Focus Groups, Citizens’ Juries and O pen S pace method: Innovative tools of public involvement in water management

1. Focus Groups, Citizens’ Juries and Open Space method: Innovative tools of public involvement in water management Kati Kangur Peipsi Center for Transboundary Cooperation Estonia 9th June, St. Petersburg

3. Rationale behind involving stakeholders in decision-making • Increase the public awareness and acceptance of the problems in water management and measures that need to be taken for solution • Enrich QUALITY OF DECISIONS with relevant viewpoints and local information about the water issue that could not have been generated otherwise. • Widen the RESPONSIBILITY for the decisions made and actions taken as stakeholders are drawn into the deliberation about the problems that need to be solved and so become co-responsible for the decisions that are made and actions that are taken.

4. Preconditions for effective public involvement • Widespread recognition of its value • Political will to implement the deliberated decisions, economical feasibility • Practical guidance and capacity to involve citizens and their recommendations in policy design. The analyses of the public participation results provide a starting point for the integrated water management strategies including the awareness building and public action fostering.

5. Overview of innovative public involvement tools: • Focus Group interviews • Citizens’ Juries • Open Space method

6. Focus groups and citizens’ juries tested inEU 5th FP funded RIVER DIALOGUE project:“Empowerment and Awareness Building in River Basin Management Through Focus Groups and Citizens Juries” • Aimed at identifying most effective participatory approach in the river basin management plan design

7. Focus groups • 4–8 members in a group discussion on certain issue • In a free atmosphere participants exchange their points of views and experiences building each other awareness and acceptance of others perspectives • Reach common understanding of the problem • Source of information on uncovered topics

8. Example: Mapping stakeholders needs in Emajõgi River Basin • How are environmental risks perceived? • Sources of environmental information? • Interest towards water management? • Possibilities for influencing environmental policy-making?

9. Interviews • Schoolchildren • Community activists • Water tourism entrepreneurs • Fishermen • Farmers • Summer cottage owners • Local government officials • Representatives of water sport club • Environmental NGOS Spring 2003 in Emajõgi River Basin with stakeholders focused on :

11. Participants perception of the experience Majority of participants’ expectations were fulfilled: • Got to say out their opinion • Exchange of information and experiences on water management • Pleasant to discuss together issues that otherwise are not talked about

12. Focus groups findings • Awareness of the risks is a precondition for interest in participation in solving environmental problems • Lack of information and relevant experiences furthers opposition among stakeholders • Water information in hard to understand and for common people • Water management earns too little public attention • WM is dominated by out of local context environmental protection and EU bureaucracy standards • Focus groups is an efficient method to evoke diverse understandings and building public awareness

13. Citizens’ juries • A group of representatives of the community comes together to carefully deliberate on the problem significant to the community. • Panel members hear expert opinions give their suggestions for the solution. • The decision made by the panel will be delivered to the policy-makers and for implementation

14. YES or NO for the water tourism development on Emajõgi River

15. Conducting Citizens’ Jury • Jury members: inhabitants of Puhja and Rannu municipalities • Presentations of witnesses from different sectors:river port, nature reserve, NGO, engineer, businessman • Enabled participants to get to know different perspectives on the development of Emajõgi region • Gives participants possibility to utter their opinion on issue at stake • Gives information on the public perceptions of the problems and value orientations, needs and interests • At the end of the day Jury compiled their recommendations • Report was sent to state and local authorities dealing with River Emajõgi WM issues

16. YES or NO for the water tourism development on Emajõgi River • Water Association lead by Min. of Environment, focal point of public involvement in river basin management plans design • Estonian Civil Society Development Act (2003) – support for the NGOs and local civil actions • Increasing activeness and acknowledgement of NGOs as state’s partners

17. Open Space Method – tested in frames of GEF project of Lake Peipsi-Chudskoe Basin Management plan • MIN. MODERATION & MAX CITIZENS’ INPUT • Participants are free to raise a problem of discussion • Choose a group of discussion to contribute to • Jointly evaluate the significnace of the problem • Compose a strategy for the problem solution

18. Future of Environmental Education in Lake Peipsi basin? • Discussion groups on: teachers’ capacity, state support, media coverage, tehnical means for water education education etc. • Example of following concrete action: Contribution to Min.o.Environment and Min.o.Education strategy on outdoors environmental education development

19. YES or NO for the water tourism development on Emajõgi River • Water Association lead by Min. of Environment, focal point of public involvement in river basin management plans design • Estonian Civil Society Development Act (2003) – support for the NGOs and local civil actions • Increasing activeness and acknowledgement of NGOs as state’s partners

20. Lessons Learned Citizens’ juries, focus groups and open space methods: • Enable participants to get to know different perspectives on a challenge in water management • Give information on the public perceptions of the problems and value orientations, needs and interests • Promote political dialogue aimed at mutual understanding: not aiming at complete agreements, but rather that they try to resolve conflicts by finding an acceptable solution • After careful careful consideration also ordinary people are able to discuss complex water management issues !

21. For more information: • www.ctc.ee • www.riverdialogue.org • E-mail: kati.kangur@ctc.ee Thank You !