Author Archives: Roshan Bliss

Opportunity to Contribute to IIAS Study Group

Posted on by
Reply

We hope that you will consider taking advantage of a significant opportunity that NCDD Sustaining Member Dr. Tina Nabatchi shared with us recently from the International Institute of Administrative Sciences. Her study group is seeking paper submissions, and it could be a great way for some of you NCDDers to contribute to the field while also getting your work out there. For more information, read the full announcement below or find the original here.

Call for papers for the IIAS study group on ‘Co-production of public services’

IIAS WG logo

The IIAS Study Group on ‘Coproduction of Public Services’ is organizing its second open meeting. Our aim is to create and nurture an intellectual platform for the theoretical discussion and empirical analysis of coproduction and its implications for the organization and management of public services.

Topic 
Coproduction refers to the involvement of both citizens and public sector professionals in the delivery of public services. Although countries differ in the extent to which citizens play a role in the provision of public services, the idea of coproduction is gaining ground around the world. Financial crises, austerity in public finances, and growing doubts about the legitimacy of both the public sector and the market, have led numerous governments to involve and cooperate with citizens and civil society in the production of public services. Unfortunately, practice is leading both theory and research, and there is a need to bring together theoretical insights and empirical data to enable a better understanding of public service coproduction. Specifically, this study group is interested in:

  1. Coproduction in different national and policy contexts. What ideological and normative stances about the role of government shape the debate on coproduction? What variations are seen across the policy fields in which coproduction takes place? What variations are seen in national (western and non-western) structures of service provision, and what factors explain this variation?
  2. The organization and structure of public service organizations. Do existing structures enhance or work against coproduction?  How can public service organizations be better structured to utilize coproduction processes and approaches?
  3. Challenges of coproduction for the work of public sector professionals. How can professionals find ways to meaningfully interact with people using and coproducing services? What are the (dis)incentives for professionals in promoting and using coproduction?
  4. The role, capacity, and willingness of citizens to engage in coproduction. What characteristics distinguish citizen-coproducers from passive service recipients? What motivates citizens to engage in coproduction?
  5. The potential benefits and pitfalls of directly involving citizens in the production of public services. What is the impact of coproduction on efficiency, democratization, responsiveness, accountability of public service delivery?
  6. The way in which coproduction is accommodated in public law and/or constitutional law. How do various legal frameworks support (or not) coproduction? How can law be enhanced to further and sustain coproduction activities?
  7. The relationship between public spending and coproduction. What financial models can be used to nurture coproduction? Can coproduction compensate for the withdrawal of public spending in times of financial crisis, or does collaboration with citizen-users demand additional resources?
  8. What are the implications of a service-recipient/coproducer dominant approach to public services for the further study of public administration? What insights can be brought in from other disciplines, such as political science, law, economics, psychology, sociology and history? What insights can be gathered from complementing research on coproduction with research on active citizenship, service management and customer engagement, or citizen self-organization?

Meeting Format 
The meeting will open with keynotes by Prof. Elio Borgonovi, Professor of Economics and Management of Public Administration at the Bocconi University and Prof. Tony Bovaird, Professor of Public Management and Policy at the University of Birmingham.

The meeting will consist of individual paper presentations and conclude with a round table discussion about the study group’s plan for future intercontinental collaboration in coproduction research.

The goal of the study group is to shed light on the current theory, research, and practice of coproduction. Therefore, we welcome both theoretical and empirical papers on all topics addressed above. We also invite scholars to use a variety of disciplinary analyses: public administration, political science, law, economics, psychology, sociology, and history among others. Interdisciplinary papers are also welcomed.

As a study group of IIAS, we seek to establish an intercontinental discussion, and therefore invite scholars from both western and non-western settings to submit paper abstracts. Submissions are particularly encouraged from doctoral students working on the topic of coproduction.

Output 
The study group co-chairs aim at providing outlet for papers presented at the meeting, most likely through a special issue in an international public administration journal. A special issue of IRAS (International Review of Administrative Sciences) is in process, as a result of the successful first meeting of the study group, which was held in The Hague last May.

