Civic Dialogues on Sustainability: Business Briefing and Best Practices Guide

Businesses have traditionally played little role in civic dialogue, but their involvement can help advance issues. The Network for Business Sustainability (NBS) has recently published two reports, written by Dr. Thomas Webler, that identify the potential for business involvement in civic dialogue.

Graphic Recording

The reports are aimed at a business audience, and can serve to introduce businesses to civic dialogue concepts. We hope that they will also be useful for anyone seeking to understand business perspectives or the value of engaging businesses in dialogues.  The reports are:

1) Civic Dialogues on Sustainability: A Business Briefing  (17 pages)

This overview for business executives describes:

  • Civic dialogue’s contribution to sustainability
  • Its relationship to other types of engagement
  • The value of business participation in civic dialogue for business and society

2) How to Engage in Civic Dialogue: A Best Practices Guide for Business  (45 pages)

This detailed guide, intended for those charged with implementing business involvement in a dialogue, also provides:

  • Models and best practices for effective civic dialogues
  • Civic dialogue case studies and lessons learned

Resource Link: www.nbs.net/topic/stakeholder/civic-dialogue/

This resource was submitted by Maya Fischhoff, Knowledge Manager for NBS via the Add-a-Resource form. NBS appreciates thoughts and feedback, and will evolve the reports accordingly. Comment on the report webpages or by sending a note to Maya at mfischhoff@nbs.net.

Crime & Punishment: Imagining a Safer Future for All (IF Discussion Guide)

Crime & Punishment: Imagining a Safer Future for All  is the newest discussion guide published by the Interactivity Foundation (IF). This booklet describes five contrasting policy possibilities or frameworks for addressing concerns over the future of our criminal justice system. These concerns include both the racial inequity and the many costs of our policies of mass incarceration, the “War on Drugs”, and general get-tough-on-crime policies.

Crime & PunishmentThe five policy possibilities are:

  1. Get Smart[er] to Prevent and Better Deter More Crime
  2. Support Families, Strengthen Community, Reintegrate Society
  3. Less Prison and More and Better Treatment for Mental Illness and Substance Abuse
  4. Fix our Prison System
  5. Do the Right Thing

The Crime & Punishment discussion guide also includes introductory sections on:

  • Why we should talk about crime & punishment
  • “You be the judge”: a real life fact pattern to spur discussion
  • “Just the facts, Ma’am”: some recent data about our criminal justice system, and
  • Some Key discussion questions and considerations for evaluating all crime and punishment policies

Copies of the Crime & Punishment discussion guide for individual or small group use may be obtained, free of charge, from the Interactivity Foundation’s website by either (a) downloading a pdf (42 pages, 1.5 MB) or (b) submitting a request for printed copies (via a form also on IF’s website).

The Interactivity Foundation is a non-profit, non-partisan organization that works to enhance the process and expand the scope of our public discussions through facilitated small-group discussion of multiple and contrasting possibilities. The Foundation does not engage in political advocacy for itself, any other organization or group, or on behalf of any of the policy possibilities described in its discussion guidebooks. For more information, see the Foundation’s website at www.interactivityfoundation.org.

Resource Link: www.interactivityfoundation.org/new-discussion-guidebook-crime-punishment-now-available

Mental Illness in America: How Can We Address a Growing Problem? (NIF Issue Advisory)

In October 2013, National Issues Forums Institute (NIFI) released an Issue Advisory that contains materials that can be used in deliberating over the issue of the impact of mental illness in America. This “issue advisory” is not a full NIF issue guide, but a basic outline of the options, entitled Mental Illness in America: How Do We Address a Growing Problem? It can be downloaded here.

From the introduction…cover_mental_illness_advisory350

Many Americans share a sense that something is wrong with how we address mental health and mental illness. More and more of us are taking medications for depression, hyperactivity, and other disorders. Meanwhile, however, dangerous mental illnesses are going undetected and untreated.

According to some, recent violent incidents reflect the need to increase security and increase our ability to detect mental illness. Others point to increasing numbers of veterans returning from overseas with post-traumatic stress disorders as a major concern. One in five Americans will have mental health problems in any given year. Unaddressed mental illness hurts individuals and their families and results in lost productivity. In rare cases, it can result in violence.

This Issue Advisory presents a framework that asks: How can we reduce the impact of mental
illness in America?

This issue advisory presents three options for deliberation, along with their drawbacks:

  • Option One: Put Safety First – more preventive action is necessary to deal with mentally ill individuals who are potentially dangerous to themselves or others.
  • Option Two: Ensure Mental Health Services are Available to All Who Need them – people
    should be encouraged to take control over their own mental health and be provided the tools to do so.
  • Option Three: Let People Plot their Own Course – we should not rely on so many medical approaches and allow people the freedom to plot their own course to healthy lives.

