Tiny House
More About The National Coalition for Dialogue & Deliberation • Join Now!
Community News

Posts with the Tag “public engagement”

Everyday Democracy's Dialogue-to-Change

Part of a larger community program, an Everyday Democracy dialogue (formerly known as a "Study Circle") is a group of 8 to 12 people from different backgrounds and viewpoints who meet several times to talk about a critical public issue. In a dialogue, everyone has an equal voice, and people try to understand one another's views. They do not have to agree with one another. The idea is to share concerns and look for ways to make things better. A neutral facilitator helps the group look at different views and makes sure the discussion goes well. (continue)

Assessing the Effects of Public Participation

This article presents the results of research designed to test participatory democracy assertions that high-quality public participation can affect participants' beliefs in desirable ways. It examines the relationships between exposure to quality participation and participant beliefs about the trustworthiness and responsiveness of a public agency and the value of including different viewpoints in public meetings. (continue)

Teachers, Study Circles and the Racial Achievement Gap

The subtitle of Orland's 76-page thesis is "How One Dialogue and Action Program Helped Teachers Integrate the Competencies of an Effective Multicultural Educator." Study Circles, a dialogue and action process, brings together teachers, parents and students from diverse racial, ethnic and cultural backgrounds to talk about the racial achievement gap. This study asks "How does the experience of participating in Study Circles bring teachers closer to integrating the competencies of the effective multicultural educator?" (continue)

ILG’s Public Engagement and Collaborative Governance Program

The Public Engagement and Collaborative Governance Program (formerly known as the Collaborative Governance Initiative) provides information and resources to help local officials in California make good decisions about the design and use of public engagement in their cities and counties. The program is directed by Terry Amsler. (continue)

Should the Public Meeting Enter the Information Age?

This article by Jim Snider for the National Civic Review, Fall 2003, 20-29 (2003) can be found at National Civic Review, Fall 2003, 20-29 (2003). Snider's goal in this article was to put the public meeting on the e-democracy agenda and to suggest a specific public meeting reform agenda firmly grounded in democratic theory. (continue)

The Deliberative Democracy Handbook: Strategies for Effective Civic Engagement in the Twenty-First Century

The Deliberative Democracy Handbook is a terrific resource for democratic practitioners and theorists alike. It combines rich case material from many cities and types of institutional settings with careful reflection on core principles. It generates hope for a renewed democracy, tempered with critical scholarship and political realism. Most important, this handbook opens a spacious window on the innovativeness of citizens in the U.S. (and around the world) and shows how the varied practices of deliberative democracy are part of a larger civic renewal movement. (continue)

Talking about Race: Community Dialogues and the Politics of Difference

More than 400 communities across the country have used dialogue in an attempt to improve race relations. In this 317-page book, the author takes an eye-opening look at this strategy to reveal the reasons behind the method and the effects it has in the cities and towns that undertake it. With extensive observations of community dialogues, interviews with the discussants, and sophisticated analysis of national data, Walsh shows that while meeting organizers usually aim to establish common ground, participants tend to leave their discussions with a heightened awareness of differences in perspective and experience. (continue)

Taking Democracy to Scale: Large Scale Interventions for Citizens

This article reviews the AmericaSpeaks model for large group interventions followed by an examination of AmericaSpeaks' intent to institutionalize the practice of national discussions on critical policy issues. (continue)

Reframing Public Participation: Strategies for the 21st Century

This article makes the case that legally required participation methods in the U.S. not only do not meet most basic goals for public participation, but they are also counterproductive, causing anger and mistrust. Both theory and practice struggle with dilemmas that make problems seem insoluble, such as the conflict between the individual and collective interest or between the ideal of democracy and the reality that many voices are never heard. Cases are used to draw on an emerging set of practices of collaborative public engagement from around the world to demonstrate how alternative methods can better meet public participation goals and how they make moot most of the dilemmas of more conventional practice. (continue)

Case Study of the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council

NEJAC was created in 1993 as a part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Environmental Justice. NEJAC helps the OEJ address environmental justice issues and integrate environmental justice into the EPA's policies, programs and activities. It does this by bringing community, industry and state/local government groups together to find solutions to environmental justice problems and by providing the EPA with independent advice and recommendations on matters related to environmental justice. (continue)

-