1. Understanding your community is the essential foundation for an effective public participation process. In too many cases, organizations rush into print and start a "dialogue of the deaf" because they haven't taken the time to develop a systematic appreciation of the people and organizations in the community or region involved. Our "social profile", developed in the mid-seventies, provides a simple but comprehensive format for a 25-30 page report which is usually completed in 10 working days. Organizational profiles of the client organization, regulatory body and other important corporate actors can be equally valuable. In a recent profile, a pervasive dissatisfaction with the proponent's head office being located in Montreal far from the local community on the West Coast was identified; this led the client representative to declare: "That insight alone justifies the cost of the profile!" A few months later, the parent company spun off a West Coast subsidiary with its head office in Vancouver as the locus of operational decisions. For a detailed outline of methodology and chapter heads and subheads for a social profile, see Reference #1. 2. The level and quality of participation by the public will be no better than that of the staff in the proponent's organization. If public participation staff are managed in a top-down, traditional way, they are likely to manage the public in the same fashion. Alternatively, participatively-managed staff are likely to work with the public more interactively since participation is part of the organizational culture. Before an organization "goes public", some internal organization development work is often necessary, as shown in the Management Considerations section and a case study of work with Sask Power in Reference #1. The development of a relevant public participation policy is often part of the pre-work needed before launching a pro-active program with the organization's external publics. 3. Spend no more that 20% of your resources trying to directly change the minds of the committed opponents of a valid proposal. Instead, direct your efforts to interest, inform and involve the usually silent majority and encourage them to deal with those who oppose the proposal. The latter activity is much more likely to be productive compared with trying to directly change the minds of those who are already locked in to a set of values, beliefs and negative positions. Many people have deplored the way single interest groups and PACs have hijacked the democratic process ; activating the usually silent majority restores balance to the political scene. In a current project, despite months of negative media publicity, a simple program (social profile, responsive publication and an open house) lasting less than a month led two-thirds of those with an opinion on the subject to support a waste management proposal when called in a telephone survey. Of course, proponents have to earn community support by ensuring that their proposal responds to community concerns. As politics becomes more populist, politicians are more sensitive to where their support lies as well as to the sources of opposition. The Edmund Burke-type politician ("Leave me alone to wheel and deal as I see fit, and throw me out at the end of my term if you wish.") seems like a vanishing breed compared with the union-delegate kind who wants to know what the public wants and will usually vote for it. This type of politician supports public participation programs. 4. The media is a dubious ally - if you want something said well, say it yourself. The media have their own agenda and will usually use yours to achieve theirs. Traditionally, we recognize the vital role of the media in the life of a community and endeavour to present a proponent's proposal through it by preparing news releases, holding news conferences, etc. This positive relationship may still be possible, especially in rural communities and with proposals which have no negative aspects. More recently, with the rise of investigative reporters, a generally skeptical attitude seems to pervade the urban media; of course, headline writers will always highlight the conflict element in any story, since this grabs readers' attention. Reference #2 contains a gripping analysis of media power and some practical suggestions on how to manage it. I prefer to prepare a display newspaper advertisement in a Q&A format with a tear-off reply coupon and publish it without notifying reporters beforehand; advertising departments will respect this strategy if asked. Later, I will provide reporters with additional background material and graphics in response to their interest. The proponent has "scooped" the story with a positive presentation instead of letting the headline writer and reporter highlight its negative aspects. 5. Consensus is a noble ideal, but be prepared to settle for informed, visible, majority public support as a more realistic and achievable goal. Consensus decision-making and alternative dispute resolution enjoy widespread interest today; both have a part to play but neither are panaceas. Consensus-building is fundamental to most public participation programs, but when consensus is established as a norm for group decision-making, everyone is given a veto. Single interest groups are likely to use it and perhaps abuse it. The classic labour-management environment, in which consensus decision-making was born, is usually different in many important ways from a typical land-use proposal in a community - up to a dozen parties, wide variations in strength and sophistication, long-term effects, etc. A continuing issue is the validity and reliabililty of the linkage between the representatives at the table and their constituencies; there is also a perception problem - many constituents don't believe they are being represented. For further information, see Reference #3. 