Resource Link: http://nifi.org/stream_document.aspx?rID=25092&catID=6&itemID=25088&typeID=8 (pdf)

Human Migration: Policy Possibilities for Public Discussion

The Interactivity Foundation (IF) has recently published a discussion guidebook entitled “Human Migration: Policy Possibilities for Public Discussion.” The guidebook was edited by IF Fellow Ieva Notturno, who also managed the long-term project and two discussion panels that explored and developed the ideas that resulted in the six policy possibilities listed below and further outlined in the guidebook.

The discussion panelists initially worked thru a series of fundamental questions and concerns about human migration, including “What could human migration mean? What are the forces that drive it? What societal goals and public policies might pertain to it? What are its different dimensions and how might these different dimensions conflict with each other? How might human migration and the conflicts that arise from it affect the ability of democracy to achieve its goals? Might immigration and emigration, as special examples of human migration, pose special threats to democracy? And if so, what are they? What concerns might Americans have about human migration? How might our public policies address these concerns? What conceptual policy possibilities might we develop that might affect the future of human migration?”

Human-Migration-coverIn response to these and other questions and concerns, they developed the following six policy possibilities for further exploration and discussion:

  1. Put Security First
  2. Privilege Human Rights & Humanitarian Needs
  3. Promote Assimilation into Local Communities
  4. Put the Economy First
  5. Keep Families Together
  6. Embrace Freedom of Movement

For each of these possibilities, the discussion guidebook also describes possible implementations, effects (or consequences), and further discussion questions.

The Interactivity Foundation is a non-profit, non-partisan organization that works to enhance the process and expand the scope of our public discussions through facilitated small-group discussion of multiple and contrasting possibilities. The Foundation does not engage in political advocacy for itself, any other organization or group, or on behalf of any of the policy possibilities described in its discussion reports. For more information see the Foundation’s website at www.interactivityfoundation.org.

Resource Link: www.interactivityfoundation.org/discussions/human-migration/

This resource was submitted by Peter Shively of the Interactivity Foundation via the Add-a-Resource form.

The Human Impact of Climate Change: Opportunities & Challenges

The Interactivity Foundation (IF) has recently published a guidebook for public discussion on “The Human Impact on Climate Change,” edited by IF Fellows Dennis Boyer, Jeff Prudhomme, and Adolf Gundersen. The guidebook was developed from the group discussions of 16 panelists in two groups from south central and southwestern Wisconsin.

Human-Impact-on-Climate-coverTest discussions facilitated by former Wisconsinites in Tucson, Ariz., and in Sonora and Mazatlan, Mexico, further developed the text of the discussion guide.

Six contrasting policy possibilities emerged from these group discussions and are described in this discussion guide along with possible implementations, examples, and consequences:

  1. Promote climate awareness: Improve public understanding of climate impacts, their consequences, and options for action.
  2. Change consumer habits: Focus on human consumption as a source of atmospheric carbon and greenhouse gases.
  3. Go for results: Identify efficient and low-cost solutions that are currently available for short-term action.
  4. Heal the planet: Plan and implement long-range recovery and rehabilitation of ecosystems.
  5. Deal with a different world: Adapt to changed conditions and plan for climate emergencies.
  6. Focus on the developing world: Assist developing nations in reducing climate impact activities and help them “leap over” traditional industrial development to clean technologies.

In developing these possibilities, the project panelists felt that much of the existing political “debate” about climate impacts has been unhelpful to citizens and policymakers. Eventually, their discussions designated certain issues, such as “Is the planet getting warmer? How is the climate changing? What role does human action play in global climate change?” as questions that rely more on empirical scientific research for their answers. Conversely, they designated other key questions, such as “What public policy choices might we make about climate change? What, if anything, might society do about global climate change?” as public policy questions that need exploration by all citizens.

This distinction helped the panelists to side-step much of the highly partisan and interest-group-driven “debate” and engage in a public conversation that was more anticipatory and imaginative. Their explorations seem to be shaped by three realizations:

  1. Universal agreement on the precise nature and extent of climate impacts is difficult to achieve and waiting for it could forestall consideration of workable impact policies.
  2. There is sufficient current evidence of dramatic environmental consequences connected to climate impacts to merit development of policy responses.
  3. Significant institutions and interests are assuming that human climate impacts are real and must be accounted for.

This last point accounted for a dramatic shift in the project discussions. Among the more conservative panelists, the realization that major financial institutions, large investors, risk managers, insurers, and military and national security leaders take climate impacts into account in their planning was a turning point. It was seen as evidence that the politicians often lag behind in both consciousness and practical problem-solving.

The sense that emerged from the climate project was that these starting points for public conversation represent a possibly useful foundation for discussion of the opportunities for innovation, economic development, and prudent planning related to climate impacts. Now it’s your turn.