Moreover, the study group aims at setting up close intercontinental collaboration among coproduction scholars beyond the scope of this meeting, including the development and sharing a database of international cases on coproduction and strategies to enable effective interaction between professionals and citizen-users in the production of public services. In addition to special issues of international journals, the study group is exploring the possibility of a book project at the closing of its three-year (2013-2015) collaboration.

Date and Location 
The meeting of the Study Group on Coproduction of Public Services will take place in Bergamo, Italy from May 20 to 21, 2014.

Cost
The registration fee is 100 Euro. Participants are responsible for their own travel and accommodations.

Submissions 
Please submit abstracts (maximum 600 words) by March 15th, 2014 to mariafrancesca.sicilia@unibg.it and t.p.s.steen@cdh.leidenuniv.nl.

Participants will be notified of acceptance by March 31st. Full papers should be submitted by May 10th.

Organization
The IIAS study group on ‘Coproduction of Public Services’ is co-chaired by Trui Steen (Leiden University, the Netherlands and KU Leuven, Belgium), Tina Nabatchi (Syracuse University, US) and Dirk Brand (University of Stellenbosch, South Africa). The second meeting of the study group is organized by Mariafransesca Sicilia (University of Bergamo, Italy).

Will Crowdsourcing Revolutionize Government?

Posted on by
Reply

Our partners at the Davenport Institute recently shared a fascinating article via their Gov 2.0 Watch blog on the growing use of “crowd-sourcing” to seek the public’s help with government tasks. This innovative approach is definitely a way to engage the public, just not in the form we’re used to seeing. Read more below or find the original post here.

DavenportInst-logoJohn M. Kamensky, Sr. Fellow with the IBM Center for the Business of Government offers insight on how governments are embracing crowd-sourcing and how it can be used to best effect:

Most government leaders are restlessly on the search for new ideas, for innovation, for whatever is next. It may be their good luck that this is shaping up to be a Golden Age for engaging citizens, customers and employees. For evidence of this, one need look no further than the rapidly expanding use of “crowdsourcing.” This social-media tool is going mainstream in many communities as a source of innovative ideas.

. . . In the government sphere, crowdsourcing is an approach that uses online tools to break a problem down into manageable tasks and engages people to voluntarily help produce those results, according to Daren C. Brabham, a scholar at the University of Southern California who is following this phenomenon.

You can read more here.

New CommunityMatters Conference Call Series Starts Thursday

Posted on by
Reply

We are excited to share that our partners at CommunityMatters, in collaboration with the Citizens’ Institute on Rural Design, are launching a new conference call series on moving community projects from planning through completion called “Making it Happen”. Their first call, “Lighter, Quicker, Cheaper”, will take place this Thursday, December 12th from 4-5pm Eastern Time. We highly encourage you to register now! You can read more about the call below, find the original post on the CM blog, or find more info on the series here.  

Start with Petunias: A Lighter, Quicker, Cheaper Approach to Community Action

CM_logo-200pxRaise your hand if this sounds familiar:

You’ve just finished a great community design or planning process. Hundreds of people participated, you came up with dozens of brilliant ideas for fixing your Main Street or revitalizing a run-down park, you drew up spiffy designs, and everyone is jazzed.

There’s just one problem: you don’t have the money to do much of anything. And your volunteers are tired. Oh, and you don’t even really know what to do first. (Make that three problems.)

We get it. You’re not alone. So where do you start? With the petunias.

Welcome to the school of Lighter, Quicker, Cheaper community action (“LQC”). When you’re just starting to implement designs and projects you need to build momentum, earn some quick wins, and make the most of every single dollar and volunteer hour. That means picking some ridiculously easy, cheap, and non-controversial projects that you can get done immediately and that will help build support for something bigger.

“Many great plans get bogged down because they are too big, too expensive, and simply take too long to happen,” writes the Project for Public Spaces (PPS). “Meanwhile the high cost of missed opportunities for economic development – and public life – continue to add up.”

Lighter, Quicker, Cheaper thinking and action can change all of that.

