Random Europeans

Trust is the word

Posted by Janice on 07/03/08

Participative democracy initiatives at EU level present special logistical problems of language and geography. However, they share many of the same fundamental issues of usefulness and motivation with small scale, local initiatives. In the end, the success or failure of all such initiatives comes down to an issue of trust. Citizens must trust that their ideas will be used by policy makers. Policy makers much trust citizens to be co-creators of policy. Without mutual trust, these initiatives can actually increase citizen cynicism and the distance between governments and people.

Check out this wonderful podcast discussing issues of trust, motivation, relevance, and much more in participative democracy projects in the UK. Much of this mirrors what’s being said about similar initiatives at EU level. Click here to listen to Andy Howell of Political Futures blog talk with Stella Creasy and Edward Andersson of the UK-based think tank Involve about “Active Citizens and Public Engagement”.

Citizenship, Democracy
Comments [RSS 2.0]

One Response to Trust is the word »»

Tamsin

Comment by Tamsin | 2008/03/12 at 17:06:47

Thanks for highlighting this podcast. I came across Involve in 2007 through a project called ‘Healthy Democracy’(http://www.sanco-stakeholderinvolvement.eu/) which looked at ways of better engagement with stakeholders. I think that process demonstrated the points being raised in the podcast. A large group of individuals from different networks (industry, consumers, NGOs) took part in the moderated discussions and formulated some policy recommendations. The Commission promised a number of actions including the creation of a small steering group to advise on future consultations. After all of the energy and interest generated… there was complete silence from the Commission. It was 6 months before there was any information about who had been selected for this group and what they would be doing. There was very feedback on how many people had applied, what their skill set and interest was and how the successful candidates had been evaluated. Needless to say, confidence and trust in the process had already evaporated for many of those involved in the earlier debates.