING
                          TRUST-ADULTS AND TEENAGERS
                                  1960-1999
Percent          60
Who say
“most people can
be trusted”      50

instead of you                                                                             Ad ults
can’t            40                                                                        (mul ti -
                                                                                           survey
be too careful                                                                             average )
in dealing
with people.”    30
                                                                                           Hi gh
                                                                                           scho ol
                                                                                           stu dents
                 20



                 10



                  0
                  19 60    19 65   19 70   19 75   19 80   19 85   19 90   19 95   20 00
Putnam’s Assessment of social capital and civic
            engagement decline
         Cause s of Social capita l and Civ ic Engage me nt
                                 de cline



                      5%       10 %
              10 %




                                                              Ti me and Mo ney
                                         25 %                 El ectron ic e nterta in me nt
                                                              Gen eratio nal
                                                              suburba ni zati on
                                                              othe r




              50 %
      Social connectedness
   decline in social visiting
   More entertaining at home
   Less eating dinner together
   Less vacationing together
   Less watching TV together
   Less just sitting and talking
   Less attending religious services
   Less Sending greeting cards
   Card playing down
          Summary: Putnam
   The frequency of virtually every form of community involvement
    measured in the Roper polls declined significantly, from the most
    common-- petition signing--to the least common--running for office.
   we have 16 million fewer participants in public meetings about local
    affairs, 8 million fewer committee members, 8 million fewer local
    organizational leaders, and 3 million fewer men and women organized
    to work for better government.
   In effect, more than a third of America’s civic infrastructure simply
    evaporated between the mid-1970s and the mid-1990s.
Putnam’s Assessment of social capital and civic
            engagement decline
         Cause s of Social capita l and Civ ic Engage me nt
                                 de cline



                      5%       10 %
              10 %




                                                              Ti me and Mo ney
                                         25 %                 El ectron ic e nterta in me nt
                                                              Gen eratio nal
                                                              suburba ni zati on
                                                              othe r




              50 %
The Portland Exception
Photo courtesy of Portland Oregon Visitors Association
    Extreme Voices: Fiorina
   Citizen participation has increased but encouraged
    extreme voices and mistrust of government
    His conclusion from case study
   Civic engagement can be expected to have good
    consequences only if those engaged are
    representative of the interest and values of the larger
    community. That is true by definition if everyone is
    engaged, but when engagement is largely the
    domain of minority viewpoints, obvious problems of
    unrepresentativeness arise.
                     Idealism
   today’s activism is more ideologically based, and players less
    likely to compromise values for material benefits as they were in
    the past.
   in the past because people had multiple memberships they were
    subject to cross-pressures that led them to moderate their
    stands
   Ordinary people not represented
   Extremists with uncompromising views bring their own issues to
    the table not the people’s
   those willing to compromise polices in order to control offices,
    jobs, and other tangible benefits have been replaced by those
    who are motivated largely by policy and ideological
    commitments.
                 What to do
   More not less participation
   Town hall meetings too costly
   it is time to abandon the notion of political
    participation as part of human nature. It is not; it is
    an unnatural act
   So make the cost of participation less, rely on
    “swarm” intelligence
   Shown that ordinary people not any less informed
    than activists
January 28, 2009
Civic Innovation: Sirianni
    Dialogue Innovations

 Appreciative inquiry
 Beneficiary assessment
 Citizen juries
 National issue forums
 Participatory action research
 Participatory rural appraisal
 Study circles
                 Fischer
   Role of science and technology in solving
    social problems
       Science as Social Control

   Foucalt argues that the language and
    vocabulary of science constructs a
    political universe. He contends that
    knowledge and power is built into the
    methodology of disciplines, and that
    instead of being a neutral force for
    discovering truth, science can be used
    to legitimate social control.
Examples of the types of problems that
        defy Easy Solutions
   Quality, cost and accountability in education
   Quality, cost and accountability in health care
   Reduction and/or disposal of solid waste
   Crime and the related issues of drugs and guns
   Restructuring of the economy (and resulting unemployment)
   Public sector debt
   Deterioration of the infrastructure
   Welfare reform
   Clean Rivers
Community Problem Solving: hardware
     and software solutions
 Problem           Hard solution          Soft solution
                   Defensive spending