Here’s how it works: Forget trying to raise five-, six-, or seven-figure sums to implement all of your streetscape improvements right away. Instead, go spend $15 at a garden center, grab a helper, and transform one weedy corner with some new planter boxes. Once people see what a difference that can make, it won’t be hard to get $100 bucks and enough volunteers to create a sidewalk café for a day, showcasing the potential of the space. And when people see how cool that is, it won’t be long until you have $1,000 and to buy some tables and chairs and create a pop-up pedestrian plaza. And if that works? Then you think about shelling out more money and making it permanent.

Fun, right? But more than just fun, LQC is actually cutting-edge strategy. By choosing the right actions first, and testing things in an experimental and incremental way, you can have a surprisingly large impact while saving resources and building support for longer-term actions. LQC lets you hone in on the actions that will actually work the best for a place and the people who use it. And it lets you actually make places livelier, prettier and more functional fast – long before you could accomplish traditional big-budget projects.

On the December CommunityMatters conference call, in partnership with the Citizens’ Institute on Rural Design, you’ll learn about the LQC model and how to apply it in your town.

PPS recommends a three-phase process:

  1. Start with amenities (like seating or gardens) and public art, which can quickly transform a space and encourage people to return.
  2. Then add events and “interventions” (such as temporary bike lanes or street closures) that can help test design solutions before fully implementing them.
  3. Finally, use “light development” (adaptive reuse, temporary structures, and building facelifts) to make changes quickly and relatively inexpensively.

But, there are somewhat messier stories from real communities that have moved from ideas to action.

Take Elkhorn City, Kentucky. Tim Belcher, a local attorney and President of the Elkhorn City Area Heritage Trust, has helped bring two Citizens’ Institute on Rural Design workshops to this town of just over 1,000 people. Elkhorn City wanted to find ways to increase tourism and economic development, and they focused on two of their biggest assets: whitewater paddling (they are located on the Russell Fork of the Big Sandy River) and theater (they are home to the renowned Artists Collaborative Theater). The community honed in on key action steps, experimented with small programs and events to build momentum, and leveraged that early work to attract more funding and complete more projects than many cities 50 times their size.

Still not sure how your community’s long-term plans can be transformed into a quick-and-dirty to-do list? Hundreds of other communities have paved the way, and their ideas are there for the taking. Start with “Spontaneous Interventions”, an exhibit at the recent Venice Biennale. Brendan Crain, Communications Manager at the Project for Public Spaces, was a member of the curatorial team for that project and will join us on the line to share LQC lessons and ideas from around the world. You can also get great ideas and advice from the Tactical Urbanism guides (Volumes 1 and 2).

So go ahead. Put that plan back on the shelf (for the time being) and just go buy some petunias. Read up on Lighter, Quicker, Cheaper community action at the Project for Public Spaces. Join us on December 12 to learn how to make your community stronger in a flash.

Think you have this LQC approach in the bag? This call is for you budding experts, too!  Tell us about your Lighter, Quicker, Cheaper success when you register for the call. We’ll ask a few people to share their story on the line!

This call is the first in a three-part series co-hosted by CommunityMatters and the Citizens’ Institute on Rural Design (CIRD). The series is designed to help any community move from a design or planning process into taking action.  

Free Copies of “The Practice of Peace”

Posted on by
Reply

We recently saw a post on LinkedIn from the good people at the Open Space Institute about a great opportunity that we wanted to share. They are giving away copies of The Practice of Peace by Harrison Owen, one of the creators of Open Space Technology! But this offer will only last until December 31st, so make sure to get your copy today! You can find out more below read the original post here. 

OSI US

The Open Space Institute in the US has generously received a donation of 2,000 copies of “The Practice of Peace” books by Harrison Owen and is distributing them for just the cost of shipping and handling.

One box of 34 books shipped domestically is $50. Shipping internationally starts at $145. We can confirm international shipping for your country before you place your order.

The Institute will not be continuing this offer past December 31st when our storage contract with the distribution company ends, and the remaining books will be “recycled.”

The Practice of Peace is a very special and comprehensive book on what Open Space has brought and continues to bring to the world. It is even more relevant and timely today than when it was first published.

Please consider if you have friends, colleagues, organizations and communities which would benefit from learning more about Open Space, the power of self-organization and genuine peace. Please help us get as many as possible out the door and not to the dumpster!

