Uusia tuulia Suurten järvien alueelta.. ja Manhattanilta? Kokemuksia osallistumismenetelmien käytöstä Pohjois-Amerikassa VIEVE Työseminaari Levi 10-13.3.2004.

Esitys aiheesta: "Uusia tuulia Suurten järvien alueelta.. ja Manhattanilta? Kokemuksia osallistumismenetelmien käytöstä Pohjois-Amerikassa VIEVE Työseminaari Levi 10-13.3.2004."— Esityksen transkriptio:

1 Uusia tuulia Suurten järvien alueelta.. ja Manhattanilta? Kokemuksia osallistumismenetelmien käytöstä Pohjois-Amerikassa VIEVE Työseminaari Levi 10-13.3.2004. Marika Palosaari

2 Osallistava suunnittelun taustaa Suurten järvien alue: ”intensiivinen” vuorovaikutus ihmisen ja luonnon välillä  pitkät perinteet uusien lähestymistapojen testaamiseen International Joint Commission (IJC): perustettu 1909 ”the Boundary Waters Treaty” sopimuksen myötä USA:n ja Kanadan yhteistyönä

3 Osallistava suunnittelun taustaa Koordinoi Suurten järvien politiikkaa. 1960-lla osallistavan suunnittelun alullepanijana: kuulemistilaisuuksia, ”citizen advisory committee” 1970-lta lähtien IJC lisännyt kansalaisosallistumisen muotoja  laaja NGO verkosto ollut merkittävä vaikuttaja bilateraalisen ekosysteemin hallinnan aloitteissa http://www.ijc.org/

4 Shared Vision Planning Shared vision model (Richard N. Palmer) Based on sound systems engineering principles, connects stakeholder concerns to water management decisions. Critique: Jack P. Manno

5 Innovatiivisia menetelmiä? a) Innovatiivinen prosessi b) Innovatiivinen sovellus perinteisestä menetelmästä c) Yhteistyöhön perustuva sidosryhmien välinen ”partnership”, jolla annettavaa perinteisille menetelmille (Beierle & Konisky)

6 ”Innovative” p.p. mechanisms Study Circles Citizen juries Round tables Collaborative Watershed management

7 The value? Key strength of most of the innovative efforts is their focus on delibarative process The focus on education and providing opportunities to share opinions and experience May provide lessons about reaching out to members of wider public May be valuable compliments to improved citizen involvement in env. policy making

8 Conclusions Turning over substantial amount of power to stakeholders may not be required for process to be successful There are a number of ”outside the group” problems that raise larger questions about the legitimacy and significance of p.p. A ”modular” approach may help resolve some problems of public participation

9 Listening to the City…

10 Applying the Principles of ‘Listening to the City’ to Other Participatory Processes by Sue L. Senecah A Practical Theory of Voice, Standing, and Influence:

11 Trust At the heart of any process to build relationships is trust. Transparency, openness, fairness, timely and comprehensive information, and other descriptors are often used to characterize effective public involvement process elements that support the building and maintenance of trust.

12 How to built trust? It is difficult to identify the elements of a process that would support the presence of trust. Trust needs to be based on relationship building, monitoring, and adjusting in order to tackle thorny, uncertain, and potentially contentious content issues with safety, openness, and effectiveness.

13 Such a process must be characterized by the three critical process elements: voice, standing and influence, that are interdependent

14 Based on Schutz’s (1958) theory of fundamental interpersonal relations orientation (FIRO): identify what members of small task groups needed to achieve cohesiveness as the key to effectiveness. inclusion (being noticed, having prestige and esteem by being included), affection (being liked, close personal ties) and control (power over others).

15 Voice Voice = Access. access to a process that offers opportunity and safety as well as the potential for being heard. Real opportunity for ideas and opinions being accorded civic standing. Access does not guarantee it, but flawed access can prevent it

16 1. the practical logistics 2. a format that will support the honoring of participants’ contributions and the reaching of objectives 3. the support of trained and competent professional volunteer facilitators

17 Standing Standing = Demonstration of Having Value in the Process. civic standing, or the demonstration of and assurance that stakeholder input is valued, respected, and honored, that it is “heard.” Support standing: what is really at stake for stakeholders, their interests. Strive to understand what fears are driving the interests.

18 Without voice (access to process) and standing (demonstration of having value in the process), there can be little influence other than through contentious means (e.g., non-participation, protests, lawsuits). However, they do not constitute trust, and although they are essential, they will do more harm than good unless they lead to influence.

19 Influence Influence = Participating in, Contributing to, and Understanding Outcomes. stakeholders’ meaningful participation is honored, leads to opportunities for gaining understanding, contributing, and influence before a decision is made. they can be influential in, e.g. prioritizing and choosing strategies or even whether a proposal proceeds

20 Value of the Trinity of voice theory Use in the design of other public policy processes that are multi-stakeholder and multi-objective. As a template, it can be characterized to fit a case’s unique context and resources. ?

21 U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution http://www.ecr.gov. The National Civic League http://www.ncl.org International Association for Public Participation http://www.iap2.org U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution http://www.ecr.gov Public Involvement Network www.pin.org

22 If any of the elements of voice, standing, or influence are out of balance or are missing, the process and relationship factors of any public involvement process will suffer and the content issues will overwhelm.