Page 66 - Enabling National Initiatives to Take Democracy Beyond Elections

64 A Project of the UN Democracy Fund (UNDEF) Red flag #2: Political context This is not a last minute approach for where an issue gets very controversial: all the public will see is a government avoiding a decision rather than genuinely listening. Similarly, a project or topic clearly identified with a particular campaigned result makes a process untenable. Participants will see this immediately and the entire project will lose its legitimacy, undermining any effort to share the problem and likely also undermining any future deliberative projects. Deliberative processes are centred on considered common- ground agreement that is undermined when they are placed as the focus of an entrenched political disagreement. Not because the participants are incapable of resolving an otherwise intractable problem, but because the additional pressure makes it more difficult for randomly-selected everyday people to patiently and appropriate consider all sides of an argument and reach agreement. The only exception here is where you can adequately address #4 below. Red flag #3: Size of the decision Some decisions will impact an entire country or an entire state. These decisions should include people from all over and not just in major cities. For example, if you’re making a decision on major infrastructure spending for the state but cannot run a process large enough to include people from regional and rural areas (where applicable) then you should change the format. Not including people impacted by a decision in the process is a sure way to undermine trust.