“Participation is a Goal, not just a Means, in NFPs.”

1. “Participation is a Goal, not just a Means, in NFPs.” Margaret A. Shannon, Ph.D. COST Action E-19 Vienna, September 15, 2003

2. Why Participation in NFPs? The essence of democracy is the self-organizing capacity of the polity in the creation of public issues and the will to struggle for public answers (policy).

3. Change and Uncertainty • Scientific information changes as questions change, as technologies change, and as the natural world itself changes. • Social values, political interests, and the nature of public questions are products of discovery, and thus are highly dynamic in an information-rich world with rapid change in perspective and knowledge.

4. Generative Politics • Actors must be animated – they are not just sitting on their porches waiting for another meeting to attend. • Interests must be created – they are not waiting in a little package carried in people’s pockets. • Values must be discovered – they emerge as choices are analyzed and debated. • Public issues arise in public debate– it is through public dialogue that private conflicts and choices are pushed into the public arena.

5. Essential elements of NFPs • Participatory • Collaborative • Iterative and adaptive • Intersectoral policy coordination

6. Participation as a Means – rationalist policy models Core assumption is that technical information and analysis conducted by experts is the best way to make “good” policy. The role of participation is to improve the nature and quality of information considered by the policy and decision makers. Participation can improve information by: • Expanding information sources • Representing different interests and stakeholders • Legitimizing the outcome based upon the inputs

7. Participation as a Goal – communicative policy model Goal is to engage the policy actors in defining the problems, identifying possible solutions, and participating the evaluating the outcomes of different strategies. Substantive goals of participation: • Engagement • Commitment • Policy networks • Multi-level governance

8. Assessing Participation in NFPs Can we develop a set of evaluative criteria consistent with each model that might allow us to judge the participatory quality of specific NFP processes?

9. Success in rationalist terms • All issues considered • All information identified • Policy makers aware of consequences • Legitimacy of outcomes • Procedural fairness • Representation of all interests • Negotiation among stakeholders

10. Success in communicative terms • Relationships formed and stabilized • Open and transparent information sharing • Engaged participants who create capacity for policy processes • Capacity building • Collaboration that activates resources and organization

11. Critique • Neither model is sufficient in isolation. • The rationalist model assumes the social and political capacity already exists and all that is necessary is adequate process. • The communicative model downplays the importance of technical feasibility and scientific credibility in policy in an effort to be relationships.

12. Constructivist Policy Model A constructivist policy model recognizes that both scientific and communicative aspects are critical in creating an empirically-grounded and politically legitimate policy with adequate implementation capacity to make a difference.

13. NFPs as Constructivist Policy Processes • Animation of actors and the creation of values, interests, issues, and public questions is the key problematic in building NFPs. • Creating scientific information responsive to these actors, values, interests, issues and public questions challenges the scientific, technical, and professional communities.

14. Information and interests are not exogenous to the process. • Scientific credibility can only be achieved when the information used in the policy process responds to the problems at issue and embraces the understanding of all actors, not just one privileged group (experts). • The political legitimacy of the process results when this information is created in open and transparent processes, where actors are engaged in the information creation and analysis processes, and where differences of situation are taken into account when creating and implementing new policy strategies.

15. NFP is not a thing, it is a way of thinking and organizing. NFPs are a dynamic, social process whereby actors from different policy sectors and across governance levels work together to better understand the problems facing them and society, to create policy strategies that are integrative (cross-sectoral and interdisciplinary), and reflective of cultural and political differences.

16. Capacity for continuous learning • Most importantly, this is not a “one time event,” rather it is an ongoing social process that provides the capacity for continuous learning and social engagement of actors across many different social sectors.

17. Democratic purposes of participation • Incorporation of change and uncertainty • Animation of actors • Creation of interests • Discovery of values • Stabilizing relationships • Capacity building • Activation of resources