 Crime             Police                 Community policing
                   Security systems
                   Prisons
 Water pollution   Sewer system           Storm water disconnect
 Waste             Collection/            Recycling
                   incineration
 War               Pentagon spending      Diplomacy
                                          “welfare” spending
 Child care        Private providers      extended family
                                          Neighbors
 Commuting         More/better highways   car pooling
                                          Flex car
                                          Mass transit
 Property loss/    Insurance              Neighborliness
 Health care                              Barn raising
                                          Preventative health
                                          Social network support
                                          care giving
Participation Techniques for Resolving
              the conflicts

   Dispute Resolution and conflict management
   Co-production of Methods, data, and public
    policy
   Changing basic relation: Citizen and expert
   New contractual relations (Good neighbor
    agreements)
    The Austin Plan Analysis
   Three forms of Representation

   Descriptive representative--the extent to
    which individual participation is
    descriptively similar to the larger groups
    they are intended to represent
    (demographic)
Forms of representation Cont.
    Trustee representation--the assumption that participants will
     apply independent judgment, and act according to conscience,
     while also considering what they have learned during
     deliberations. (representing the common good, or extension of
     government, most federalist in approach.)
    Opinion representation--also referred to as “delegate” form of
     representation: The extent to which participant opinions are
     similar to those of the larger group), regardless of demographic,
     that they are in touch with the neighborhood and represent in
     effect an opinion poll of the neighborhood
Tauxe
Moralistic vs. Rational way of doing
         business (Tauxe)

   while the technocratic rhetoric relied on the
    ideological power of the language of science,
    system, and expertise, the local rhetorical
    conventions relied on invocations of
    individualism--both the laissez-faire values of
    business and industry, and the rights of
    residents to resist the authority of planners,
    zoning ordinances, public utility
    commissioners, or anyone else interfering
    with the personal freedom in land use
    Who won? Who lost?
 Bureaucratic style was a requisite tool
 Local people who adapted fared better
  than those that didn’t
 Does a more mobile and diverse society
  demand rationalistic planning methods?
          Tauxe asks:
 can planning be a truly community
  based process? To be so it must not
  only democratize formal institutions and
  procedures but also make room for non-
  bureaucratic discourse and
  organizational form.
 Which leads to Communicative
  Planning theory
Innes: Communicative Planning
Innes: Comunicative Planning Method

   The communicative perspective
    represents a shift from a view widely
    held over at least the last 30 years, that
    the planner’s job is mainly to deliver
    unbiased, professional advice and
    analysis to elected officials and the
    public who in turn make decisions.
Issues in planning in practice
      Innes speaks to
  knowledge utilization
  The planning process is not neat and
   tidy
  Neutrality of science in doubt
  NIMBY/Policy gridlock
  “wicked problems”
Communicative Planning Model

 Knowledge that is embedded in social
  structure
 Co-producing intellectual capital
 The Value of Many kinds of information
 New forms of consensus (Bricolage)
 Repeat after me: I will learn as much
  from those I am “serving” as from those
  I “serve”
             Bricolage
   make creative and resourceful use of
    whatever materials are at hand
February 4, 2009
Introduction: Planning Process
    Levels of decision making


Governme nt   Ind ividual     Representa tive           Citizen s
De cides      consultatio n   Groups (stakeh olde rs)   De cide
Range and purpose CP Programs

 Public Affairs/Relations
 Public Education
 Policy Advisory
 Voluntary action
Inform   Consult   Involve Collaborate Empower
         Plan in a nutshell
   Determine regulatory basis
   Internal Assessment
   Learn about Community
   Audience identification
   Assess level of interest/issue management
   Detailed time line
   Write up plan and make it available
Strategies used by government for
       citizen participation
  Public hearings and open meetings
   94%--97%
  Surveys 58%
  Voter referenda 50%
  Citizen panels, committees, etc. 73%
      Interactive Exercise
   When should the public be involved?
Identifying issues that require public
             participation
    Desirability and feasibility
    The Decision will have a significant impact
    The Decision will affect some people more than
     others
    The decision will impact a vested interest or use
    The decision involves a subject which is already
     controversial
    Needs active support to implement the decision
When you’re not sure if public
    should be involved:

   Check with others who have worked on
    similar issues
   Check with other nearby communities
   Ask the stakeholders
   Conduct Focus groups
   Design in checkpoints
   Don’t expect to be right all the time
         Be familiar with:

 Regulations governing citizen
  participation
 Existing working agreements
 Culture of organization you work with
 Expectations of citizens
 History and culture of people you are
  working with
       Preliminary Questions before
             developing plan

   Describe key affected individuals and groups
   How important is this issue likely to be to the key
    affected individuals
   How controversial do they think the issue will be?
   What kind of participation activities do they think
    would be appropriate?
   Level of probable public interest
   What are the issues that are likely to emerge?
The decision making process can affect
  the credibility of public participation:

