Developing the Public Participation Field: The Role of Independent Bodies for Public Participation

Abstract

This article examines how independent bodies for public participation (IBPPs) can initiate a convergence around practices among actors in the public participation field, especially sponsors of participatory arrangements and the associated participation firms. As IBPPs have the public resources and legal authority to independently organize participatory arrangements, they can play a coordinating role in the public participation field. A comparison of two IBPPs, one in Canada (Quebec) and one in France, shows that IBPPs enhance the development of the participation industry and strengthen recognition of several informal norms concerning public participation design and implementation.

Between virtue and profession: Theorising the rise of professionalised public participation practitioners

“…This legitimation extends beyond the credentialling of individual practitioners; it is also a vehicle for ‘deeper integration of engagement into organizational structures and cultures, including facilitating a greater number of engagement practitioners to enter executive and senior executive leadership roles in the same manner as their engineering, finance and project management counterparts’ ( Bice et al, 2019 : p. 305). As Bherer et al (2021) observed in their case studies of two government agencies that provide regulatory oversight over public participation, these agencies further the development of both formal and informal rules, norms and standards. While these agencies ‘rarely internalize public participation in their own organization’ ( Bherer et al, 2021 : 702), they do change public participation practice, as individual public participation professionals and specialized public participation firms adapted their work to ensure that their clients meet these new standards.…”

“…As the demand for community engagement grows, so too does the demand for a ‘new category of expert’ ( Bherer and Lee, 2019 : 196) to design and implement these processes. While some of these public participation specialists work as individual consultants, recent research by Bherer et al (2021) has tracked the emergence of public participation firms. These firms offer a variety of support services and ‘have gradually become recognized as specialists in public debate and who, in turn, subcontract some aspects of the process to smaller firms’ ( Bherer et al, 2021 : 700).…”

“…While some of these public participation specialists work as individual consultants, recent research by Bherer et al (2021) has tracked the emergence of public participation firms. These firms offer a variety of support services and ‘have gradually become recognized as specialists in public debate and who, in turn, subcontract some aspects of the process to smaller firms’ ( Bherer et al, 2021 : 700). Such arrangements have reinforced in some places ‘ a legitimized organizational model in public participation, that of the delegation of the implementation of a participatory process to a third-party organization’ ( Bherer et al, 2021 : p. 700 italics in original).…”

“…The observed growth in specialised public engagement consultants from the 1990s onwards directly coincides with the formation of professional associations and the increased networking opportunities these associations provide ( Bherer & Lee, 2019 ). But like the large participation firms, these professional bodies play a significant role in consolidating public participation practices and influencing how engagement is delivered ( Bherer et al, 2021 ). This is a structural shift in participatory practice, that ultimately changes the spaces of participation and the power structures encased within them, thus raising interesting theoretical questions about the changing nature of the relationship between urban planning and participation, and how these relationships are understood in planning practice and theory.…”

“…In these contexts, this industry includes ‘the for-profit and non-profit’ entities that are ‘paid to supply public engagement services and products’ ( Lee, 2015 : 57), the public participation practitioners working in the industry intersect with, but are also distinct from, the planning profession. These practitioners include the external consultants that local government planning departments hire to design and implement public participation ( Lee, 2015 ) and those working for government agencies that create the standards for other departments’ approaches to public participation ( Bherer et al, 2021 ). In Canadian municipalities, these public engagement practitioners are often located in the communications department, providing guidance and oversight to all municipal staff engaged in public participation, including professional planners, while in Australia, local and state governments are increasingly looking to public engagement consultants to run public participation processes with planners maintaining a more technocratic role regarding the provision of expertise.…”