To order, please visit the OSI US website at http://osius.org/content/practice-peace-books.

Knight Foundation Maps Civic Businesses & Investments, Seeks Feedback

Posted on by
Reply

Knight-Foundation-logoOur interest was piqued recently by a report released by the Knight Foundation presenting the first mapping of “civic tech” businesses and investments here in the United States. We know that many NCDD members work in or are interested in the high-tech end of public engagement, so we wanted to share some snippets from a great article about the report that we found on the tech blog, GigaOm (you can find the original article here), and to let you know that you have a chance to give your feedback on the report.

So what is “civic tech”, you might ask? Well, it’s not so hard to understand:

Jon Sotsky, the foundation’s director, described civic tech as “technology that’s spurring civic engagement, improving cities and making government more effective.” The field includes a range of private and public organizations, from groups the Knight Foundation and its data analytics and visualization partner Quid designate as “P2P local sharing” (Airbnb) to “community organizing” (Change.org) to “data access and transparency” (Open Data Institute).

And as many of us know, civic tech has been on the rise in recent years, taking on different shapes and being used in many different ways. It is a growing sector, which is why the Knight Foundation set out to map it in the first place:

You might not have heard of “civic tech,” but chances are it has affected your community and its influence will only increase over time. According to a Knight Foundation report released today — the first to track civic tech businesses and investments — the sector has raised $430 million in investments in the past two years and civic tech company launches are increasing 24 percent annually.

The report generated quite a bit of interesting data, and that’s why it came along with a nifty visualization tool:

Users can explore civic tech through a bubble treemap data visualization, sorting by themes, communities and companies. Investments are color-coded as either private investments or public grants and the size of the bubbles depends on the size of investments. As you explore each section, you can see the investment types and amounts as well as several other data points, all of which can be downloaded as an Excel spreadsheet.

Visualizations of this type can be crowded by the number of nodes they include, but the Knight Foundation does a good job showing the structure of the civic tech field as a whole. Indeed, the Knight Foundation, a nonprofit geared at benefiting media and the arts, is using the information to make its own investment decisions. The intention is that everyone can get a better view of the field, including new startups trying to find their way in the space.

We agree that it is important for all of us to gain a better understanding of this emerging field, so we highly encourage you to check out the Knight Foundation’s report and the visualization tool. But we especially wanted NCDD members to know that the Knight Foundation is looking for feedback on civic tech initiatives or funders that they may have missed in their report:

As with any sector that is measured for the first time, Sotsky admits it is incomplete, which is why they’ve included feedback links for people to add missing civic tech businesses and investments. The intention of the list is to “get a conversation started” so that next year’s civic tech data directory will be more robust.

So if you are connected with a civic tech initiative, funder, or group that you don’t see in the report, you’re invited to email Knight Foundation director Jon Sotsky at sotsky@knightfoundation.org with suggestions of what may have been missing from this year’s report. We hope that next year’s report will be bigger, better, and more informed by the NCDD community of practitioners!

Original GigaOm post: www.gigaom.com/2013/12/04/knight-foundations-civic-tech-data-visualization-project-reveals-surge-of-startup-activity.

Public Agenda’s New “Beyond the Polls” Project

Posted on by
Reply

We are excited to share about a great new initiative from our partners at Public Agenda, in collaboration with the National Issues Forums and the Kettering Foundation. Together, they are launching Beyond the Polls, a new regular commentary on public opinion issues. We encourage everyone to check out the initial announcement about the project below, or find the original announcement here.

PublicAgenda-logoWelcome to Beyond the Polls, our regular commentary on what Americans are thinking about pivotal issues our country and communities face. Each month, we offer a second look — a deeper look — at public opinion. We try to put survey results in context and enrich them by drawing on our extensive experience listening to citizens in both research and community settings over the years.

Our aim is to explore and understand the hopes, values, concerns, and priorities people bring to today’s issues — the public questions and controversies we think about every day. Just as important, we want to juxtapose the views that polling typically captures with what happens to those views when citizens have a chance to absorb and weigh different options for addressing issues and hear what other citizens have to say about them.

