WINNING THE CONVERSATION: FRAMING AND MORAL MESSAGING IN ENVIRONMENTAL CAMPAIGNS (original) (raw)
Related papers
Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, 2016
In the early 2000s, a distinct shift occurred in government and public discourse from 'public participation' to 'community engagement'. Our search of Google trends (after Butteriss 2014), based on frequencies of keyword searches, shows that worldwide, the term 'public participation' is in decline, while 'community engagement' is rising (Figures 1 and 2). In 2004 (the first year data are available), the term 'community engagement' was searched 40 per cent of the extent to which 'public participation' was searched. Apart from two periods in 2013, when search numbers matched, the indicator suggests that interest in community engagement has been firmly in the ascendancy relative to public participation. In April 2016, the worldwide search rate for 'community engagement' was double that for public participation. From 2004 to 2016, Australia was the main source of searches for the term 'community engagement', with double the rate of South Africa, 2.5 times the rate of Canada and the UK, and treble the rate of USA (though some of these countries have other preferred terms). In Australia, searches for the term 'public participation' were negligible, and the term community engagement prevails (South Australia, Queensland, and Victoria were the dominant sources of web searches) (Figure 2). Data are not available for New Zealand. This change in preferred terminology is puzzling. Does it signify a new way of thinking and major shift in practice, a difference in contexts (discrete decisions versus more continuous policy development, or the interest in corporate social responsibility 1 and social licence to operate), or a change in preferred terms for much the same concepts? We suspect all of these. The preeminent international organisation in this field, International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) confirms that it uses the terms 'public participation' and 'community engagement' interchangeably. It defines public participation as: a process that involves the public in problem solving or decision making and uses public input to make decisions. It includes all aspects of identifying problems and opportunities, developing alternatives and making decisions. It uses tools and techniques that are common to a number of dispute resolution and communication fields. (IAP2 2010, p. 20). It also introduces its spectrum of public participation by using both terms: IAP2's Public Participation Spectrum is designed to assist with the selection of the level of participation that defines the public's role in any community engagement program. (IAP2 2016) We note that the organisation has not changed its name, but now calls its newsletter Engagement matters. Others portray public participation and community engagement as different but related concepts, with engagement as the broader concept. For example, Consult Australia (2015, p. 5) states 'Engagement is a broad term that can encompass public participation, community, stakeholder or public relations, consultation, government and media relations'.
The nature of public action: social environments, psychological traits and mobilization
2012
In a democracy, none of us can exert much influence as individual citizens acting alone. This is by design. In a democracy, decision-making promotes and even requires collective efforts. When advancing our personal interests and our notions of the common interest, we must often act cooperatively with others to pursue common goals. When political tasks require more than one citizen to achieve, this is our only practical option. Our actions as individual citizens are significant. Yet to be effectual, we must collaborate with and rely upon others. We must mobilize ourselves as publics. Doing so requires us to reject the notion that "the public" exists automatically when some people are legally recognized as citizens. It requires us to reject the notion that "a public" is equivalent to an audience, created whenever ideas spread through a population. It requires rejecting the premise that citizens belong to a public simply because some actions or issues may affect their lives or the lives of those with whom they share a common identity. For a public to exist, citizens who share common interests or preferences must take action to accomplish a political goal. These goals can take a number of forms. Citizens can attempt to select who holds elective office. They can attempt to shape the priorities of those elected. They can attempt to participate in the administration of justice by sitting on juries. They can attempt to disrupt social and economic practices they find unjust. Different as these goals may be, each involves influencing an authoritative decision-making process by taking action. Each involves many people directing their energy toward the same end. Understood in this way, the capacity of publics to achieve goals comes down to the decisions of individual citizens. It is not inevitable that a public will emerge to pursue a particular goal. Nor is it inevitable that a public will succeed. To exist and to be effective, publics must be mobilized. Someone must organize efforts that appeal to citizens. Citizens must then participate in these efforts. The challenges that can arise are notorious. Citizens can benefit from outcomes, even if they do not contribute to the public actions that create them. When political goals require the efforts of many, and the benefits to the individual remain uncertain, citizens may refrain from taking action. Of course, if no one takes action, or if too few do, individual and collective interests can go unrealized. Understanding the challenges of
Handbook on Theories of Governance, 2nd edition, 2022
Public participation in governance involves the direct or indirect involvement of stakeholders in decision-making about policies, plans or programs in which they have an interest. This chapter explores the theories illuminating key concerns, namely what constitutes legitimate and useful public participation; the relationships among diversity, representation, and inclusion; the appropriate influence of different kinds of knowledge; and how to align participation methods and contexts. We describe two areas needing additional theoretical development: what levels of participation are desirable and workable, and the threats and opportunities for participation posed by increasingly diffuse systems of governance.
Public Participation for 21st Century Democracy
John Wiley & Sons, Inc. eBooks, 2015
have provided a variety of audiences with a very attractive book, skillfully combining a normative message with a conceptual framework as well as an extensive practical skills inventory. Successfully integrating the theoretical and practical demonstrates their subject matter mastery-from broad-brush to in-the-field as well as classroom exercises. The book should be seen as an indispensable resource for a formal class on engagement, for workshops on the same topic, or for professionals seeking to broaden their engagement scope and skills. The authors make their normative case that "instead of continuing to view the world through the professionalized, issue-delineated lenses that we first adopted in the early 20th century, we should embrace the holistic, democratic citizen-centered view that has emerged in the early 21st century" (p. 287). When referring to contemporary engagement techniques, they write, "These are not just props for conventional processes, but building blocks for new political systems. We should not just be asking how to help citizens participate in democracy; we should be asking citizens what kind of democracy they want" (p. 322). The authors' passion reveals itself throughout the book, bolstered by example after example ranging systematically from local, to healthcare, to education, to state and federal and even global. Nabatchi and Leighninger's systematic approach to their subject adds to its compelling nature. They refer to an engagement infrastructure consisting of topics like legal requirements, government roles, and educational curricula. They identify categories of building blocks that range from "disseminating information" to "enabling community decision-making," and parallel in some ways the spectrum of engagement originally associated with the International Association for Public Participation (http://www.iap2.org). They include concepts like "thick" and "thin" participation techniques to differentiate those involving group work and a deliberative mindset from those oriented more toward individuals and access to input more than deliberation. Concepts such as these help organize the reader's thoughts, and they are reflected