Participation: what works?

About the process

Thank you for agreeing to take part in this study. The research is investigating how to improve participatory processes, and is being conducted by Dr Karen Bell (University of Bristol) and Prof Mark Reed (Newcastle University). A copy of the Newcastle University ethics permission for this evaluation is available on request from Prof Reed.

We will not ask you for your name and projects will be anonymised in our write-up. Participation is voluntary and you may withdraw from the survey at any time, you may request a copy of your data and you may ask for your data to be deleted. Data will only be used by Dr Bell and Prof Reed and will be solely used for the purposes of this research. If you would like a copy of the paper that the data will be used in, please provide your email address at the end of the survey. Participation normally takes 5-10 minutes, depending on the length of answers you wish to provide. By choosing to proceed, you grant consent for your answers to be used as described above.

Thank you for your help with this!

Karen and Mark

Question Title

* 1. Thinking back on a participative decision-making process you have organised/been involved in, please identify the participatory process e.g. did it have a name, or who organised it, when and/or what was it about?

Question Title

* 2. What was the purpose of the process? (choose one)

knowledge sharing (understanding needs and preferences of participants, learning from information they share)

collective decision-making (consensus decision making based on discussion to find the ‘common good’)

choice and voice (participants choose from prescribed options and/or give preferences)

oversight (participants oversee processes or comment on reports)

Other (please specify)

Question Title

* 3. On a scale of 0-5, how ‘successful’ was the process?

Neutral

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 4. Describe what was successful or unsuccessful from your perspective

Question Title

* 5. To what extent were the following factors present (score 0-5, with most present being 5)

	Score
A safe space that fosters trust	A safe space that fosters trust Score menu
Inclusion of marginalised voices/perspectives	Inclusion of marginalised voices/perspectives Score menu
Accessibility to all, systematically identifying and overcoming barriers to engagement such as cost, language and cultural barriers	Accessibility to all, systematically identifying and overcoming barriers to engagement such as cost, language and cultural barriers Score menu
Equality between participants that respects and values different knowledges and contributions	Equality between participants that respects and values different knowledges and contributions Score menu
Equal recognition of all types of knowledge bases, from local, lay, informal, implicit (or tacit), contextual “know-how”, to scientific, expert, formal, explicit, universal “know-why”	Equal recognition of all types of knowledge bases, from local, lay, informal, implicit (or tacit), contextual “know-how”, to scientific, expert, formal, explicit, universal “know-why” Score menu
Authenticity i.e. honest and open communication	Authenticity i.e. honest and open communication Score menu
Transparency of process i.e. occurring in an open way without secrets	Transparency of process i.e. occurring in an open way without secrets Score menu
Freedom (from fear)	Freedom (from fear) Score menu
Equal power for all participants within the process	Equal power for all participants within the process Score menu
The ability to deliberate i.e. to share perspectives freely with adequate information to do so	The ability to deliberate i.e. to share perspectives freely with adequate information to do so Score menu
Accountability, during and post process, ensuring that responsibility is taken for decisions and they are faithfully implemented	Accountability, during and post process, ensuring that responsibility is taken for decisions and they are faithfully implemented Score menu
Feedback loops that keep people informed about how their knowledge is being used	Feedback loops that keep people informed about how their knowledge is being used Score menu
Access to the resources and other means necessary to actively participate	Access to the resources and other means necessary to actively participate Score menu

Question Title

* 6. What was the timescale for the process?

Short (i.e. one or two meetings or less than one month)

Medium (i.e. up to six months)

Long (i.e. more than six months)

Other (please specify)

Question Title

* 7. What was the spatial scale of the process?

Local or regional (e.g. within a local authority)

National (e.g. Scotland, England or UK)

Multiple scales (e.g. combination of local and national events as part of a process)

Other (please specify)

Question Title

* 8. Were you responsible for organising or facilitating the process?

Yes