So what led us to develop Beyond the Polls? Here is some of what’s behind the series:

  • Polls often reflect top-of-the-head thinking. Surveys capture what people may be thinking at any given time, depending on how they’re feeling about things, what they know, what they’ve heard, and what’s happening in their own lives and communities and in the media. Unless we also take a look at this context, polling results have limited value.
  • The public’s views are not static. Polling results can change over time as people move beyond this top-of-the-head thinking and consider the questions at hand more deeply. As Pubic Agenda co-founder Dan Yankelovich has pointed out, people’s views tend to shift based on whether or not they have had time and opportunities to learn about an issue, consider it from different perspectives and decide where they stand. When they do this, sometimes their thinking becomes clearer. Sometimes their outlook becomes less dogmatic and more flexible. Sometimes people re-arrange their priorities as they recognize and think through trade-offs. Sometimes people, by talking with others, discover something that is very important to them that may not have been evident beforehand. Polls can fail to discriminate between top-of-the-head reactions and these more stable views.
  • Leaders cherry-pick at times. With so many polls available, and so many people quoting them for all sorts of reasons, what appears in the media can be piecemeal and, at times, misleading. In addition to the reasons we mention above, survey results often change depending on how questions are asked and what aspect of an issue a survey organization chooses to address. Sometimes pundits, elected officials, candidates and others zero in on one or two poll results—the ones that best match their own preferences—and blithely ignore the rest. We don’t do that. We examine and comment on all the best polls and look at what they’re saying—taken together.
  • Polling can’t substitute for democracy. Don’t get us wrong, we love opinion polls. Public Agenda designs and conducts surveys, and the National Issues Forums and the Kettering Foundation regularly consult opinion research in their work to get citizens talking about tough problems and working together to solve them. But democracy means much more than conveying poll results on citizens’ preferences to elected officials. Citizens have a real job to do grappling with tough issues and listening to the views of others.
  • Sometimes polls are on the wrong side of history. Because all of us move through a learning curve as we think through issues and hear from others, polls can change dramatically over time. In some of the most important moments of our history, public opinion lagged behind the arc of change. For example, few public views have shifted more radically than those toward women in the workforce. In a 1938 Gallup poll, more than three quarters of respondents disapproved of “a married woman earning money in business or industry if she has a husband capable of supporting her.” Twenty-two percent approved. In the late 1980s, opinion had nearly reversed, with 77 percent approving and 22 percent disapproving. These days, the question seems outdated. Gallup and other polling organizations are now asking questions about equal pay for women and men staying home to care for the children. Historical shifts like this mean we need to view polling as one piece of information. Polling is not a full or complete rendering of what the American people support, or what they may come to support — and consider indispensable — over time.

We’re eager to hear your responses to Beyond the Polls. Sign up to receive an email update when we have a new Beyond the Polls post. And, if you have a question or issue that could benefit from our review, let us know. We’d be pleased to consider adding it to our list of potential topics. Interested in continuing the conversation? Join us on Twitter with the hashtag #BeyondPolls.

Original post: www.publicagenda.org/blogs/welcome-to-beyond-the-polls

Fun & Games with CommunityMatters

Posted on by
Reply

Our friends and partners at CommunityMatters have been having a lot of fun recently, and we wanted to share a bit about it so that NCDD members aren’t missing out! CM recently hosted a conference call on Creating Fun Places, and you can find the notes for the call here and/or listen to the audio of the call here. We also encourage you to check out their follow-up blog post about lessons from the call below or find the original on the CM blog by clicking here.

5 Tips for Creating Playful Places in Your Town

CM_logo-200px

Mike Lanza of Playborhood and Brian Corrigan of Oh Heck Yeah take play pretty seriously. Mike turned his front yard into a neighborhood gathering place focused on play, and Brian’s organizing a large-scale street arcade in downtown Denver. Mike and Brian both love having fun, but they also know that play is beneficial for their communities.

Mike’s house is an epicenter for play, attracting kids and adults alike with fun fountains, sandboxes and even an in-ground trampoline. He’ll tell you that after creating this neighborhood gathering spot, people on his block are more physically active, more social and they have more fun. These benefits are characteristic of third places – spaces outside of work or home where people gather.

