As mentioned previously,
the degree to which the public can -- and therefore will -- be
involved in planning, problem solving and decisionmaking is often
determined by available resources. Schedules, budgets and staffing may
place limits on the types of interactions that take place, or on the
number of stakeholders that can be identified and invited into the
process.
Even with “unlimited”
time and resources, there are still trade-offs between the number of
citizens that can be involved in decisionmaking and the degree to
which they actually become part of the process. Figure 1, below,
illustrates this trade-off. As the level of interaction and
involvement increases (from bottom to top), there is a decline in the
total number of stakeholders who are able to participate.
Source: Awakening
Participation (REC, 1996)
This suggests
two approaches for determining the role of citizens/stakeholders.
1.
Schedule and available resources determine the degree to which
citizens will be involved. Without enough time or sufficient staffing,
for example, the participation program is limited to the dissemination
of information, and possibly some review and comment. The role
citizens can play may also be determined by the capacity and
experience of both the citizens and the planning agency in public
involvement.
2.
The participation goals for the program are used as the basis
for resource allocations and other decisions, such as the length of
the participation program, or the priority that may be placed on
community capacity building -- as opposed to decisionmaking.
The array of roles that
citizens may play is shown in Figure 2. The most active form of
participation, citizen as decision maker, requires a significant
commitment of time and resources by both the planner and the
participating stakeholders. The opposite end of the spectrum, voters,
suggests that public information is available, and that citizens are
satisfied with electing decisionmakers who will represent their views.
