Participative design of participation structures: a general approach and some risk management case studies

Organising participation of multiple stakeholders is nowadays a widespread request in decision processes, especially for organisations managing environmental risks. Therefore, analysts delivering decision support are expected to provide decision makers with scientifically sound and practically realisable approaches regarding this issue. One of the main challenges in dealing with participation is the definition of the organisation, the so called participative structure, through which stakeholders will contribute and interact during the decision process. Who should participate when and according to which rules are the main questions to be answered. Stakes associated to this challenge are of extreme importance for decision makers since decision legitimacy and acceptance strongly relies on the ability to demonstrate a real transparency and information disclosure during the whole decision process. This paper proposes the iterative comparison approach as a new and original frame to be used by an analyst supporting a client dealing with such questions. Through an unambiguous definition of cognitive artefacts to be constructed when designing participative structures, this paper provides a clear framework that organises an analyst intervention in participative contexts. Furthermore, it offers the opportunity to design tailored participative structures that integrate context specificities in one hand, and satisfies quality criteria being fairness, competence and efficiency on the other hand.

[1]  Simon French,et al.  E-Democracy: A Group Decision and Negotiation Perspective , 2010 .

[2]  Alexis Tsoukiàs,et al.  Real-World Decision Aiding: A Case in Participatory Water Management , 2010 .

[3]  R. Ackoff The Future of Operational Research is Past , 1979 .

[4]  Johs Grundahl,et al.  The Danish consensus conference model , 1995 .

[5]  Thomas Webler,et al.  “Right” Discourse in Citizen Participation: An Evaluative Yardstick , 1995 .

[6]  C. Mazri,et al.  Apport méthodologique pour la structuration de processus de décision publique en contexte participatif : Le cas des risques industriels majeurs en France , 2007 .

[7]  J. Mirenowicz The Danish consensus conference model in Switzerland and France: on the importance of framing the issue , 2001 .

[8]  Alexis Tsoukiàs,et al.  From decision theory to decision aiding methodology , 2008, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[9]  A. Agrawal Dismantling the Divide Between Indigenous and Scientific Knowledge , 1995 .

[10]  Bernard Roy On operational research and decision aid , 1994 .

[11]  G. Rowe,et al.  A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms , 2005 .

[12]  J. Barraux,et al.  Revue française de gestion , 1978 .

[13]  S. Arnstein,et al.  Ladder of Citizen Participation , 2020 .

[14]  Ortwin Renn,et al.  A New Approach to Risk Evaluation and Management: Risk‐Based, Precaution‐Based, and Discourse‐Based Strategies 1 , 2002, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[15]  Katherine A. Daniell Co-engineering participatory modelling processes for water planning and management , 2008 .

[16]  Paul Hoggett,et al.  The politics of decentralisation : revitalising local democracy , 1994 .

[17]  Jonathan Rosenhead,et al.  Rational Analysis for a Problematic World Revisited , 2001 .

[18]  James R. Batt Science, Technology and Human Values. , 1975 .

[19]  P. Watzlawick,et al.  Pragmatics of human communication , 1975 .

[20]  James S. Fishkin,et al.  The Voice of the People: Public Opinion and Democracy , 1995 .

[21]  Peter M. Wiedemann,et al.  Public participation in waste management decision making: Analysis and management of conflicts , 1993 .

[22]  P. Watzlawick,et al.  Pragmatics of Human Communication: A Study of Interactional Patterns, Pathologies and Paradoxes , 1964 .

[23]  Ortwin Renn,et al.  Planning Cells: A Gate to “Fractal” Mediation , 1995 .

[24]  B. Roy Méthodologie multicritère d'aide à la décision , 1985 .

[25]  Lucien Sfez,et al.  Critique de la décision , 1976 .

[26]  Simon Joss,et al.  Public participation in science : the role of consensus conferences in Europe , 1995 .

[27]  Ortwin Renn White Paper on Risk Governance: Towards and Integrative Approach , 2009 .

[28]  Alexis Tsoukiàs,et al.  An explicative model of ‘public’ interorganizational interactions , 1993 .

[29]  Bernard Roy L'aide à la décision aujourd'hui : que devrait-on en attendre ? , 2001 .

[30]  Alexis Tsoukiàs,et al.  On the concept of decision aiding process: an operational perspective , 2007, Ann. Oper. Res..

[31]  Melvin J. Dubnick Army Corps of Engineers , 1998 .

[32]  Bernard Roy,et al.  Aide multicritère à la décision : méthodes et cas , 1993 .

[33]  Ned Crosby,et al.  Citizens Juries: One Solution for Difficult Environmental Questions , 1995 .

[34]  J. Habermas,et al.  De l'éthique de la discussion , 1992 .

[35]  G. Rowe,et al.  Public Participation Methods: A Framework for Evaluation , 2000 .

[36]  Alain Schaerlig,et al.  Décider sur plusieurs critères , 1985 .

[37]  T. Webler,et al.  What Is a Good Public Participation Process? Five Perspectives from the Public , 2001, Environmental management.

[38]  H. Simon,et al.  A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice , 1955 .

[39]  Jason Corburn,et al.  Bringing Local Knowledge into Environmental Decision Making , 2003 .

[40]  Ortwin Renn,et al.  A Brief Primer on Participation: Philosophy and Practice , 1995 .

[41]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decisionmaking , 1992 .

[42]  S. French,et al.  Designing a Participatory Process for Stakeholder Involvement in a Societal Decision , 2008 .

[43]  R. Laufer QUAND DIRIGER, C'EST LEGITIMER , 1996 .

[44]  Thomas Dietz,et al.  Who Should Deliberate When , 1998 .

[45]  Peter Sandøe,et al.  Consensus Conference Manual , 2006 .

[46]  Ivan Koprić,et al.  Citizens as Partners: Information, Consultation and Public Participation in Policy-Making , 2006 .

[47]  Desmond M. Connor A new ladder of citizen participation , 1988 .