Basic Standards for citizens’ assemblies
May 22, 2019 by Extinction Rebellion
Written by Marcin Gerwin
There’s been an explosion of interest in organising citizens’ assemblies on climate change. This is really exciting. Citizen’s assemblies will create the political motivation to implement policies to protect UK and global citizens from the effects of our warming climate and prevent further biodiversity loss. I have no doubt that recommendations coming from citizens will be strong and far-reaching – people understand both the urgency of the climate crisis and our dependence on biodiversity. However, for a citizens’ assembly to work well and be truly democratic, there are some basic principles that must be followed.
I teamed up with experts from around the world to develop a list of basic standards for citizens’ assemblies. The list, which is presented below, is not set in stone, because deliberative democracy is a relatively new field and the process is still being
Extinction Rebellion expect a citizens’ assembly on the Climate and Ecological Emergency to implement these standards as a minimum. There are three underlying premises behind them: 1) Democracy is for everyone, 2) In a democracy, people are sovereign, 3) The process should be fair.
1. Random selection of participants – all members of a citizens’ assembly are selected by lot (a process known as “sortition” – similar to how juries are selected). Ideally, every member of the population eligible to take part in a citizens’ assembly should receive an invitation to participate.
2. Demographic representation – the composition of a citizens’ assembly should broadly match the demographic profile of the community participating in the process. A set of criteria may be used to ensure demographic representativeness of the community, such as age, gender, ethnicity, geographic area, etc. The aim is to create a small scale community that “feels like us”. The size of the group should allow for inclusion of a wide diversity of views. A stipend should be provided to all participants.
3. Independent coordination – the citizens’ assembly is run by an independent team of coordinators, which is responsible for preparing the process of random selection, developing the agenda, and inviting experts and facilitators. If the citizens’ assembly is organized by local authorities or the parliament, it is important that members of the coordination team are not part of the civil service or active politicians. The coordinators should be impartial and not direct stakeholders.
4. Citizens’ assembly can invite experts – despite the programme being prepared by the team of coordinators, the citizens’ assembly can invite additional experts of their own choice. Expert input can be provided in the form of a speech in person, a live stream, a recording, a written note or another method.
5. Inclusion of the widest
6. Inviting all stakeholders – any organization, informal group or institution whose area of work and expertise is related to the topic of the citizens’ assembly has the right to present its opinion to the citizens’ assembly in person. The role of the team of coordinators is to define the stakeholder criteria – they do not make a selection. If time is limited and there is a large number of stakeholders, a method may be used to select some stakeholders to represent those with similar perspectives. In this case, a diversity of perspectives should be represented in a balanced manner.
7. Deliberation – discussions which include listening to others mindfully and weighing options are the key elements of a citizens’ assembly. The programme should involve discussions in small groups and plenary sessions, and should be run by skilled facilitators in order to maximize opportunities for Assembly Members to speak and to be heard.
8. Openness – all members of the community should be able to provide input to the citizens’ assembly in the form of comments, proposals or suggestions.
9. Sufficient time for reflection – providing a sufficient amount of time for reflection is necessary to achieve thorough and considered decisions. If the matter is not urgent, it is best not to rush. The citizens’ assembly should be able to prolong its meetings – their length and number – if it chooses to do so (subject to budgetary limits).
10. Impact – the follow-up to the citizens’ assembly’s recommendations should be clear from the outset. Ideally, recommendations that receive the support of the citizens’ assembly at an agreed threshold should be treated as binding (to such an extent that is legally permissible in the given situation).
11. Transparency – all presentations during the educational, plenary phase should be transmitted live and recorded. All materials presented to the citizens’ assembly should be made available online. Clear information about how the Citizens’ Assembly’s recommendations will be implemented should be provided online and updated as actions occur. A report presenting details of methodology used for organizing a citizens’ assembly should be provided by the coordination team.
12. Visibility – each citizens’ assembly is an important event in the life of a community and citizens should be informed that it is happening, and given information on how they can get involved (e.g. writing a submission) and follow it. The Citizens’ Assembly should be publicly announced before it is formed.
Marcin Gerwin is a specialist in sustainable development and deliberative democracy, and has coordinated a series of citizens’ assemblies in Gdansk, Poland.