Random Selection Does Not Equal Deliberative

I have been increasingly concerned about what appears to be confusion about what ‘deliberative’ processes in community engagement actually are.

This is important for a number of reasons.

While we, as an industry, have had tussles about nomenclature such as ‘engagement’ ‘consultation’ and ‘participation’, these have been more about subtle nuances rather than substantive differences in intent.

However, the term ‘deliberative’ has a distinct meaning, and it particularly indicates a process that is further to the right on the IAP2 spectrum. In our work, deliberation is about providing a microcosm of the community with access to all the information, in an objective and balanced way, so they can reach a considered position through weighing up options and choice work.

A deliberative process is one in which a group of people come together as a mini public to deliberate on an issue and work towards reaching a consensus recommendation. The key points here are that they work together as a group, that they are representing and representative of the wider community and that they are given all the information concerning an issue and are free to reach any recommendation they wish. Importantly, there is always the opportunity for a minority view.

Random selection is a key element of deliberative processes but it is not a necessary one – random selection of a demographically matched group provides the group confidence that they are in fact a ‘mini public’ and it provides a robust element in removing the ‘self interested’ from the process.

However, deliberation is about how a decision is reached – it is the process of long, careful consideration of something. We all deliberate when we make big decisions, such as financing our homes, or making large purchases or deciding to marry, separate or have children. Deliberation is part of our lives, and a deliberative process is about bringing this thoughtful, considered approach to some of the big issues that communities need to consider.

So a deliberative process needs to involve time, access to information and a group process whereby participants do not contribute as individuals, but deliberate on behalf of their wider community.

Another key aspect of deliberative approaches is the level of influence the outcome or recommendation has on the final decision. In the purely academic sense, the recommendations need to be accepted as they are made and, in Europe particularly, these processes have been informing public policy for many years. In Australia, there is still a reticence by decision makers to commit to the outcomes of deliberative processes and, some would say that any process that stops short of this is not strictly speaking deliberative. NewDemocracy Foundation, in particular, is helping to persuade governments that they can have confidence in the decisions of deliberative approaches and hopefully we will see a wider acceptance of these initiatives, particularly in the development of public policy.

The increased use of random selection is perhaps giving rise to some of the confusion about deliberative processes.

Most deliberative processes use random selection in order to gather together citizens who represent the wider community; however, random selection on its own does not make a process deliberative. Random selection is the basis for a survey and, like a survey, it does provide us with useful and sometimes rich information but it should not be confused with a process which aims to foster and encourage critical thinking and rigorous interrogation of what are usually important and relevant public policy issues.

Good community engagement only needs a few elements to be robust and where it sits on the IAP2 spectrum does not diminish or enhance its effectiveness or credibility if these are adhered to. We, as an industry, need to be confident about our work and rigorous in our methodology and using terminology accurately is important for all of us. We all have a commitment to ensuring our practice is robust, rigorous and effective, and accurate descriptions of what we do is an important part of that.

Lucy Cole-Edelstein
Director, Straight Talk