Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Conversation with Matt Leighninger - IAP2 Australasia 2012

Presentation on online engagement and the need for long-term public participation planning

Related Audiobooks

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Conversation with Matt Leighninger - IAP2 Australasia 2012

  1. 1. A Conversation with Matt Leighninger:Online Tools and Long-term Plans for Engagement IAP2 Australasia October 11, 2012
  2. 2. The Deliberative Democracy Consortium
  3. 3. Slides available Guides:
  4. 4. The big picture: Two impacts of the Internet1. Empowering individual citizens (web, email – wrapped up in other changes)2. Empowering citizengroups (Facebook,Twitter, other socialmedia)
  5. 5. First impact: How have citizens* changed? More educated More skeptical – different attitudes toward authority Have less time to spare Better able to find resources, allies, information* “citizens” = residents, people
  6. 6. Second impact allows for new forms of engagement More sustained Larger, more diverse numbers of people Easier for ‘engagers’ – recruitment doesn’t have to start from scratch More open to ideas from the ‘engaged’ Need joint planning for engagement infrastructure – not just tools
  7. 7. What is not changing Need for face-to-face relationships Need for an overall engagement plan Importance of partnering with other groups, organizations, institutions
  8. 8. Questions or comments?
  9. 9. How much is the Internet changing how you do P2?
  10. 10. Digital divides (plural) Overall, Internet access growing Different people use different hardware Different peoplego to differentplaces on theInternet Communities justas complex onlineas off
  11. 11. What online tools can do: Help citizens gather data
  12. 12. What online tools can do: Helppeople generate and rank ideas
  13. 13. What online tools can do: Help people visualize options
  14. 14. What onlinetools can do:Help sustain communityconnections
  15. 15. Common mistakes Treating Internet as a one-way medium Not enough recruitment Transparency without proactive engagement Gathering ideas and not implementing them
  16. 16. Questions or comments?
  17. 17. What have your successes – and challenges – been with online engagement?
  18. 18. Successes, limitations of engagement so farSuccesses: Making policy decisions, planning Catalyzing citizen action Building trust Fostering new leadershipChallenges: Time-consuming (especially recruitment) Unsustainable (usually not intended to be) Meets goals of ‘engagers,’ not ‘engaged’ Doesn’t change the institutions Limited impact on equity Trust, relationships fade over time
  19. 19. Why plan for more sustainable kinds of engagement?1. Sustain the benefits2. Allow the ‘engaged’ to set the agenda3. Better address inequities4. Increase community attachment and economic growth5. Increase residents’ sense of legitimacy and “public happiness”
  20. 20. Community engagement planners should consider some key building blocks:
  21. 21. As always, recruitment is 90% of the work
  22. 22. Questions or comments?
  23. 23. Questions to consider1. Does your community already have some building blocks in place?2. Are there other building blocks that might be useful?3. If you were to begin creating a long-term plan for your community, who would you work with?4. What do you need to help you get started?
  24. 24. Resources••••••• On Facebook: “Deliberative Democracy Consortium” group page• The Next Form of Democracy
  25. 25. Resources (continued)• On YouTube: the DDC channel• Using Online Tools to Engage – and Be Engaged by – the Public at• Planning for Stronger Local Democracy at – and other resources at