| Brief description of technique |
|
Citizens' juries have been trialed extensively in the
US and Germany (where they are called planning cells),
and more recently in the UK and Australia. The name
'jury' gives an idea of the process - expert witnesses
are called and representative groups of citizens (usually
12-15 people) deliberate on the soundness of the arguments
presented by a commissioning authority.
|
| To what kinds of consultation situations
is this approach best suited? |
|
Citizens' juries have been used to deliberate on a
range of policy and planning issues, including health,
environment and social justice issues.
|
| Brief outline of how the process usually
works? |
|
This consultation method allows for the inclusion of
expanded levels of expertise, knowledge and skills in
the deliberative process, whereby participants can engage
in face-to-face exchange, questioning of experts, facilitated
discussion and opportunities for experiential learning
and social interaction (eg: the process could involve
field trips).
Experts could be from universities or non-government
organisations or amongst the key stakeholders. Because
it is held over a few days, the discussion can be quite
in-depth, dealing with complex material.
|
| How much time is generally needed? |
|
Two to three days
|
| How are target populations identified and
approached? |
|
Participants are randomly selected and contacted by
mail but a level of self-selection is involved.
|
| What are the skills required? |
|
Requires a skilled moderator.
|
| What kind of information do participants
require prior to their involvement? |
|
Access to summarised, printed information up front
and then more detailed, printed information during the
course of the citizen jury. This may include a range
of visual information, such as videos or slides.
|
| How is the process successfully concluded? |
| A report of the recommendation is provided to
the commissioning authority. |
| How is this approach usually evaluated? |
|
Qualitative output - recommendations in the form of
a report prepared by the jury.
|
| Strengths |
- Great opportunity to develop a deep understanding
of an issue.
- Provides informed feedback.
- Public can identify with representative citizens.
- Limited number involved but can generate media interest
and thus stimulate community learning and awareness.
|
| Weaknesses |
- Because of the small pool of participants it can
be dismissed as being insufficiently representative
though highly deliberative. German 'planning cells'
partially solve this problem by holding a number of
juries simultaneously in different locations.
- Not suitable for all issues.
- Extensive preparatory work.
- Highly resource-intensive.
|
| Resources Required |
- Approximately $10,000 - $15,000 for 16 people.
|
| Further information |
| A similar method is a Consensus Conference which
can be used when the broader public input is required,
or when the issue is so complex or new that a commissioning
authority does not yet know what questions it wants to
ask. Consensus Conferences can take a number of years
to complete and are therefore more expensive to run then
Citizen Juries. Additional resources on the Citizen
Jury and Consensus Conference can be accessed at the Active
Democracy website |
