One of the ways deliberative engagement differs from other types of engagement approaches is how people are recruited to take part.
A random, stratified recruitment approach is a core principle and one of the key strengths of a deliberative process. This critical step, however, can also be time-consuming and expensive.
“A recruitment process at a state government level with a high level of publicity is likely to lead to a big increase in people willing to take part in deliberations.”
With more organisations undertaking deliberation (and especially with councils and water authorities in Victoria being required to offer their communities higher levels of influence in planning processes), that means more recruitment taking place more often.
It can seem untenable to resource multiple, separate recruitment processes consecutively, particularly if previous recruitment campaigns have yielded less than ideal response rates.
EXPLORING SOLUTIONS
MosaicLab director Kimbra White and newDemocracy Foundation's Dr Lyn Carson have produced a research and development note exploring some ideas for reducing the costs and enhancing the effectiveness of recruiting for deliberative processes (i.e. community panels and citizen’s juries).
A potential role for electoral commissions in deliberative engagement
DELIBERATIVE RECRUITMENT AND REPRESENTATIVENESS EXPLAINED
Random, stratified recruitment, which is undertaken independently of the host organisation, results in a group of everyday citizens that are descriptively representative of the community impacted by the issue.
Not sure what that all means? That’s understandable! It’s a bit of a science, and a specialised area. You can explore this form of recruitment and what we mean by ‘representativeness’ in more detail in this previous article we published: Dilemma discussed > Representative views, and in another newDemocracy research and development note here: How to recruit participants for citizens’ assemblies.
AN EMERGING NEED
The Local Government Act of Victoria 2020 requires councils to undertake ‘deliberative engagement practices’ at least every four years.
“A state-wide recruitment process would provide a huge reduction in costs to councils in undertaking deliberative engagement as is required by the Act and would have the added benefit of publicising the fact that democracy is being done differently in Victoria at the local government level.”
The research note draws lessons from MosaicLab’s experience facilitating deliberative processes for nine local government authorities in the first round of deliberative engagement under Victoria’s new Local Government Act. The newDemocracy Foundation was involved in a review of these processes.
The note asks how multiple/many deliberative panels can be recruited cost-effectively. It explores different ways that councils could use these panels (including through a 'standing panel' model) and provides conditions for success to help them consider how this would work.
A standing panel is a group of people selected to collaborate around many issues over a long period of time. Read more about different models for deliberation in a previous Monthly Myth blog post: Deliberation is one time, one group, one issue.
AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH
The research note says:
"Given that the Local Government Act requires all councils to undertake ‘deliberative engagement practices’ at least every four years for four major plans (Community Vision, Council Plan, Asset Plan and Finance Plan), there could be considerable savings for councils if the recruitment was undertaken centrally on a state-wide basis whether this undertaken by the Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC), an independent recruitment organisation or a state government department.”
The note then goes on to outline how this could work (summarised below):
An independent organisation is appointed to undertake a state-wide recruitment process.
The organisation issues invitations to 10,000 households (randomly selected) in each of the 79 council areas to gain expressions of interest to participate in a deliberative panel (and remain available for up to two years).
The organisation collects the EOIs and checks them all for appropriate representation, randomisation and stratification with allowance for a top-up process every one to two years if needed.
Councils could then use these panels in at least two ways:
One-off panels – selected only when a council requests the independent organisation to select a certain number of people (say 50) to form a panel for a particular topic.
Standing panels – council chooses to appoint one ‘Standing Panel’ that operates over a longer time period and provides advice on more than one issue/topic. The independent organisation would then select people to match the demographics of the municipality and they become a standing panel for two years (or an eight-meeting commitment).
RELATED RESOURCES
MosaicLab blog: Dilemma discussed > Representative views. How to ensure you’re hearing from people that are proportional to and reflective of the wider community or stakeholders you’re trying to engage with.
MosaicLab blog: Monthly Myth > Deliberation is one time, one group, one issue.
newDemocracy R&D note: How to recruit participants for citizens’ assemblies.
newDemocracy handbook: Democracy Beyond Elections.
join our monthly newsletter
The Discussion shares the latest engagement news, ideas, case studies and more.
