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