Democracy Matters phase 2: analysis of responses

1. Introduction

Background

In December 2017 the Scottish Government and COSLA launched the Local Governance Review to ensure Scotland's diverse communities and different places have greater control and influence over decisions that affect them most. The Review is doing this by considering how powers, responsibilities and resources should be shared across national and local spheres of government, and with communities.

In 2018 the Scottish Government launched the Democracy Matters engagement process alongside the community sector. Community-led conversations across Scotland considered a small number of big questions about the role of communities in the future of local democracy. People from diverse backgrounds overwhelmingly wanted greater control and influence over those decisions that affect their community the most.

Building on these findings, Ministers and the COSLA Presidential Team launched a second phase of Democracy Matters engagement in August 2023 for a period of six months. As part of this, communities across Scotland came together to consider what that control and influence should look like where they live.

Democracy Matters 2 sought to generate deeper learning by engaging with communities to use a specific set of questions to consider what different governance arrangements could look like in different places. The questions looked across all public services and the role that communities might play in their design and delivery to improve local people's lives. Engagement was open to everyone across Scotland, and communities were encouraged to discuss and respond to the questions with their families, friends and neighbours. Participation was particularly sought from community representatives and equalities groups across island, rural and urban areas, to understand different perspectives.

Engagement approach

A public consultation was open from 28 August 2023 to 28 February 2024, with participants invited to share their views through multiple channels:

• On the Scottish Government's Citizen Space consultation hub, which enables anyone with an interest to submit a response.
• The Scottish Government funded a range of equalities organisations including the Glasgow Disability Alliance, the Children's Parliament, the Poverty Alliance, Black and Ethnic Minority Infrastructure Scotland (BEMIS), Forth Valley Sensory Centre and Making Rights Real to carry out engagement with communities of interest.
• A total of 58 conversations were funded by small grants of up to £300 awarded to community organisations to enable them to facilitate their own events through funding the hire of a venue, professional facilitation, publicity, transport to the venue, verbal translation services, refreshments or organising a crèche.
• Seven events were coordinated and facilitated across Scotland in the community engagement process, by Scottish Community Development Centre (SCDC) and Development Trust Association Scotland (DTAS). A final online session event was held on 22 February 2024 where 10 participants from the facilitated events shared reflections with each other and further refined the ideas generated.

Participant profile

Democracy Matters Phase 2 received 166 unique responses. The vast majority - 159 responses - were submitted directly onto the Citizen Space consultation hub or emailed to the Scottish Government. Of these:

• 83 responses arose from conversations within communities hosted by, for example, community organisations, community councils, third sector organisations, and equality advocacy groups.
• 46 organisations submitted their views.
• 30 were sent by individuals who responded to the consultation.

The other seven responses were reports on the facilitated conversations. While these were not submitted to Citizen Space, summary reports were considered in the analysis^[1].

Information on the geographic profile of community conversations and the seven facilitated conversations is provided in Appendix A.

Analysis approach

The Lines Between was commissioned to provide a robust, independent analysis of the responses to the public consultation. This included producing summary reports for the seven facilitated conversations.

The main purpose of consultation analysis is to understand the full range of views expressed. This report therefore provides a thematic analysis, presenting the themes identified in responses from most to least commonly mentioned. All themes, including views shared by small numbers of participants, are covered; an insightful view expressed by a very small number of participants is not given less weight than more general comments shared by a majority. Similarly, all responses have an equal weighting. We recognise this means a response from an individual has the same weight as the response from an organisation which may represent many members, but this approach ensures all views are presented.

Qualitative analysis identifies the key themes across responses to each question, including any themes evident at multiple questions. The research team developed an adaptive coding framework for use during the coding process.

While qualitative analysis of open-ended questions does not permit the quantification of results, to assist the reader in interpreting the findings, we use the following framework to convey the most to least commonly identified themes in responses to each question:

• The most common / second most common theme; the most frequently identified.
• Several participants; another prevalent theme, but not the most common.
• Some participants; a recurring theme.
• A few/a small number of participants; a less commonly mentioned theme.
• Two/one participants; a singular comment or a view identified in two responses.

Where appropriate, quotes from a range of participants are included to illustrate key points and provide useful examples, insights and contextual information.

Considerations

When reviewing the analysis in this report, we would ask the reader to consider:

• Public consultations invite everyone to express their views; individuals and organisations interested in the topic are more likely to respond than those without a direct or known interest. This self-selection means the views of participants do not necessarily represent the views of the entire population.
• Reflecting the large number of people who took part, it is impossible to detail every response in this report. The level of detail provided across responses varied considerably and a few organisations shared lengthy submissions reflecting their specific subject matter expertise. These responses are referenced where possible. Full responses to the consultation, where permission for publication was granted, can be found on the Scottish Government's consultation website.
• Many participants submitted responses directly the Scottish Government which either followed a shorter set of questions designed for conversations (see appendix C) or did not align with the consultation questions. These responses have all been included, with analysts exercising their judgement about the most relevant place to include this material for analysis purposes.
• There was significant overlap in views across the consultation questions, with participants often making points or raising suggestions under one question which more directly related to another question. Again, analysts ensured all information was included in the most relevant place for analysis.
• The focus of the conversations and the depth of conversation on particular issues also varied significantly between responses, depending on the composition and interest of the groups and how they were facilitated.