For Brian, Oh Heck Yeah’s focus on turning downtown Denver into an immersive street arcade is about building trust among strangers, generating new ideas and inspiring partnerships that can make the city an even better place to live, work and (of course) play.

On our last CommunityMatters conference call, Mike and Brian shared their ideas for creating more playful places. If you want to reap the benefits of play in your own community, here are five tips for getting started:

1. Think Like an Inventor

Have a vision for transforming a dull space in your community into a vibrant and playful place? Go ahead, dream big! But, when it comes to making things happen, think like an inventor and start with a prototype. The iterative approach of prototyping means you can experiment with an idea to refine the concept and work out the kinks.

Take Brian’s advice and start with the 1.0 version of an idea.  What does your grand idea look like when it is stripped down to its simplest, easiest and least expensive form? As you grow toward the 10.0 version, you’ll gain momentum by building a cadre of supporters, ensuring your biggest version of your big idea is successful.

If you’re interested in learning more about prototyping, don’t miss our December call on A Lighter, Quicker, Cheaper Approach to Community Action. Register now! 

2. Legalize Fun

It’s easy to talk about creating great places, but altering public spaces around town means taking risks. If your local laws hinder improvised solutions to traffic problems, start advocating for a local city repair ordinance.

Inspired by the success of Share it Square, a neighborhood project to make a traffic intersections more interesting, safe and playful, the City of Portland created an ordinance allowing for locally-led improvement projects. As long as adjacent property owners approve and safety is maintained, citizens can receive permits for intersection improvements. Use Portland’s ordinance as the foundation for legalizing fun in your town.

3. Create a Draw

Build places where people want to stay.

Public spaces rely on one essential element for success – the presence of people. If you want people to engage in a playful space, make it visible. Mike suggests starting with a bench – just a place to sit. Add a solar-powered tea or coffee stand as an attractor. Or, take a playful approach by installing a ball pit or swing set. Invite people to come to the space at a particular time, and give them a reason to be there.

Find more ideas for attracting people by listening to our call on Third Places.

4. Engage Creative Minds

Capitalize on the ideas and talents of the creative sector, the artists, designers and actors in town. How can you enliven a public space with musicians or dancers?

Through Oh Heck Yeah, Brian is partnering with organizations like the Colorado Symphony and the Denver Art Museum to bring his project to life. In Mike’s front yard, a local artist created a mural of the neighborhood to help kids explore and understand their environment.

There are endless ways to engage creative minds in placemaking projects, especially when you’re focused on play. But, if you want something that resonates with your community, seek art that is culturally meaningful, that incorporates the skills of local people and showcases the distinct assets of your city or town.

5. Try Something!

Get outside and try something. If you’re starved for ideas, start with our list of 75 Seriously Fun Ways to Make Your Town More Playful. Or, check out our follow up: 25 (More) Ways to Make Your Town More Playful. And, don’t miss the playful ideas from Mike, Brian and our fabulous callers. You can find their thoughts by reading our call notes or listening to the call recording here.

You can find the original blog post from CommunityMatters at www.communitymatters.org/blog/five-tips-creating-playful-places-your-town.

The National Dialogue Network Begins Its Public Analysis Phase

Posted on by
Reply

We are pleased to highlight the post below, which came from NCDD Sustaining Member and 2012 NCDD Catalyst Award winner John Spady of the National Dialogue Network. Do you have news you want to share with the NCDD network? Just click here to submit your news post for the NCDD Blog!

Hello to all our NCDD friends,

NDN logo

The National Dialogue Network (NDN) — recipient of the 2012 NCDD Catalyst Award in “Civic Infrastructure” — has entered “Cycle 4″ of its original 5-cycle process to design and demonstrate a system for coordinated and collaborative conversations on important national issues. The first issue selected for national conversations was Poverty & Wealth in America.