6. "Public" is a plural noun - beware of any statement which uses it in the singular. This is such a simple signal, but it invariably uncovers many untested assumptions and leaps of logic which lead proponents to be in their current, often difficult, situations. It is critical to identify the perhaps dozen publics for a proposal, the organizations which claim to represent them, the leaders who seem to speak for them, the media (formal and informal) which reach them, the values, attitudes and beliefs which motivate them, their knowledge of and attitudes to the proponent and the proposal, and under what conditions they might accept or support the proposal. Preparing the social profile assembles this and other vital information to provide the social data base essential for planning and managing the public information and consultation program. 7. Social Impact Assessment needs a participative methodology and a focus on co-managing the impacts of a proposal, whether forseen or not. Initially, S.I.A. was conducted by outside experts, but their track record led the Economic Council of Canada to commission a review by Dennis Paproski which resulted in Paproski's Propositions. These seven statements highlight the importance which should be given to the "genuine opinions and contentions of indigenous peoples". (See Reference #4; a summary appears in #1.) The relevance of a participative approach to Social Impact Assessment and Management is illustrated by experience with community leaders facing five development projects in Labrador, the northern B.C. community of Atlin concerned about a proposed mine and the picturesque town of Gibsons, B.C., faced with an influx of 1500 construction workers working on a pulp and paper mill. (See Reference #1 for three case studies.) When regulatory hearings drive S.I.A. studies, the focus is on preparing an impressive series of reports for review. I believe it is much more important to develop the joint capacity of the community and the proponent to manage the project's effects, whether or not they are predicted. In Atlin, one of the results of a participative S.I.A. program was the establishment of an Advisory Planning Committee which replaced a reliance on the Chamber of Commerce as the major decision-making body in this unincorporated community of 350-400 people. 8. A proponent often has more potential support than media coverage suggests. When the third terminal was being proposed for the Toronto International airport, the airport general manager was fearful that a public participation program would enable anti-noise protesters to overwhelm the proposal. When social profiles were prepared of the three adjacent municipalities, the latent support for the airport and its expansion became clear. Display newspaper advertisements and open houses resulted in some 4,000 written responses - a clear majority supported the proposal; the anti-noise people were a small minority. Steps were taken to control noise which reduced, but did not eliminate, the protests. 9. In designing a public participation program, one secret of success is to try to ensure that every public wins something, even if it is only recognition. Once the various publics for a proposal have been identified and understood, a serious review with the project manager can enable each public to obtain something of value to it. In some cases, the proposal must be modified so that it is not quite as efficient, effective or profitable as it was initially, but this is necessary so that it may become politically viable. In the Gibsons, B.C., case noted earlier, the construction force was initially scheduled to peak in July. When the construction manager realized the implications of this for the community, he arranged for it to peak in February - operators of service establishments enjoyed summer-level business for 18 months in a row, and at no cost to the project. Public input to the Victoria Eaton Centre resulted in: increased street retail space, a compatible character for the exterior, underground parking, the retention of Broad St., a varied roofline and other elements desired by the public. (See Reference #1 for two case studies.) 10. Evaluation is the best way to learn from both your successes and your failures. In the early days of my practice, I would keep a fieldworker on for another week after the end of the project and have them carry out face-to-face interviews with participants in a recently concluded public participation program. Later, a telephone survey was used. In the mid-eighties, I hired a psychologist to interview both client representatives and interest group leaders to identify what they liked and didn't like about our programs. We routinely evaluate every planning and instructional workshop. The results are not only valuable for the workshop leader but, when anonymous verbatim replies are consolidated and fed back to the participants, they are instructive for them as well. Regular evaluations are both an insurance policy for the practitioner and a safety valve for the participants.
Conclusion
References
Acknowledgements
|
