The participatory turn in local policies: A product of the market

Mazeaud, Alice; Nonjon, Magali

doi:10.1111/gove.12439

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…PEPs are usually described as individuals who host public meetings with citizens (Blue and Dale 2016). The various mappings of the public engagement field carried out in the United States (Lee 2015), the United Kingdom (Chilvers 2012), France (Mazeaud and Nonjon 2020) and Quebec (Bherer et al 2017) have shown the diversity of PEP backgrounds: their qualifications are highly varied, ranging from planning and sociology to biology (but predominantly the social sciences), and they use a diverse range of participatory methods from several different social and managerial perspectives (alternative dispute resolution, art of hosting, artistic performance projects, new age therapy, lobbying and campaigning, workplace participation, consensus building and collaborative approaches, public deliberation, etc.) (Lee 2015).…”

Section: Current Scope Of the Fieldmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since the sponsors of participatory arrangements generally prefer to contract out the task of conducting participatory processes to third‐party organizations, a public engagement industry has developed in several countries (Cooper and Smith 2012; Mazeaud and Nonjon 2020). In a pioneering 2008 paper, Hendriks and Carson showed that the uncertainty associated with deliberative processes puts PEPs in a delicate situation in their relationships with the clients who hire them.…”

Section: Current Scope Of the Fieldmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Public engagement and its practitioners: Opening up and looking beyond the black box of facilitation

Bhérer

2021

Can Public Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public engagement has been one of the most prolific fields of democratic practice in the last two decades thanks to the rapid dissemination of a wide variety of participatory tools across governments, public sectors and countries. It includes conventional consultative forums like public hearings, advisory committees or neighborhood councils as well as democratic innovations like participatory budgeting, deliberative polls, citizen assemblies, and civic intergroup dialogue meetings-all intended to foster participatory democratic processes. With the development of public engagement, the work of designing and organizing these participatory processes is increasingly entrusted to public engagement practitioners (PEPs) (Lee 2015).Little attention has been paid to the interactions between PEPs and sponsors-a kind of asymmetrical relationship in which the sponsor is the most powerful actor. The challenges PEPs face in their mediation with sponsors can undermine their ability to implement fair and open dialogue processes. This aspect concerns not only the individual capacity of PEPs to handle abusive requests from sponsors but also the context in which the public engagement industry is developing. In this New Frontier article, we propose four research avenues to open up the "black box" of public engagement and understand the conditions inherent in establishing participatory arrangements.

show abstract

Section: Current Scope Of the Fieldmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Current Scope Of the Fieldmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public engagement and its practitioners: Opening up and looking beyond the black box of facilitation

Bhérer

2021

Can Public Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Increasingly, the deliberative industry as it intersects with participatory planning is defined and legitimized by its own standards and credentialing systems . And it is an industry that is not only responding to market demands for deliberative solutions, but in some cases can be a driving force in the ongoing participatory turn in local government (Mazeaud & Nonjon, 2020). I would situate DDEPs as one of the deliberative commercial goods developed and sold as part of this "market of participation" (Hendriks & Carson, 2008;Lee, 2015;Mazeaud & Nonjon, 2020).…”

Section: Professionalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Rise of Dedicated Digital Engagement Platforms for Local Planning

Boyco

2024

CPP-APC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digitally mediated participation in planning processes has grown significantly. In an emergent digital turn for participatory planning scholarship, there is a growing body of research attempting to trace this growth and grapple with its implications. This paper explores how planning scholars and practitioners can deepen their critical stance toward digital modes of participatory planning. In Canada, this approach becomes especially important given the recent and widespread adoption of a specific digital platform type used to support participatory decision-making at the municipal level. Across the country, many towns and cities have embraced what I call Dedicated Digital Engagement Platforms (DDEPs). Despite their growing influence, these platforms for community involvement have not been previously quantified at a nation-wide level, nor thoroughly examined in planning scholarship. New evidence presented here defines DDEPs and documents the extent of their use by local and regional municipalities across Canada. In light of the growing prominence of these platforms, this article then provides the foundation for a more critical digital participation research agenda that draws on important debates in wider planning theory regarding democratic decision-making, the commercialization of deliberative democracy, and the platformization of public participation.

show abstract

“…We will first briefly explain the participatory turn of public action in France and the main features of participatory administrations in local government. It is a specific fact of the French case that the participatory offer comes mainly from local authorities (Mazeaud and Nonjon, 2020). 1 Unlike the case in many countries, it is rare in France for non-profit organisations to organise and finance participatory arrangements.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From the participatory turn of administrations to the bureaucratisation of participatory democracy: study based on the French case

Gourgues

Mazeaud

Nonjon

2021

International Review of Administrative Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article sets out to contribute to the debate on the participatory turn of public action and the administration by studying the profile and work of civil servants dedicated to citizen participation within French local administrations. Counter to the rhetoric advocating the participatory modernisation of the administration, an analysis of the day-to-day work of civil servants in charge of participation makes it possible to grasp the dynamics behind the bureaucratisation of citizen participation. Without actually shaking up administrative routines, the specialist civil servants invent new routines essentially intended to maintain the arrangements set up, even when these have little or no effect on the conduct of public action. Points for practitioners This article provides an insight into the processes of administering citizen participation in France according to a double logic of specialisation and dissemination, and analyses the practical aspects of participatory work within the administrations.

show abstract

The participatory turn in local policies: A product of the market

Cited by 10 publications

References 37 publications

Public engagement and its practitioners: Opening up and looking beyond the black box of facilitation

Public engagement and its practitioners: Opening up and looking beyond the black box of facilitation

Assessing the Rise of Dedicated Digital Engagement Platforms for Local Planning

From the participatory turn of administrations to the bureaucratisation of participatory democracy: study based on the French case

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About