contexts for public engagement: a policy perspective Julie Barnett Senior Research Fellow University of Surrey
Dec 31, 2015
contexts for public engagement: a policy
perspective
Julie BarnettSenior Research Fellow
University of Surrey
Perspectives on engagement
Practitioners and academics often note the value and necessity of policy development taking alternative framings and sources of expertise into account
Debates about upstream engagement and opening up Focus on participation, dialogue and deliberation Deliberative-analytic methods Development of engagement ‘tool kits’ Evaluating engagement
Consultation in the news
Policy considerations
the demand from policy for engagement the messiness of policy making evidence based policy making
contexts for engagement the policy cycle the policy domain
The demand from policy for engagement
Academics/providers suggest that engagement provides a ‘supply’ of worthwhile outcomes
Policy makers and practitioners in a range of institutional settings constitute the demand function
Generally little consideration of the framings that the policy setting imposes on the demand for engagement
The demand context of policymaking (I)
Increasing rhetoric around the importance of dialogue and deliberation.
Alongside this every day policy making is messy, mundane, expedient and often highly constrained
“It will always be a part of the policy landscape to have indecisive ministers, policy conflicts, staff turnover and too few resources. Take all that as given and think of what to do about it”
(National School of Government, Workshop materials, June 2007)
The demand context of policymaking (II)
Evidence based policy making dominant discourse in UK government policy development
“Evidence for policy making is any information that helps to turn a department’s strategic priorities and other objectives into something concrete, manageable and achievable” (Shaxson 2005)
A simple schema of evidence-based policy making
POLICIES THAT TAKE GOOD
INFORMATION
POLICIES THAT TAKE BAD INFORMATION
AND USE IT BADLY
AND USE IT WELL
(Shaxson, 2005)
Evidence based’ is about the processes of using information as much as about the quality of the information itself
Context for engagement
PURPOSE CONTEXT PROCESS
OUTCOMES
+ +
=
EVALUATION
Context provided by the policy cycle
The shape of the space for engagement to make a difference is likely to vary at different stages of policy development
For example: principles, strategy, policy options & implementation
Implications for who to involve, what questions to ask (who asks the questions?), what change is possible
Engagement to:
Scope the issue; Set the agenda; formulate the problem
Start of policy focussed
engagement process
Widening and deepening of engagement
Narrowing of debate but opening to formal
consultation
Learning lessons
Engagement to:
Develop policy options; Shape
policy proposals
Engagement to:
Refine the policy options
Engagement to:
Review after delivery and learn through
monitoring and evaluating
Agendasetting
Define the issue
Understand the situation
Develop & appraise options
Implement & monitor
Evaluate & adapt
Prepare for delivery
Commit toresponsibilities
Outcome focus
Creating the space for engagement
When not to engage...
" The reason we fetch up for our local
elections is not so that we may have our
neighbourhood ruled by the madness of
guesswork but so that we may elect
representatives of sufficient commitment,
intelligence and ability, first to identify
critical issues and then to find, and use, the
greater expertise available"
When to engage…
Extent to which the policy domain displays public values is characterised by uncertain science has a history of contestation might require public behaviour change
From a demand perspective policy makers need guidance about how to decide which aspects of context to be sensitive to and how this should be done
In summary..
Developing public engagement initiatives should take account of
the characteristics of the policy environment
the context of the policy cycle the context of the policy domain