I am asking readers of this NCDD blog to make a small contribution of time during this brief public analysis phase. Click on both of the links below and just focus on what interests you. Try to understand “what the data is saying.” Then add a comment at the end of this post with any insights you are able to glean from the preliminary report or Excel file. In this current phase, the general public is urged to help interpret the preliminary results received and to submit insights for review and inclusion in the 2013 Summary Report. All assistance will be acknowledged.

If you want a special “cross tab” for analysis, or have any other questions, just let me know — leave a comment below or call our toll free message line: 800-369-2342

Thanks for your help… and now here are the links you’ll need:

Number of self-selected participants who answered the national Opinionnaire® Survey as of Nov. 23, 2013: 105

Preliminary graphic report: http://is.gd/2013NDNPrelimReport.

Excel data (XLS) download: http://is.gd/2013NDN105XLS.

Peter Levine on Making Public Participation Legal

Posted on by
Reply

This post is shared from the blog of supporting NCDD member and professor of Citizenship & Public Affairs in Boston, Dr. Peter Levine. Peter shares a humorous take on the not-so-funny state of public meetings, and highlights the NCDD-supported Making Participation Legal report. For more info about this important intitiative and how it was created, check out our write up on its release.

Making Public Participation Legal

This is pretty much how “public participation” looks when it takes the form of a meeting with officials at the head of the table defending their policies, and their fellow citizens lining up to speak:

The “Parks and Recreaton” satire hits so close to home because public forums usually use awful formats and methods. As Matt Leighninger writes:

The vast majority of public meetings are run according to a formula that hasn’t changed in decades: officials and other experts present, and citizens are given three-minute increments to either ask questions or make comments. There is very little interaction or deliberation. Turnout at most public meetings is very low – local officials often refer to the handful of people who typically show up as the “usual suspects.” But if the community has been gripped by a controversy, turnout is often high, and the three-minute commentaries  can last long into the night. On most issues, the public is either angry or absent; either way, very little is accomplished (Making Public Participation Legal, p. 3).

One reason is the laws that allow or require public participation: they are poorly structured. The Working Group on Legal Frameworks for Public Participation has developed frameworks for better state and local laws. Their model legislation and other materials are presented in a new report, Making Public Participation Legal, available from the Deliberative Democracy Consortium (DDC).

You can find Peter’s original post here: http://peterlevine.ws/?p=12660.

Adding Art to Public Meetings

Posted on by
Reply

We hope you’ll take a moment to read this inspiring article about the power of art in public meetings - and in this case, the art of words – from our friends at AmericaSpeaks. You can read it below or find the original post on their blog by clicking here.

AmericaSpeaks_Logo

The Power of Spoken Word

We have facilitated hundreds of public meetings over the past 18 years. All are memorable in their own right, but some have special moments that are unforgettable.

At our Creating Community Solutions DC meeting on Saturday, October 12th, we facilitated a day-long meeting for 400 participants on mental health in the District. We had a fantastic turnout, literally standing room only, and particularly of youth aged 15-24, with more than 120 participating.

In every meeting, we try to feature local talent of one type or another – whether it be a band that plays prior to the beginning of a meeting or an exercise leader who leads an energetic stretch break for participants 4 or 5 hours into the meeting.

At Creating Community Solutions, we had the honor of including two very talented, precocious teenage spoken word artists, both from the DC Youth Slam Team.

Both artists – Amina Iro and Thomas “Vocab” Hill – have been performing for the past year, and have competed in national contests like the 2013 Brave New Voices International Youth Poetry Slam Festival.

Amina performed first, a powerful poem about the depression her mother has battled and the impact it has on her mom, herself, and her family. The crowd gave her an extended standing ovation.

Later in the morning Vocab performed a moving piece about his uncle, a veteran, who suffers PTSD after several tours in Iraq. He too brought down the house.

Whereas the rest of the day focused on conveying critical data and information about mental health and illness and featured in-depth and sometimes difficult conversations about what challenges youth face and how do we overcome these challenges, these artistic moments served to inspire, energize, and focus the audience on the critical nature of the convening.

Art can make an enormous difference in so many parts of our lives. And, even in unlikely settings like a public meeting on a public policy concern.

Thank you Amina and Thomas!

To read more about Creating Community Solutions DC, CLICK HERE.