PUTTING THE PUBLIC
BACK IN PUBLIC
POLICY
Citizens' Assemblies:
An Introduction to
Definitions & Guidelines
October 2024 (version 1)
This report was first prepared by newDemocracy.
With their permission, it has been revised by FIDE -
North America to fit our North American context.
2 Citizens’ Assemblies: An Introduction to Definitions & Guidelines Citizens’ Assemblies - a broadly representative group of randomly chosen people who are tasked by public authorities to develop collective, informed proposals on policy issues - are blossoming across North America. This exciting form of deliberative democracy presents an opportunity to develop shared understanding around this innovation.
As Citizens’ Assemblies become more prevalent, we must develop a common language and taxonomy. Our community of practitioners, public officials and managers, donors and researchers will benefit from definitions and guidelines that enhance understanding and improve implementation.
This document seeks to articulate key components, guiding principles and best practices.
Over the past several months, FIDE - North America has sought input and guidance from Board members and affiliated partners including Matt Byrne, Linn Davis, Yves Dejaeghere, Harry Nathan Gottlieb, Amy Lee, Matt Leighninger, Valerie Lemmie, Peter MacLeod, Sara McPhee-Knowles, Laura Ryan, David Schechter and Alice Siu.
Rather than rigid rules, we offer a framework to illuminate the distinguishing elements that define a Citizens’ Assembly. Our intention is to provide guideposts while leaving room for innovation and adaptation to a variety of contexts. We see this as a living document that will evolve along with the field. We warmly invite input from deliberation experts and practitioners to refine and expand these recommendations over time. Our plan is to incorporate new learnings and perspectives and to revise and update this resource annually.
Our hope is that these shared definitions and guidelines will provide clarity and coherence for democratic innovators. We are grateful for the thoughtful feedback and the individual comments we have received over the past several months by e-mail and during work sessions. We are thankful for the organizations that have endorsed this report including the Berggruen Institute, the Center for Democracy Innovation at the National Civic League, IDEA, newDemocracy, MASS LBP and Unify America.
We welcome you to engage with these ideas and join us in strengthening the practice of Citizens’ Assemblies across North America and beyond.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S NOTE
1 1 The term ‘Citizen’ is used in the broadest sense of the word and follows the OECD definition: “It is not meant in the more restrictive sense of a legally recognized national of a state and is used interchangeably with people.“ Marjan H. Ehsassi
3 Citizens’ Assemblies: An Introduction to Definitions & Guidelines The short answer is that a Citizens’ Assembly meets a specific set of deliberative principles, including representativeness by democratic lottery or sortition, time, information, accountability, deliberation, and a free response.2 WHAT MAKES A CITIZENS’ ASSEMBLY?
No, it’s not simply when something is commissioned by a government or run by the right people that makes it a citizens’ assembly. It's more like how Fair Trade products must meet minimum definitions related to labor practices and environmental sustainability.
The application of these guidelines helps ensure that deliberative engagement projects meet their full potential. By adhering to these principles, we create positive experiences for all involved---from decision-makers exploring deliberative processes for the first time, to the communities investing their time and energy, to the engagement providers facilitating the project.
Successful implementations build trust and enthusiasm for democratic innovation.
They demonstrate the power of collaborative problem-solving and inspire further use of these methods. By outlining best practices, we aim to support and guide those excited about citizens' assemblies, helping them realize the full potential of these tools for addressing complex public issues.
“Is this like how Champagne is only Champagne if it’s from the Champagne wine region?”
“What if I want to run a citizens’ assembly but have limited resources?” Citizens’ Assemblies may not be the answer to every public problem. We understand that assemblies require significant investment and may not always be feasible. The good news is that you can still incorporate many deliberative principles into your engagement efforts, even if you can’t implement a full citizens’ assembly.
By applying these principles creatively within your constraints, you can enhance the quality and impact of your public engagement initiatives. Remember, any step towards more deliberative and inclusive decision-making is valuable! 2 Citizens’ Assemblies go by different names. Some of the alternative names used in North America for engagements that meet the criteria outlined in this document include: citizens’ juries, policy juries, community panels, deliberative panels, reference panels and citizens’ reviews.
PRINCIPLES GUIDING
CITIZENS’ ASSEMBLIES
REPRESENTATIVENESS
Democratic lottery/Sortition methods
ensure diverse representation, bringing
together everyday people from all walks of
life to contribute their unique perspectives.
Additional measures should be introduced
to remove barriers and reduce the cost of
participation.
01 03
It is difficult for large groups of people to find agreement on complex decisions. The OECD and the United Nations Democracy Fund recommend key principles that improve the deliberative quality of group work by creating the ideal environment for the consideration of the broadest range of sources while giving people time, an equal share of voice and influence. This document draws inspiration and builds on these guiding principles and definitions. 02 05
06A CLEAR REMIT
A well-defined scope empowers
participants to address specific problems
and explore potential solutions within
agreed-upon parameters. Also known as
mandate.
ADEQUATE TIME
Providing sufficient time allows participants
to learn, consider balanced information, and
collaborate effectively, resulting in thoughtful
and well-reasoned outcomes.
DIVERSE INFORMATION
Exploring a wide range of sourced and
diverse perspectives, including expert
opinions requested by participants,
enriches the deliberation process and
strengthens the final recommendations.
DELIBERATION, NOT DEBATE
Skilled, independent deliberative
facilitation fosters an environment of
active listening and respectful exchange
of ideas, allowing all voices to be
heard and multiple perspectives to be
considered as collective intelligence
emerges.