Resource Link: www.interactivityfoundation.org/discussions/human-impacts-on-climate/

This resource was submitted by Peter Shively of the Interactivity Foundation via the Add-a-Resource form.

Immigration in America: How Do We Fix a System in Crisis? (NIF Issue Guide)

One of the National Issues Forums Institute’s issue guides, Immigration in America: How Do We Fix a System in Crisis? (updated edition, 2013), outlines this public issue and several choices or approaches to addressing the issue. National Issues Forums do not advocate a specific solution or point of view, but provide citizens the opportunity to consider a broad range of choices, weigh the pros and cons of those options, and meet with each other in a public dialogue to identify the concerns they hold in common.

The following excerpt is taken from the issue guide. The 12-page issue guide presents three options for deliberation.

The costs and benefits of immigration have always been debated. But as we work our way out of a tough economic recession, some wonder whether newcomers, especially those arriving illegally, are compromising our quality of life, taking jobs away from those already here, and threatening our security and sovereignty as a nation…

The question facing Americans today is how to create a system that meets our diverse needs–a system that values the role immigrants play in society, takes heed of today’s economic and legal responsibilities, and keeps us strong and competitive in the future.

To promote deliberation about immigration reform, this guide presents three options, each built on a framework of ideas and information drawn from studies, speeches, interviews, books, and public policy proposals.

Option One: Welcome New Arrivals
A rich combination of diverse cultures is what defines us as a people. We must preserve our heritage as a nation of immigrants by shoring up our existing system while also providing an acceptable way for the millions of undocumented immigrants currently living here to earn the right to citizenship.

Option Two: Protect Our Borders
Failure to stem the tide of illegal immigration undermines our national security, stiffens competition for scarce jobs, and strains the public purse. We need tighter control of our borders, tougher enforcement of our immigration laws, and stricter limits on the number of immigrants legally accepted into the country.

Option Three: Promote Economic Prosperity
To remain competitive in the 21st-century global economy, we need to acknowledge the key role that immigrants play in keeping the US economy dynamic and robust. This option favors a range of flexible measures, such as annual adjustments to immigration quotas, that put a priority on our economic needs.

More about NIF issue guides…

NIFI’s issue guides introduce participants to several choices or approaches to consider. Rather than conforming to any single public proposal, each choice reflects widely held concerns and principles. Panels of experts review manuscripts to make sure the choices are presented accurately and fairly. By intention, issue guides do not identify individuals or organizations with partisan labels, such as Democratic, Republican, conservative, or liberal. The goal is to present ideas in a fresh way that encourages readers to judge them on their merit.

NIFI offers various materials for each of the issues it produces issue guides on. The moderator guide or “guide to the forums” for each issue is available as a free download. Discussion guides (or “issue guides”) for participants are generally available in print or PDF download for a small fee ($2 to $4). DVD’s can also be purchased for some issues for just $6, for use at the beginning of your forums to introduce the topic and approaches.

All NIF issue guides and associated tools can be accessed at www.nifi.org/issue_books/.

Resource Link: www.nifi.org/issue_books/detail.aspx?catID=14&itemID=20619

Bullying: What is it? How do we prevent it?

This issue guide was created by the David Mathews Center for Civic Life in 2012 for Alabama Issues Forums that took place in 2012 and 2013. The issue guide provides a brief overview of the bullying issue and outlines three approaches to addressing this public issue.

Bullying-coverThe David Mathews Center—a non-profit, non-partisan, non-advocacy organization—does not advocate a particular solution to the bullying issue, but rather seeks to provide a framework for citizens to carefully examine multiple approaches, weigh costs and consequences, and work through tensions and tradeoffs among different courses of action.

The issue guide’s introductory essay, authored by Dr. Cynthia Reed of Auburn University’s Truman Pierce Institute, outlines the impact the bullying issue has on Alabama and the nation:

“Although bullying is often thought of as only a school-related problem, in reality it affects us all. Bullies can be students, parents, teachers, administrators, work colleagues, or others in the community. Likewise, bullying can occur at school, at work, at church, or at other community functions… Today, most states have legislation requiring schools to address bullying. Yet bullying remains prevalent in our schools, workplaces, and communities.”

The issue guide outlines three possible approaches to addressing the issue:

Approach One: “Get Tough on Bullying”
Reports of bullying incidents are reaching epidemic proportions. Bullying is unacceptable. It must be treated with zero tolerance. Increased reports of bullying in our schools demand that schools, principals, and school districts do more to help prevent and provide tougher consequences for bullying. We must ensure that district anti-harassment policies and student codes of conduct in Alabama are strictly enforced.

Approach Two: “Equip Students to Address Bullying”
Students need practical knowledge and skills to react to and report bullying. Not every young person understands what constitutes bullying and how to respond to it. Many feel powerless as victims and/or bystanders. Many bullies do not understand the effects of their actions. The lines between victims and bullies often become blurred when circumstances change and/or victims retaliate. The bullied may be charged as bullies if they retaliate. We should concentrate our efforts on educating students about bullying and how to respond to it. We should create supportive, enriching school cultures that equip young people to address the root causes of bullying.

