close open_in_new

Widely diverse rationales exist for public participation programs. Sometimes there is a desire to inform the public or to get feedback on existing proposals. Sometimes there is a desire to help the public engage together in powerfully co-creative citizenship. Sometimes there is interest in bringing latent community wisdom to bear on public policy. We need to consider a full range of possible outcomes in the very earliest stages of public participation planning. If outcomes are considered first, it is very likely that multiple process programs will be recognized as necessary to satisfy the full range of desired outcomes.


The initial list below is far from comprehensive, but I hope it will serve as a stimulant toward creating an expanding list of outcome options useful to everyone involved. Please wonder as you read it: What possible desirable public participation outcomes are missing here? Note your answers and add them to the dialogue about this..


Note that the categories into which I have clustered the outcomes are only a rough initial take on how these various potential outcomes might be grouped. So they, too, are subject to modification.


AN INITIAL LIST OF POSSIBLE DESIRABLE OUTCOMES OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION


Input Outcomes


  • Citizens have given input to officials.
  • Officials know better what citizens think and feel.
  • Participating citizens have chosen from among options provided to them by officials.
  • Public judgment has shaped public policy, public opinion and/or public behaviors.

Participation Outcomes


  • There has been opportunity for all interested people to participate.
  • Interest groups feel their voices have been heard.
  • Lots of citizens feel that their voices have been heard.
  • Some citizens have had a direct and intense experience of citizenship.
  • Everyone involved - including citizens generally - feel the process has been fair.
  • The public believes there has been public involvement.

Social Consensus Outcomes


  • People have been educated about the issues.
  • Citizens have come to agree with the policies officials want to pursue.
  • Diverse sectors in the community are "on the same page."
  • The community is generally and broadly aware that a participatory process has been happening.
  • Thousands or millions of citizens have had a vicarious experience of intense citizenship.
  • The community feels like it has spoken, like "We the People" have spoken.
  • The process offers potential for ongoing collective learning by the whole community.

Diversity Outcomes


  • The diversity of the forum has been considered adequate by the community and/or the relevant stakeholder groups
  • Conflict in the community has been addressed and there is more mutual understanding.
  • The diversity in the community - or around the issue - has been used creatively.

Quality of Output Outcomes


  • The public is impressed with the quality of the solutions.
  • Realistic solutions have been chosen that can be readily implemented within the scope of existing institutions and players.
  • Recommendations have been developed that can demonstrate measurable results within a few months or years.
  • People have been motivated into actions or behaviors that will serve the common good.
  • Imaginative solutions and perspectives have been found that excite people to move beyond what has been done before.
  • Public policies and programs have resulted that prove to have long-term, broadly beneficial impacts acknowledged by the whole community.
  • The community's capacity for successful self-governance or self-organization has been enhanced. I'm a bit concerned that we're starting with "input." We might step back and add "Agenda-Setting." For the public to be empowered to self-identify policy issues is the ultimate goal, so that the community is self-governing in a more profound manner than responding to agendas identified by the officials. This is hinted at by stating "public judgment has shaped public policy..." but I'm not certain we're stating this strongly enough.