Public Value and Participation: A Literature Review for the Scottish Government

CHAPTER TWO DEFINING PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

What is Public Participation?

2.1 Defining what we mean by public participation is an important first step. The field is littered with jargon and citizens can sometimes be 'turned off' or feel alienated by the belief that specialist knowledge is a pre-requisite for involvement. Phrases such as Best Value, Closing the Opportunity Gap, and 'citizen and consumer focused public service provision' are unlikely to trip off the tongues of those who are unfamiliar with the public service reform debate. Yet all of these initiatives depend for their success on engagement with the public. Moreover, a lack of clarity about what the participation process involves can cause confusion and potentially engender scepticism amongst participants. What could be more off-putting than a public 'consultation' over a policy or decision whose outcome has already been decided? The UK government's consultation on the future of nuclear power, for instance, did little to contribute to an open and transparent decision making process or to foster trust in political leaders. Indeed, legal action was taken to require the government to consult again, although participants and commentators remained highly dissatisfied with the process. ¹⁰ Whilst extreme, this underlines the importance of honesty about what the outcomes of participation are likely to be and the need for clarity of language.

2.2 From whichever angle one approaches the subject, participation involves the ideas of 'enabling', 'enhancing' and having an active part in a larger process of deliberation. Put simply, this means that people have the chance to have a say in the decisions that affect their lives, be it how they pay their taxes, apply for a driving licence, get a doctor's appointment or think about Britain's energy policy, beyond their visit to the ballot box once every four years.

2.3 These principles are well understood. However, the selection of examples in Box 2.1 illustrate that there are subtle differences in the way that organisations talk about participation. By indicating that participation goes beyond 'gathering evidence and opinions', 'improving service delivery' and 'consultation', it is suggested that the different terms for participation also denote different levels of engagement with the public. In practice, this means that the desired outcome and the public's expectations of the process vary. What this really boils down to is two simple questions: how much weight is attributed to the opinions or preferences of members of the public engaged in the process, and therefore how much effort, time, energy and thought can people be expected to make?

2.4 This concept has traditionally been modelled on a ladder or scale, which is illustrated in the Public Participation Spectrum in Box 2.2 on the following page. For the purpose of clarity in this literature review we will be using the term 'public participation' to denote all activities by which members of the public (whether defined as citizens, users or consumers) contribute to shaping the decisions taken by organisations, from consultation (second from left in Box 2.2) to empowerment at the other end of the spectrum. The last section of the table offers examples of the appropriate techniques that can be used to achieve each goal. Annex one contains a more detailed list of methodologies.

2.5 An alternative to categorising the different 'types' of participation is to pose the following questions:

• Why do organisations want the public to participate?
• Is it:
  • To communicate information?
  • To gauge public opinion or gather the views of a particular 'micro-public'?
  • To provide guidance on a particular decision? or
  • To ask members of the public to take decisions themselves?

Box 2.2 The Public Participation Spectrum

Source: The IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation (International Association for Public Participation, 2007)

2.6 Yet another way of thinking about the process is to envisage what participation looks like from inside and outside an organisation. For instance, as a public manager with experience and expertise in a particular field, you may have a specific view about what is important to you if the organisation is to be run efficiently and effectively. But viewed from 'outside', the public may have a very different set of priorities. Public value suggests that public managers develop an 'outside-in' frame of reference, where their ability to run the organisation depends on a much keener appreciation of those things that the public genuinely value. This means that a balance must be struck between an organisation's internal priorities and public concern with particular issues. Sometimes public opinion may be ill-informed (witness the controversy about the MMR vaccination) but the role of the public manager is to respond sympathetically to these concerns, offer an account that tries to change the public mind and listens carefully to the views of citizens as the process unfolds.

Public value and participation in practice

2.7 Whilst public value offers a new framework for thinking about how citizens engage with the state, governments, public institutions, organisations and citizens are already taking part in numerous participatory activities. A simple way of distinguishing between the many participatory methods used in practice is offered by Curtain (2003), who identifies four broad types of practical initiative: 'traditional,' 'customer-oriented feedback,' 'participative innovations' and 'deliberative methods'. The survey of participatory methods employed by 216 English local authorities cited in Box 2.3 reveals a significant level of activity and a set of well-tried techniques, although it should be noted that this survey covers only those methods used by elected officials and policy makers.

Box 2.3 Participatory Methods used by Local Authorities in England

Source: (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2002)

2.8 A survey by Nicholson (2005a) of the civic participation activities across the then Scottish Executive also revealed that over 191 different policy initiatives were supported by civic participation activities in 2004, of which the most common form was written consultation (39 per cent of all activity reported). Whilst newer research techniques, such as the use of focus groups and opinion polls were also being used, Nicholson noted that earlier experimentation with different forms of participatory activities appeared to have given way to more conventional activities, such as holding seminars and meetings.

2.9 The Scottish Government is by no means the only organisation to adopt participatory approaches: a wide range of instruments are in use across the Scottish public sector. These were mapped by a research company in 2000, which found that the most commonly used techniques for engaging the public were: developing links with community groups; holding open or public meetings; adopting new research methods (such as focus groups and surveys); communicating information via exhibitions and local newsletters. Written consultations, collecting user comments and complaints, and running workshops were also regularly used. A full list of techniques can be found in annex two. Whilst this does not represent the considerable number of initiatives to encourage greater public participation that have been put in place since this survey was published in 2000, it nonetheless illustrates the range and scale of the activities that public institutions were engaged in at this time, and offers an useful point of comparison with Nicholson's more recent work. Although the categories used are different, it is interesting to note that there are similarities between this mapping exercise and Nicholson's findings from central government that written consultations, seminars and meetings with target sector groups, and focus groups were some of the most commonly used participatory methods.

2.10 However, there are now numerous examples of experimentation with less conventional approaches to participation in localities across Scotland. Some areas are setting up local authority-wide citizens' assemblies, run by and for community representatives, meeting regularly with 100 to 125 delegates. The introduction of Community Planning (described in chapter three), designed 'as a framework for making public services responsive to, and organised around, the needs of communities' has encouraged the development of different approaches to engaging with the public. Aberdeen City Voice initiative is one well-known example, described in Box 2.4 on page 16.

2.11 Combining these various 'top-down' methods developed by governments, departments and public institutions with participatory activity emanating from the 'bottom-up' (meaning those that are led by community or campaign groups), suggests that participatory models are more developed than is commonly supposed. This conclusion is supported by an Economic and Social Research Council research funded programme on civic participation, which found that while voter turnout may be low, people participate in numerous other forms of civic participation (broadly conceived), such as signing petitions, contacting MPs and joining protests (Pattie, Seyd and Whitely, 2003). Their analysis of civic engagement was based on questions asking respondents whether they had undertaken any of a series of different forms of action 'aimed at influencing rules, laws or policies' in the past year.

Summary

• The term public participation can broadly be defined as all activities by which members of the public (whether defined as citizens, users or consumers) contribute to shaping the decisions taken by public organisations.
• The purpose and methods of fostering public participation can be classified according to a scale or spectrum, with consultation at one end, and more deliberative techniques at the other. Public value promotes deliberative government but is not prescriptive about which methods to use to achieve this.
• A lot of participatory activity is occurring in Scotland, both at government level and within local public services. Mapping of these activities suggests that in spite of the numerous new initiatives introduced since 2000, more traditional forms of engagement, like inviting the public to take part in written consultations, continue to be the preferred approach and that these are being used in conjunction with newer research methods such as focus groups and opinion polling.

Having defined what we mean by public participation, the following section explores in greater depth what the drivers for this increased interest in public participation are.