Consensus conferences
The Danish Board of Technology
The consensus conference, sometimes called citizens’ panels, along with its conceptual cousin participatory technology assessment, is the most widely discussed forum for engaging public participation in health- and technology-science policy- and decision-making. It is a dialogue between experts and citizens, open to the public and the media. A conference has three dimensions:
The citizen panel plays the leading role: it consists of about 14 people who are introduced to the topic by a professional facilitator. The citizen panel formulates the questions to be taken up at the conference, and participates in the selection of experts to answer them. The panel has two weekends for this preparation.
The expert panel is selected in a way that ensures that essential opposing views and professional conflicts can emerge and be discussed at the conference. Good experts are not only knowledgeable but also open-minded and good communicators with an over-view of their field.
An advisory/planning committee has the overall responsibility of making sure that all rules of a democratic, fair and transparent process have been followed.
On the first day of the conference, the experts present their answers to the questions from the citizen panel, from the point of view of their field of expertise. The following morning is reserved for clarifying questions and for discussions between the expert panel, the citizen panel and the audience. The rest of the second day and the third day are reserved for the citizen panel to produce a final document, presenting their conclusions and recommendations. Consensus on attitudes and recommendations is achieved through open discussion. Thus the final document is an expression of the extent to which the citizen panel can reach consensus. On the morning of the fourth day, the citizen panel reads the final document to the experts and the audience, including the press. The experts have the opportunity to correct misunderstandings and factual errors, but at this point they are not allowed to influence the views of the citizen panel.
Examples:
An Aging Population, 2002
Telework, 1997
Readings:
Mohr, Alison, "Of being seen to do the right thing: Provisional findings from the first Australian consensus conference on gene technology in the food chain", Science and Public Policy,29(1) February 2002, 2-12
The author discuses the first Australian consensus conference, held in Canberra in 1999. The exercise in participatory technology assessment involved 14 “ordinary” citizens in a discussion on gene technology in the food chain. While the author considers the event to have been largely a success holding promise for the future, she does observe that any such new style of decision making will have to face obstacles. When transplanting the consensus conference model into a new social context a period of anticipatory socialization is needed so that organizers and participants are clear about what is achievable.
Durant, John, "Participatory technology assessment and the democratic model of the public understanding of science," Science and Public Policy, 26(5) October 1999, 313-320
The author considers the recent sentiment in support of public participation in technology assessment. While such practices date back to the 1960s in the U.S., he notes the distinguishing quality of current endeavors lies in a concern to establish what he calls “socially sustainable” polices for science and technology: i.e., those that prove credible and robust in the face of increasingly skeptical public attitudes toward many forms of scientific, technological and industrial change. In this light, he argues, ideals of equality between scientists and lay citizens, and of informed public debate, as the preconditions for forging socially sustainable public policies need to be translated into new processes of deliberative democracy.
Andersen, Ida-Elisabeth, and Birgit Jaeger, "Scenario workshops and consensus conferences: Towards more democratic decision-making," Science and Public Policy, 26(5) October 1999, 331-340
The authors explore the application in the Danish context of two popular citizen engagement media; consensus conferences and scenario workshops. The latter they describe as a group of citizens interacting with other actors to exchange knowledge and experience, develop common visions and produce a plan of action. Both approaches have in common creation of a framework for dialogue among policymakers, experts and lay citizens.
IPAC Events