  Too narrow a definition of the problem
  A perception of advocacy or “selling”
  Limited alternatives considered
  Too little time allowed for public
   participation
  Lack of visibility
Make sure you have the resources to
carry out the plan, including job roles

    Spokespersons
    Technical Experts
    Meeting facilitators
    Graphic Designers
    Public Relations
    Mailing list Managers
    Management (on board?)
    Elected Officials (on board?)
        Writing up the Plan
   Assures that public participation is well thought
    through
   Makes sure that the plan is coordinated with all
    affected parts of the organization
   Integrated with Decision Making and Internal
    Coordination
   Allows for Management Review
   Allows for Public Review
   Provides Documentation
    A plan should contain

 Sequential plan of activities
 Issues management activities
 Review Points
 Budget and Staff Resources
 Length of Public Participation Plans
    Information Product Guidelines
   Who are you trying to reach?
   What is the message?
   Two levels: already involved and not
   Demonstrate how action makes a difference
   Use short declarative sentences
   Use conversational English (8th grade level)
   Human scale comparisons rather than technical terms
   Limit length of material. Five double-spaced pages (1500
    words)
   Link individual elements to broader goals
   Pretest public information products
   Use graphics and illustrations to support written content
   Make it clear when fuller documentation is available
February 11, 2009
    Fears about Public Meetings (ODOT)
   Public wants control
   Misinformation/lack of information
   Technology fails/ or make bad presentation
   Conflicts between presenters
   leaders, no followers
   Disputes escalate, loose control of meeting
   Hostile audience (Frankenstein’s mom shows up)
   No one shows up
   Unable to accommodate wishes
   Look stupid or disorganized
   Public unwilling to deal with constraints
   Don’t achieve goals of meeting
   Fear of public speaking
   People will walk out
   There will be errors in data
   Other issues will surface (unsolvable ones)
Techniques for getting information to the public

  Briefings                      Media kits
                                 news conferences and
  Exhibits and displays            media briefings
  Feature stories                Newsletters
  Information Repositories       Newspaper inserts
                                 News releases
  Internet                       Paid advertisements
  Mailings (key reports, etc.)   Panels
  Media interviews/talk          Presentations
     shows                       Public Service
                                   Announcements
                                 Symposia
Techniques for Getting information from the
                 Public
Appreciative inquiry summit       – Open house
Beneficiary assessment            – Open space
Charrette                         – Participatory Rural
City Walk                           Appraisal
Coffee Klatch                     – Participatory Technology
Computer-aided negotiation          Assessment
Consensus building/Consensus      – Participatory
    conference                      television/cable
Field trips                       – Plebiscite
Focus groups                      – Polls and Surveys
Future Search                     – Public Hearings
Groupware                         – Retreats
Hotlines                          – Samoan circles
Interviews                        – SARAR
Multiattribute utility analysis   – Town Meetings
Large groups/small group          – Visioning
      How to Identify audiences
   Level 1--People or organizations (if any) that are so
    interested or involved that they need to be treated as
    partners in designing and conducting the process
   Level II--People or organizations who must be
    involved in the major public involvement activities, if
    these activities are to be creditable
   Level III--People or organizations who need to be
    involved in the technical aspects of the process only
   Level IV--People or organization who need to be kept
    informed, and offered opportunities to participate, so
    they can make a choice whether to participate
              Exercise
   Identifying audiences
    Some Operating Principles for Public
          Involvement Groups

   1. Create a set of operating rules for the meetings. Also make clear rules
    about how members communicate with the public and media.
   2. Understand and assure that stakeholders are representing the interests
    of whom they represent.
   3. Make decision making process clear and transparent, and make sure
    the larger context for decision making is clear.
   4. Create a knowledge base that equalizes participation. (Refer: Butman)
   5. Make sure you have adequate resources to manage the process.
   6. Remember the principles of: mutual understanding, shared
    responsibility, full participation, inclusive decisions.
   7. Understand the stages of communication in a longer term group
    process.
   8. Give everyone roles and responsibilities, create key roles
   9. Member selection—How to dictate or modify process to accommodate
    learning and participation styles
   10. Turnover and Introduction of new members
Hopes about public meetings (ODOT)

