Assessing impacts of citizen engagement through public deliberation
1 / 29

Assessing Impacts of Citizen Engagement Through Public Deliberation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Assessing Impacts of Citizen Engagement Through Public Deliberation. Presented by Sue Williams, Ph.D. Ron C. Powers, Ph.D. Renée Daugherty, Ph.D. Wendy Pettersen. Purpose of Study .

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Assessing Impacts of Citizen Engagement Through Public Deliberation' - shandi

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Assessing impacts of citizen engagement through public deliberation

Assessing Impacts of Citizen Engagement Through Public Deliberation

Presented by

Sue Williams, Ph.D. Ron C. Powers, Ph.D.

Renée Daugherty, Ph.D. Wendy Pettersen

Purpose of study
Purpose of Study Deliberation

To determine the impact of Public Policy Institutes (PPI’s) and subsequent local issues forums on fostering citizen engagement through public deliberation.

Objectives for public policy institute participants
Objectives For Public Policy Institute Participants Deliberation

  • Determine to what extent participants have convened, moderated, and/or recorded local issue forms or facilitated this process.

  • Determine if they organized a local steering committee or network to support local issue forums.

  • Determine if local forums reached common ground or a direction for policy.

Objectives for ppi participants con t
Objectives For PPI Participants Con’t. Deliberation

  • Determine what type of follow up resulted from local forums.

  • Identify how participants have used the deliberative approach in professional personal settings.

Objectives for forum participants
Objectives For Forum Participants Deliberation

  • Identify how participants have used the deliberative approach in professional and personal settings.

  • Determine if local forums explored specific issues in depth.

  • Determine if common ground identifying a policy direction was achieved.

  • Determine the extent of public action resulting from public forums.

National issues forums nif project
National Issues Forums(NIF) Project Deliberation

  • Part of Kettering’s “Citizens and Public Choice” program

  • Non-partisan, non-advocacy

  • Nation-wide network (about 30 states)

  • Issues identified each year

  • Issue books/videos

  • Local issue forums

National issues forums nif philosophy
National Issues Forums (NIF) Philosophy Deliberation

“…rooted in the simple notion that

people need to come together to

reason and talk – to deliberate

about common problems. Indeed,

democracy requires an on-going

deliberative dialogue.”

NIF Overview

Public deliberation
Public Deliberation Deliberation

  • A structured dialogue framed using 3-4

  • policy approaches

  • A means to make tough choices about policy directions

  • A way of reasoning and talking together

    - Weighs the views of other

    - Considers consequences and trade-offs

    - Respects the perspectives and values of


  • A means to find common ground for action

Anatomy of a public problem

Public Problem Deliberation




Public Decision

Anatomy of a Public Problem

Collaboration Deliberation

  • Oklahoma State University

  • University of Missouri

  • Kettering Foundation

Instrument Deliberation

  • Collaborative Development

  • Telephone Interview Format

  • Pilot Tested

    • California

    • Florida

    • South Dakota

    • West Virginia

Sample Deliberation

  • Participants of five PPI’s (N=87)

  • Forum Participants (N=118)

Public policy institute participants involvement in issue forums
Public Policy Institute Participants Deliberation Involvement In Issue Forums

Forum participants
Forum Participants Deliberation

  • N = 118

  • Three Counties In Missouri

    • Balancing Our Heritage With Our Horizons (locally framed issue)

    • Racial and Ethnic Tensions: What Should We Do?

    • A Nice Place to Live: Creating Communities, Fighting Sprawl

Outcomes of issue forums as perceived by participants
Outcomes of Issue Forums as Perceived Deliberationby Participants

Conclusions for ppi participants
Conclusions for PPI Participants Deliberation

  • Use of Deliberative Approach

    46% active after the PPI

    • participated in teams

    • returned to the community and formed a team-58%

    • participated in a forum soon after PPI

  • Type of Use and Usefulness

    Three highest ratings

    • Work

    • civic life

    • dealing with the public

  • Conclusions for forum participants
    Conclusions for Forum Participants Deliberation

    • High Forum Ratings Exploring Issues In Depth

      • Weighing costs and benefits

      • Fair and equal treatment of choices

      • Trade-offs and consequences

    • Identification of Common Ground

    Conclusions for forum participants con t
    Conclusions for Forum Participants Con’t. Deliberation

    Extent of Action

    • Community

      • Local media

      • Office holders

      • Additional forums

    • Individual

      • Sharing materials with others

      • Changed how one talks to people about issue

      • Changed perspective on the issue

    For more information contact

    Sue Williams, Ph.D. Deliberation

    Family Policy Specialist


    Renee Daugherty, Ph.D.

    Education Methods Specialist


    For More Information Contact