ENHANCING CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN POLICY MAKING

Levels and opportunities for, individual citizen participation in policy making differ considerably across countries in the European Union. All countries provide at least a basic level of information on issues which can be accessed by the individual. Similarly, all make efforts to consult citizens during the policy making process, although some are more pro-active about this than others (e.g. some simply provide feedback mechanisms on the internet, while others actively seek to obtain citizens’ views through opinion polls and other mechanisms). Beyond this, however, there are considerable differences between countries in terms of citizens’ opportunities to actually participate in decision-making.

At EU  level, there are quite a number of mechanisms in place to ensure that citizens can make their voices heard directly. However, these mechanisms mainly focus on consultation and advising, stopping short of more involved levels of participation such as co-production and co-decision making.

Most of the mechanisms for citizen participation are government-led: that is, government provides the opportunity for citizens to make their voices heard, and thereby determines the extent to which citizens can participate. Citizens therefore generally play quite a passive role in terms of creating opportunities to be heard. In terms of engaging with the mechanisms in place, citizens largely play a fairly active role: for example, many consultation mechanisms (e.g. internet feedback or response forms) rely on citizens taking an interest in the issue at hand, rather than reaching out to citizens (e.g. through opinion polls).  

Citizens participate throughout the cycle of policy conception, development and implementation, though this varies from country to country. However, at both national and EU levels citizen participation tend to be most common during policy formulation, while participation in processes of monitoring and evaluation during policy implementation are less common and also more ad hoc (less structured mechanisms are in place).

Citizens at national and EU level are most commonly treated by policy makers as sources of information or as stakeholders rather than political actors, as evidenced by the scarcity of examples of co-production and co-decision.

Barriers to participation

Barriers range from a lack of awareness or interest among the general public, to a lack of time allocated for adequate consultation and participation, and a lack of resources for more expansive participatory processes. While some of these barriers (e.g. lack of interest) may be difficult to overcome, others can be addressed if policy makers are alert to them.

There are five types of citizens that avoid participation

1. The researchers : This group will only participate if they have had the opportunity to explore the whole issue, allowing them to develop a well-founded opinion. Generally, they claim a lack of information hinders their participation;
2. The suspicious : This group will not participate because they do not trust the government or the participatory process. They claim the decision has already been made and the process is a fake;
3. The ever-busy : This group is always busy and finds no time to participate, although they feel they should (as a duty to society). They claim their participation is not a preferred way of spending scarce quality time;
4. The indifferent : This group is not interested in anything outside their own microcosmos. They claim to have no interest in government decisions;
5. The uncertain : They lack confidence on their own possible role in participatory processes. They claim their opinion has no bearing on the matter.

Specific measures in terms of targeted communications, clear process steps and adequate information will result in a better attendance from these groups, although the latter three types of citizens will be hard to convince to participate.

Citizens are not always aware of the issues, or of the opportunities to participate. A common barrier to participation is a simple lack of awareness among citizens as to the issues under discussion, or of their rights and opportunities to contribute to that discussion. Consultations at national (and EU level) are often conducted on-line, which immediately excludes those members of society who do not have access to the internet. This problem is compounded by the fact that some opportunities to participate are simply not widely publicised . However, governments are getting better at providing information proactively rather than responsively.

A more difficult barrier to overcome is the fact that citizens are not always interested in the issues being discussed, or in participating in them. Apathy is a common problem encountered in the political sphere. It is possible that a lack of interest is actually a manifestation of a lack of understanding or awareness  or indeed to a lack of faith in the policy making process . Policy makers should therefore be alert to the need to provide information (about the issue as well as the opportunities to engage in the decision-making process) before assuming that citizens’ failure to participate is due to apathy. Positive engagement with citizens can help overcome apparent problems of apathy.

Other mechanisms for participation are sometimes preferred. Citizens simply prefer to participate through other mechanisms, such as local government, NGOs or other groups. They find this easier and more convenient, or they may wish to group together with others in order to strengthen their voice, thereby increasing their chances of being heard.

Citizens do not feel empowered, or do not believe they will be listened to. Throughout the EU, citizens have a basic lack of faith in the participatory nature of the policy making process – in other words, they feel that there is little likelihood of their opinions being taken on board and affecting the decisions taken by policy makers. This is particularly the case at the European level. Citizens believe that the only chance they have to influence European policy is to lobby their national and European parliamentary representatives and hope that they will campaign for them.

There is often a lack of time for adequate consultation or participation. A common barrier in most countries is that consultations are often carried out too quickly, or that they start too late in the policy process to allow citizens to participate effectively.

One of the reasons for a lack of citizen engagement in policy making at national level is due to a lack of imagination on the part of the authorities as to how to involve people. Mechanisms which are commonly used at local or even regional level – such as citizens’ juries, workshops, public hearings etc. – are hardly used at national level.

In many countries, institutionalised participation procedures proposed by authorities at national level are often mainly focused on informing the public, rather than actually involving them in the decision-making process. Some countries lack the resources needed for more extensive participation. For some countries the lack of financial and human resources needed to carry out extensive consultation or participation is acute.

Possible Solutions

• Raise awareness about the issues, and about the right to participate. Policy makers need to publicise the issues under discussion and the opportunities available to people to make their opinions heard.
• The importance of participation for the democratic process needs to be explained.
• Resources should be devoted to convincing the citizen of the justice and fairness of the decision-making process. Awareness raising and information provision should become more routine in European countries.
• Allowing more time for the policy making process is a key element in enhancing citizen participation. However, a longer timeframe should also be accompanied by additional opportunities to participate.
• Citizens have a tendency not to take part in public hearings because they feel uncomfortable expressing lay opinions in front of experts or other more knowledgeable parties. Hearings could be divided into two meetings – one for directly affected stakeholders, and one for indirectly affected stakeholders – so that citizens might be less shy and more actively involved. Another option would be to hold private ‘surgeries’ in addition to public meetings, to allow citizens to express concerns in a more private context.
• Governments could provide funds for citizen groups to undertake research of public documents and scientific, technical reports, and to network with other interest groups in other cities and countries.