Originally published 13 June 2014. This article is retained from the tCI archive. Law, policy or practice may have changed since publication.
We have known for some time that the UK is almost certainly one of the world leaders in public consultation. When Elizabeth Gammell and I spoke at a World Bank conference eighteen months ago, it confirmed much that we already suspected, and scarcely a week now passes in the Institute without further evidence that consultation know-how is in demand internationally. It is one reason we have appointed Dutchman, Remmert Keijzer to spearhead our involvement in Europe.
It is not that other countries do not currently consult, though many use slightly different terminology. In one key area of policy, they have little choice. In 1998, the United Nations in Europe came together in Denmark to agree the Aarhus Convention. This is a landmark agreement that, inter alia committed countries to consult their public on major projects that had implications for the environment. It strengthened the role of environmental impact assessments and gave people rights to information and to ‘participation’ in environmental decision-making. In effect it encourages consultation.
In a week’s time, Institute Fellow, Jonathan Bradley will join Remmert in representing us at the ‘Fifth meeting of the Parties’ at Maastricht, the Netherlands. The on-going work of ensuring compliance with key international participative initiatives sounds boring but it is at the heart of many of our day-to-day controversies, be they about nuclear power, wind farms, railway lines, flood prevention or any number of environmental issues. For all these, good consultation is essential.
Now look north to Sweden. Earlier this month, its local authorities convened a ‘Democracy Summit’ to look at future challenges in a country famous for its consensual culture – and very high levels of voter turnout. Conclusions offered by a panel of international experts (including Susan Ritchie, who is one of our Associates, Edward Andersson of Involve who is now based in Malmo, Catherine Howe of Public-I and Elke Loeffler of Governance International) suggest that even here, there is a likely need for a more ‘deliberative’ approach. It means engaging the public to think through some difficult issues, and to be consulted other than through the ballot-box.
Elections may not feature in China – but consultation does! In two weeks, the Institute will host a high-level delegation of civil servants pioneering the use of online consultation for pre-legislative engagement in that vast country. This is part of an exciting sequence of EU-China “policy dialogues” and Fraser Henderson has already visited Beijing as he and Quintin Oliver are part of an international project team to help the Chinese understand best practice in this area.
With another of our Associates, Mike Bartram, busy in Morocco on a World Bank project to embed public consultation into the Kingdom’s constitution one asks whether all these initiatives are just a random collection of unrelated steps. Or is something happening out there?
Our view is that almost all countries we know have adopted some form or another of public participation, usually a reflection of its own political culture, the freedom with which people can argue and campaign and the willingness of the media to encourage transparent debate. But all these local consultation environments are being overwhelmed by the immense power of the international culture of social media. The last ten years has seen a remarkable transformation in people’s ability to become informed and to organise themselves for political, social and, problematically for religious reasons. Although many see this as an empowerment of the citizens, there are others who fear at the destabilising effects that have already been seen in many countries.
What is undeniable is that there is increased interest in finding ways to organise effective public consultation in ways that encourage robust but manageable debate but without some of the risks of political upheaval. And, boring as this may be for radicals on all sides of the political spectrum, it is a pragmatic response to a modern-day challenge.
There is much to do. Best practice needs to evolve and respond to the range of environments where consultation needs to thrive. But we do not have all the answers here in the UK, and we see a need to study practice in other countries. For that reason, Remmert will work with Keith Butterick of the Huddersfield Centre for Communications and Consultation Research to devise a major programme of pan-European research into consultation. Stand by for an important Proposal Conference this autumn.
In the meantime, it’s nice to know that, despite needing a lot of improvement, we have a proud international reputation for consultation…if not for football!
TRIGGER POINTS
- Rhion Jones’ paper as presented to the Swedish local Authorities is called “Democratic challenges – a consultation-based perspective” and is available upon request from Jan Warner on 01767 318350 or hello@consultationinstitute.org
- Susan Ritchie’s paper is called “A practitioner’s view of Democracy”, and can also be obtained from Jan Warner.
- For details of the 5th meeting on the Aarhus Convention, see http://www.aarhusmaastricht.org
- If you are interested in the forthcoming research project on pan-european consultation practice, contact Remmert Keijzer on hello@consultationinstitute.org
This is the 262ndTuesday Topic; a full list of subjects covered is available for Institute members and is a valuable resource covering so many aspects of consultation and engagement