contexts for public engagement: a policy perspective Julie Barnett Senior Research Fellow University of Surrey

Perspectives on engagement Practitioners and academics often note the value and necessity of policy development taking alternative framings and sources of expertise into account  Debates about upstream engagement and opening up  Focus on participation, dialogue and deliberation  Deliberative-analytic methods  Development of engagement ‘tool kits’  Evaluating engagement

Consultation in the news

Policy considerations the demand from policy for engagement  the messiness of policy making  evidence based policy making contexts for engagement  the policy cycle  the policy domain

The demand from policy for engagement Academics/providers suggest that engagement provides a ‘supply’ of worthwhile outcomes Policy makers and practitioners in a range of institutional settings constitute the demand function Generally little consideration of the framings that the policy setting imposes on the demand for engagement

The demand context of policymaking (I) Increasing rhetoric around the importance of dialogue and deliberation. Alongside this every day policy making is messy, mundane, expedient and often highly constrained “It will always be a part of the policy landscape to have indecisive ministers, policy conflicts, staff turnover and too few resources. Take all that as given and think of what to do about it” (National School of Government, Workshop materials, June 2007)

The demand context of policymaking (II) Evidence based policy making dominant discourse in UK government policy development “Evidence for policy making is any information that helps to turn a department’s strategic priorities and other objectives into something concrete, manageable and achievable” (Shaxson 2005)

A simple schema of evidence-based policy making POLICIES THAT TAKE GOOD INFORMATION POLICIES THAT TAKE BAD INFORMATION AND USE IT BADLY AND USE IT WELL (Shaxson, 2005) Evidence based’ is about the processes of using information as much as about the quality of the information itself

Context for engagement PURPOSECONTEXTPROCESS OUTCOMES ++ = EVALUATION

Context provided by the policy cycle The shape of the space for engagement to make a difference is likely to vary at different stages of policy development For example: principles, strategy, policy options & implementation Implications for who to involve, what questions to ask (who asks the questions?), what change is possible

Engagement to: Scope the issue; Set the agenda; formulate the problem Start of policy focussed engagement process Widening and deepening of engagement Narrowing of debate but opening to formal consultation Learning lessons Engagement to: Develop policy options; Shape policy proposals Engagement to: Refine the policy options Engagement to: Review after delivery and learn through monitoring and evaluating Agenda setting Define the issue Understand the situation Develop & appraise options Implement & monitor Evaluate & adapt Prepare for delivery Commit to responsibilities Outcome focus Creating the space for engagement

When not to engage... " The reason we fetch up for our local elections is not so that we may have our neighbourhood ruled by the madness of guesswork but so that we may elect representatives of sufficient commitment, intelligence and ability, first to identify critical issues and then to find, and use, the greater expertise available"

When to engage… Extent to which the policy domain  displays public values  is characterised by uncertain science  has a history of contestation  might require public behaviour change From a demand perspective policy makers need guidance about how to decide which aspects of context to be sensitive to and how this should be done

In summary.. Developing public engagement initiatives should take account of the characteristics of the policy environment the context of the policy cycle the context of the policy domain