Checklist for preparing a public participation process on immigration issues

HIWE writing series on key results of the project: Part III

Have you decided to organise a public participation process for solving challenges related to immigration issues? Awesome!

Co-operation between private, public, third sector organizations, and the public can be a great means for developing better services and more impactful policies.

The scale and complexity of public participation can range widely: from simple one-off activities for collecting stakeholders’ views on a specific issue to longer processes of co-creating and even co-producing solutions together.

To make sure participatory processes produce societal value as well as value to everyone involved, diligent preparation is needed.

Our checklist is intended to be used when planning a public participation process – in particular a co-creation process – that is related to immigration issues.

Download the checklist as a PDF here.

WHAT?

• Do you know what challenge you are trying to solve? Is public participation actually needed to solve this issue? Double-check that co-creation is the best way to solve the challenge, and that you are really willing to collaborate with stakeholders and give them a degree of power.
• Does the co-creation process have a clear purpose? Do the participants have the opportunity to (re-)negotiate it?
• What kind of public value is the co-creation aiming to produce? Do you know what a successful outcome of the process would look like? Is it the same for the initiators and the different participants?
• Do you know what the participants can influence and what they cannot influence? Being clear about what participants can affect helps managing expectations.

WHO?

• Have you analysed who the relevant stakeholders that should be involved are? Have you gone beyond the people who are easy to reach and tried to identify those normally excluded from decision-making?
• Have you made sure to invite internationals if the co-creation is related to immigration issues? Are they representing themselves, associations, organisations, or companies?
• How are you recruiting the participants? Are you aware of possible factors that might prevent them to join (f.ex. financial, cultural, language, care-related, time-related, physical or geographical barriers…)? Can you offer assistance to minimise these?
• Is taking part in the process beneficial to the participants? Do the participants need to be remunerated or is the process and its outcomes producing enough value for them?
• What kinds of relationships do the participants, process initiators, and facilitators have? Are there differences in their power relations of the participants? These should be considered when designing the process.

HOW?

• Who designs the co-creation? Do you have an internal team or hire external experts? Will the participants have a say in the process? No matter the length or complexity, a well-designed process makes it more effective and participation smoother.
• Is this a one-time activity or a longer co-creation process? The design of longer processes needs to be more flexible.
• When and where does the process take place? Is it in-person, online, or hybrid? How long does it last? What implications does the venue have on opportunities to participate and collaboration methods used?
• Do you know what level of participation is suitable for the purpose of the process? Participation levels can vary from informing to consulting, involving, collaborating, and even empowering. See our Policy Recommendations and Roadmap for Action and International Association for Public Participation’s Spectrum of Public Participation for more info.
• Have you designed a process and methods that fit the intended level of participation and purpose of the co-creation?
• Have you chosen methods that enable equal participation and participants’ engagement? Is your designed process inclusive and does address power differences or potential conflicts? Methods can be tailor-made or existing methods can be mixed-and-matched to fit the process. For example, literature on facilitation (see Suomen Fasilitaattorit Ry’s list of literature in Finnish), participation, and innovation methods provide good tools. Sitra also has future- and change-oriented tools.
• Does the design process make use of the diversity of participants? Is the process designed to be meaningful for the participants?
• Have you thought of the ethical aspects of the participation and collaboration? (See The Ethical Compass video by CoSIE project)
• Who will facilitate the process? It is important to have an individual or team in charge of making the process run smoothly and making participation as easy as possible.

Download the checklist as a PDF here!

Further reading: Bryson, J., Quick, K., Slotterback, C. & Crosby, B. (2013). Designing Public Participation Processes. Public Administration Review, 73(1), 23-34.

Authors: Piritta Parkkari (University of Eastern Finland) & Satu Aaltonen (University of Turku)