   Everyone will understand
   People will participate freely
   Cross section of public will show up
   Everyone will be truthful
   Solutions will be found
   Group will reach consensus
   No one will show up
   Leave with a positive feeling
   Issues that are important will surface
   Won’t be waste of time
   Ownership will be established
   Image of organization will improve
   There will be full house
   That staff will be able to be impartial listeners
   Get out alive
    Some Operating Principles for Public
          Involvement Groups

   1. Create a set of operating rules for the meetings. Also make clear rules
    about how members communicate with the public and media.
   2. Understand and assure that stakeholders are representing the interests
    of whom they represent.
   3. Make decision making process clear and transparent, and make sure
    the larger context for decision making is clear.
   4. Create a knowledge base that equalizes participation. (Refer: Butman)
   5. Make sure you have adequate resources to manage the process.
   6. Remember the principles of: mutual understanding, shared
    responsibility, full participation, inclusive decisions.
   7. Understand the stages of communication in a longer term group
    process.
   8. Give everyone roles and responsibilities, create key roles
   9. Member selection—How to dictate or modify process to accommodate
    learning and participation styles
   10. Turnover and Introduction of new members
     Facilitator's Guide
 Principles for Participatory decision
  making
 Facilitation Fundamentals--skills
  necessary for any process
 Facilitator Role
 Steps for building sustainable
  agreements
Participatory Decision-making core
               values

 Full participation
 mutual understanding
 inclusive solutions
 shared responsibility
Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory
          Decision-Making
Calculus of Diversity--Limited
Calculus of Diversity--Expanded
Gathering Diverse Points of
   View (the Divergent Zone)
   Surveying the territory: Collecting
    perspectives

   Searching for alternatives: Generation
    of ideas

   Raising difficult issues: speaking freely
Key to surveying Territory
 Divergence is OK
 Resolution is not the goal
 Goal is to Gather diverse points of view
 Goal to get people to think outside the
  box and to not just represent their
  opinion or position
February 18, 2009
Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory
          Decision-Making
    Building shared framework of
            understanding

 Enter the groan zone
 Goal: create shared context
 Goal: Strengthen relationships
    Creating Shared Context

If I were you…..
Backing up from solutions to needs
Meaningful themes (sub-text reasons)
How will ____ impact our ____
Multiple time frames
    Strengthening Relationships
   Getting to Know each other
    – Anecdotes and mementos
    – Two truths and a lie
    – The support seat
   Giving and receiving feedback
    – Observations and interpretations (one-to-one)
    – Appreciations
    – How do I come across?
Exercises: Mutual Understanding

 Pig Personality Profile
 Learning differences
 Other ice breakers and mutual
  framework building exercises
        Community Stories
   Finding balance between traditional ways of doing
    things and the rationalistic system
   Influence of story on the way we live our lives
   Constructed social knowledge, made up of rational
    science and experiential knowledge
   Lowering the cost of governance and distributing
    costs of constructing/maintaining the commons and
    public sphere
   Assessing progress toward long term goals, e.g.
    sustainability (costs and benefits)
   Goal is to maintain or create an inhabitation pattern
    that is sustainable
     Rappaport’s Narrative Analysis

   Rappaport's proposes that society, community, and
    individual perspectives are embodied in three
    narrative typologies:

   Dominate cultural narratives are those stories about
    persons, places and things that have consistent
    storyline and thematic content across individuals and
    settings. These narratives reflect societal views
    about people, places and things.
     Rappaport’s Narrative Analysis
   Community narratives are descriptive and historical accounts of
    life in a particular community which are accessible to community
    members. The presence of shared community narratives can
    be indicative of shared community experiences and identity.

   Personal stories refer to personal accounts of one’s own life or
    observations.
Ten reasons why we'll always need a good
                 story
   1.    Stories first of all are a playground for language, an arena for
          exercising this extraordinary power.
   2.    Second, stories create community.
   3.    Stories help us to see through the eyes of other people.
   4.    To show us the consequences of our actions.
   5.    To educate our desires
   6.    Stories help us dwell in place
   7.    Stories help us dwell in time.
   8.    Aware of time passing…we mourn things passing away, and we often
          fear the shape of things to come. Hence our need for the eighth
          power of stories, which is to help us deal with suffering, loss, and
          death.
   9.    Stories teach us how to be human
   10.   The wisest stories acknowledge the wonder and mystery of creation
          and that is the tenth power of stories.
    The Role of Story in Building
            Community
   Influence of story on the way we live our lives
      Dominate cultural stories, community, and individual
   The knowledge to over come rather than learning to work with
    (Columbia River)
      Saving the strongest salmon
   White Wolf in the Amazon
      Shaman’s son and knowledge of the forest
   Sand Maps in the Australian outback
   Valuing experiential knowledge as well as scientific or technical
      The story of Bob Benson
   Beavergate
Broader Vision, Civic Story
   “The role of sustainability in the city
    (Portland, Oregon) oozes out of
    every ounce of the city’s government
    operations, and affects the way the
    government is organized and
    functions.”(Portney)
    Portland’s Civic Story
 Over 30 year period Portland created a
  civic story, in part myth, in part reality
 It dictates civic behavior
 Citizens expect to be involved
 Bureaucrats and elected officials expect
  citizens to be involved.
Example of Community Story Exercise,
         Brisbane Australia

