Community Consultation in Victorian Local Government: A Case of Mixing Metaphors?

Abstract

This article draws on a three-year collaborative research project investigating how community consultation is practised by Victorian councils, especially in relation to multiple publics and groups that councils can find 'hard to reach'. Based on an analysis of consultation documents, this article looks at councils' understanding of community consultation and underlying assumptions, the expected outcomes and how this is translated into guidance for practice. The research demonstrates that councils aim to consult to provide a range of outcomes, but there is a lack of clarity about how to choose and use the appropriate combination of consultation tool(s) and public(s) to facilitate these. Councils are also unclear about how the outcomes of consultation feed into existing decision-making processes and the implications of this for democratic legitimacy. This is in part due to the fact that the conceptual tensions around consultation and the democratic process are apparent not so much by virtue of what is said about them, but of what is not said. The article begins by outlining the conceptual and definitional problems associated with consultation using typologies of public participation. We investigate how typologies inform the consultation documents developed by councils and in how far they support practice. We then address the need to involve multiple publics and the vexed issue of who is hard to reach and why they should be consulted.

Understanding the factors that make public participation effective in health policy and planning: a realist synthesis

“…The most common manifestation of this mechanism relates to the involvement of multiple publics and groups with a special attention to minority groups (Summers and McKeown 1996;Kashefi and Mort 2004;Brackertz and Meredyth 2009;Menon and Stafinski 2011;Griebler and Nowak 2012). These minority groups include those who have a marginalised voice and those who are not usually inclined to participate; that is, 'hard-to-reach' stakeholders.…”

Young Children as Active Citizens in Local Government: Possibilities and challenges from an Australian perspective

“…It appears that when local government does seek to increase the participation of "hard to reach" groups, such as the young, a lack of clarity over which consultation processes and tools are most effective appear to hinder their efforts (Brackertz and Meredyth 2009). The respondents in our study acknowledged their lack of knowledge regarding very young children's competencies and expressed a desire for change.…”

Addressing nutrition and social connection through community gardening: A South Australian study

“…This is particularly salient because the two MH programs are located in areas of relative socio‐economic disadvantage where residents are considered to be at greater risk of poor nutrition and associated chronic diseases . Low socio‐economic communities are often assessed as hard‐to‐reach by primary health care services, and requiring programs of high relevance and trust in order to elicit community engagement . It would seem that the MH program using a community development approach whereby participants had strong involvement in shaping the program offers potential for improving healthy eating.…”