A FREE RESPONSE AND A FINAL
REPORT
Participants are empowered to develop
their own recommendations, rationales,
and supporting evidence based on their
collective learning and deliberation. This
independent, impartial and open-ended
approach encourages creative problem
solving and ensures the group’s output is
in their own words and genuinely reflects
their work product.
07 ACCOUNTABILITY
Follow-up mechanisms and clear
communication about how the
government or mandating authority will
act on or respond to the final report and
recommendations ensures the process
has meaningful impact.
Citizens’ Assemblies: An Introduction to Definitions & Guidelines 4 04 5
Citizens’ Assemblies: An Introduction to Definitions & Guidelines A DEFINITION FOR CITIZENS' ASSEMBLIES:
Setting Guidelines and comparing
Citizens’ Assemblies with other forms of engagement
How to read the table:
Hit all seven squares in green and you’ve got yourself a citizens’ assembly. Dip your toes into the purple and we recommend you use a different name and consider what promises you’re making. Anything in pink, and you’re doing community engagement that might have some deliberative elements.
0103 02
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
such as TOWN HALLS and
COMMUNITY FORUMS
CITIZENS' or CIVIC
ASSEMBLIES
DELIBERATIVE PROCESSES
such as DELIBERATIVE
TOWN HALLS and
DELIBERATIVE POLLING
Democratic lottery is a kind of
stratified random selection based on
criteria such as age, gender, race,
socio-economic status, geography.
Diverse random sample, but often not
fully stratified or not drawn from the
full population.
Self-selected participation.
Assembly is asked to collectively
draft proposals to a clearly articulated
public problem.
Participants are asked to provide their
position on a series of questions.
Attendees often gather around a topic
area.
Recommended minimum four days
or approx. 36 hours, predominantly
in-person.
Generally, less than 25 hours. Single instance workshop.
REPRESENTATIVENESSREMITTIME
04 The assembly is presented with
carefully curated balanced,
diverse, and credible information.
Participants should be able to
request additional materials.
Limited to a small pool of
stakeholders, sometimes controlled by
the sponsor or steering group. Often
with limited government involvement.
Limited. Generally based on a single
document prepared and provided by
government.
INFORMATION
Full facilitated deliberation.
Participants learn together, weigh
options, consider trade-offs, and seek
rough consensus.
Participants deliberate but the result is
an aggregation of individual responses
rather than common ground or
supermajority decision.
Debate or limited discussion. No
deliberation.
A commitment by the mandating
authority to respond to proposals in a
timely manner.
Often no direct government
commitment to the process. Indirect
processes are often conducted by third
parties seeking to influence a decision.
Advivsory only. No commitment to
respond.
Participants collectively draft policy
proposals and present their final
report directly to the mandating
authority for consideration.
The report may be a polled exercise of
pre-written options or not supermajority
recommendations. Response
provided by an entity other than the
government/decision-maker.
Generalized summary report written
by engagement staff or consultants.
050607
DELIBERATIONOUTPUTACCOUNTABILITY
6 Citizens’ Assemblies: An Introduction to Definitions & Guidelines “WHAT HAPPENS IF I DON’T STICK TO
THE GUIDELINES?”
Processes that do not meet the definition of a Citizens’ Assembly can still be meaningful in addressing community needs and solving public problems.
We advocate for Citizens’ Assemblies because:
Ensuring the Assembly has a meaningful level
of influence on decisions motivates diverse
participation. When people know their input
will have a tangible impact, they’re more likely
to commit their time and energy. This creates
an inclusive process that attracts a wide range
of voices, not just the usual participants.
Empowering participants to respond
freely to questions and write their own
recommendations fosters creativity and
independent thinking. This approach maintains
the integrity of the process and encourages
innovative solutions, allowing the potential of
collective intelligence to emerge.
Skilled, independent facilitators support
deliberation by guiding participants through
a process of learning, perspective-sharing,
and thoughtful consideration of trade-offs. This
facilitated approach helps the group move
beyond debate to find areas of agreement.
Using a rough consensus or super majority
principles ensures the final recommendations
reflect broad consensus, presenting decision-
makers with well-supported proposals.
Accountability is ensured with a clear and
well-articulated follow-up mechanism.
The assembly presents the final report to the
mandating authority, who in turn makes a
commitment to consider and respond to the
proposals within a reasonable time. Over
time, these processes strengthen the citizen-
state relationship and can enhance trust in
political institutions.
A representative sample selected through
democratic lottery enhances trust in the
process. It ensures diverse perspectives are
included, especially from those who might
not typically participate. This approach brings
together a true cross-section of the community,
enriching the deliberations with a wide range
of lived experiences.
Providing ample time for deliberation allows
participants to explore the issue from all angles.
This thoughtful approach enables the group
to find common ground and develop well-
considered recommendations . Adequate
time demonstrates the organizer's commitment
to a thorough and unbiased process.
Offering a comprehensive range of views
and allowing participants to request additional
information empowers them to examine the
issue thoroughly. This open approach builds
trust in the process and enables participants to
form well-informed opinions, leading to more
robust and credible proposals.
The sense of belonging and community
that emerges amongst participants along with
enhanced learning, enthusiasm, engagement
and a feeling of consequential voice strengthens
civic muscle resulting in empowered and
activated citizenship and democratic renewal.
7 Citizens’ Assemblies: An Introduction to Definitions & Guidelines The following organizations have endorsed
Citizens’ Assemblies:
An Introduction to
Definitions & Guidelines
October 2024 (version 1)
If you would like to endorse this publication, write to us at:
[email protected]
fidemocracy.org