 What is the Story?
 Where did it come from?
 If it is a good story how do you maintain
  it?
 Is it sustainable (socially, economically,
  environmentally)
     Developing Story skills
   The art of learning: how to learn from stories and
    other forms of communication
   Ritual: setting deeper context for discussion
   Using story to get to know one another
   Community Strengths or assets
   Narrative analysis
   Practice Stories
Summary: Community Stories
     Community stories are created based on the
     interaction between the place and its people
    But community stories are also co-opted by
     dominate cultural narratives
    A good community story is socially,
     environmentally, and economically
     sustainable
    Citizens need to feel they are a part of
     creating the story so that the cost of
     governance is lowered.
Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory
          Decision-Making
    Developing Inclusive Decisions
   Exploring Inclusive Principles
     – How can we do both (p. 187)
     – Develop your own group inclusivity process
   Creative Reframing
     – Two ways of looking at a problem (p. 196)
     – Examples: removing restraints, catastrophizing
   Strengthening good ideas
     – Again important to create agreed upon process
     – Examples: who does what, who else needs to evaluate?
2. Creative Reframing: Ways of looking at
               the problem
     Its them                  All of us
     It’s a problem            An opportunity
     Goal unachievable         Need realistic steps
     Product won’t sell        Selling to wrong people
     Not enough resources      Wasting resources we have
     Need more input           Attention to existing input
     Incompetence              Maybe not enough time
     Not enough money          New sources of money
     Can’t get along           Not enough commitment
     Don’t have power          Where’s our leverage
     Not enough time           prioritize
1. Inclusive Principles: How to do both?
      Other Reframing
 What’s unchangeable about problem?
 Key words
 Reversing assumptions
 Removing constraints
 Recentering the cause
 Catastrophizing
3. Strengthening good ideas
 Clarifying evaluation criteria
 Payoffs and risks
 Can we really make this work?
 Who else needs to evaluate the
  proposal?
 Who does what by when?
Reaching Closure
Decision making without rules
    To whiner goes the spoil
    Put on next meeting agenda and nothing happens
    Decision made behind closed doors
    Certain people always get their way
    Meeting drags on and on
    Fixed positions stalemate the discussion
    Time runs out final thoughts become the decision
    some poor person given the task to decide
    Person with most stake gets their way
    Common Decision Rules
 Unanimous agreement
 Majority vote
 Person-in-charge decides after
  discussion
 Delegation
 Flip a coin
 Person in charge decides without
  discussion
    Striving for Unanimity
 Consensus: is the process by which a
  group thinks and feels together en route
  to decision
 Unanimity is the point at which the
  group reaches closure
Gradients of Agreement
EXTRA SLIDES
     Civic Innovations: Premises
   Innovation as response to complex public problems resistant to
    traditional policy solutions and institutional routines
   That innovations come from public and private/nonprofit, citizens
    working together
   That there is strong activism, not decline but transformation
   Citizen and citizen groups empowered, and that equalization of
    power vs. old elite model is good but needs innovations to
    succeed.
   Unfortunately, market economics turning citizens into customers
Deliberative Democracy Theories

 Policy Learning
 Organizational Learning
 Participatory Democratic Theory
          Examples
 Woburn Mass. Citizen science
 Siting hazardous waste
 Watershed health
Summary Theoretical Writings
    Sidney Tarrow: Social movements
    DeTocqueville: Roots of American democracy
    Daniel Kemmis: Direct and Representative forms of democracy
    Jeffrey Berry: Growth of citizen interest groups
    Robert Putnam: Civic engagement and social capital
    Siranni and Friedland: Civic innovations
    Morris Fiorina: excesses of democracy
    Fischer: intractable problems and role of science
    Day: How to evaluate citizen participation
    Tauxe: Limits of rational planning process
    Beatley: Representation
    Innes: communicative planning theory

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:27
posted:11/2/2011
language:English
pages:166