Approach Three: “Engage the Community and Parents in Bullying Solutions”
Bullying is a widespread behavior. It is not limited to schools. Parents and the community should accept more responsibility for talking about and preventing bullying. The cost is too high for the community if bullying is not addressed. Bullies take up school time and police time. Bullies can end up convicted of crimes when they reach adulthood. Teachers and administrators do not have the time, personnel, and resources to eradicate all bullying. They cannot address its complex root causes outside the school environment. We, individually and through our community organizations, must communicate to young people that bullying is unacceptable. A great amount of bullying and violent behavior begins in the home. We must reach out to parents. We must reach out to young people. Some young people do not have supportive home environments and need community help.

More About DMC Issue Guides…

David Mathews Center issue guides are named and framed by Alabama citizens for Alabama Issues Forums (AIF) during a biennial “Citizens’ Congress” and follow-up workshops. Alabama Issues Forums is a David Mathews Center signature program designed to bring Alabama citizens together to deliberate and take community action on an issue of public concern. Digital copies of all AIF issue guides, and accompanying post-forum questionnaires, are available for free download at www.mathewscenter.org/resources.

For further information about the Mathews Center, Alabama Issues Forums, or this publication, visit www.mathewscenter.org.

Resource Link: www.mathewscenter.org//wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Bully-Brochure_press_PMS.pdf

This resource was submitted by Cristin Foster of the David Mathews Center for Civic Life via our Add-a-Resource form.

Dropouts: What Should We Do?

This issue guide was created by the David Mathews Center for Civic Life in 2010 for Alabama Issues Forums that took place in 2010 and 2011. Dropouts: What Should We Do? provides a brief overview of the dropout issue and outlines three approaches to addressing this public issue.

Dropouts-coverThe David Mathews Center—a non-profit, non-partisan, non-advocacy organization—does not advocate a particular solution to the dropout issue, but rather seeks to provide a framework for citizens to carefully examine multiple approaches, weigh costs and consequences, and work through tensions and tradeoffs among different courses of action.

The issue guide’s introductory essay, provided by the Alabama State Department of Education, outlines the impact of the dropout issue on Alabama and the nation:

Every 26 seconds a student drops out of school.

The dropout crisis is one of the greatest threats to the United States. The students that leave our education systems without a diploma create an economic, social and generational crisis for the entire nation. Every state and its students are impacted by dropouts, who create deficits in the educational wealth and financial stability of the population.

The issue guide outlines three possible approaches to addressing the issue:

Approach One: “Emphasize Achievement”
Dropouts from our K-12 schools are regrettable, but our primary focus should be on emphasizing achievement, initiative, discipline, and creativity among those who choose to stay in school. These characteristics are best promoted through competition and recognition of success in that competition. These are characteristics we want in our work force. These are characteristics we need to be successful in individual life, community vitality, and global competiveness. We need our best young people to be all they can be.

Approach Two: “Emphasize Preventative and Corrective School Programs”
Social costs are too high if we do not address dropout prevention and correction. Dropouts don’t always simply lack individual initiative, discipline, and perseverance. Some young people come from poor family backgrounds and lack support for learning outside the school environment. Others get behind early in reading ability and lack positive role models. Some students have understandings and skills that are not easily quantified and measured, and they give up competing in situations that are beyond what they see as leading to productive lives. Some have family situations that require their primary attention, including those who serve as the primary wage earner for the household. We need solutions that take into account students backgrounds and situations.

Approach Three: “Emphasize Community Responsibility”
Ideally schools might emphasize both achievement and prevention, but some problems are beyond the resources and capacities of schools to address. Some young people need more help than they can get during school hours. Communities should think broadly and creatively about their overall educational resources, not just their schools. Moreover, some young people have substance abuse problems and/or such rebellious behavior that they cannot be kept in schools. Yet, if they do not receive constructive attention, they may become even worse problems.

More About DMC Issue Guides…

David Mathews Center issue guides are named and framed by Alabama citizens for Alabama Issues Forums (AIF) during a biennial “Citizens’ Congress” and follow-up workshops. Alabama Issues Forums is a David Mathews Center signature program designed to bring Alabama citizens together to deliberate and take community action on an issue of public concern. All AIF issue guides, and accompanying post-forum questionnaires, are available for free download at www.mathewscenter.org/resources.

For further information about the Mathews Center, Alabama Issues Forums, or this publication, visit www.mathewscenter.org.

Resource Link: www.mathewscenter.org//wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Issues-Brief_web.pdf

This resource was submitted by Cristin Foster of the David Mathews Center for Civic Life via our Add-a-Resource form.