|
Mini-publics and random-selection play a huge role in the latest Democracy innovations. Basically, a small group of citizens is randomly selected. They meet to address some issue and help the whole system of people gain clarity about what's best. Most of these are "Deliberative Councils" like The "Citizens Assembly" (or "People's Assembly"), the "Citizens Jury" or "Deliberative Polling". Of particular note is the Citizens Assembly because it is gaining momentum throughout the world. Usually it is chartered by government to address particular issues and spark better policy decisions. The "Wisdom Council Process" seems similar but has a different overall purpose. It's intended to facilitate a new System of governance by which all the people get involved in solving Monster Problems and stopping problems from being created in the first place. For this, it uses a quality of thinking different than dialogue or deliberation that we call "choice-creating" As people increasingly understand the immense value of these two democracy tools, we hope that they can be used in tandem to help create Wise Democracy and the Good Society.
|
|
1) Comparing the Citizens Assembly and the Wisdom Council Process
Summary |
Citizens Assemblies are "deliberative democracy" interventions aimed at improved decision-making within a Constitutional Republic. This social innovation involves a mini-public of random citizens studying a given issue, weighing options and voting to identify which option is best. Hopefully, this recommendation influences decision-makers and policy. |
The Wisdom Council Process is ultimately is aimed at shifting the System to "Real Democracy, by adding the missing leadership of "We the People." It sets up an ongoing series of mini-publics that are specially facilitated to address the most difficult issues, reach unified views, and present shared conclusions to the general public as reflections of what we are all thinking. The point is to engage all citizens into one high quality conversation. |
What does it look like? |
This is a large mini-public of 50-200 people who meet for an extended time to learn about a chosen issue, deliberate options and make recommendations. Each mini public is given a well-defined problem, unbiased information, and a set of possible options. A neutral moderator helps participants weigh the options, vote, and present the final recommendations to decision-makers. |
This is an ongoing series of small mini-publics (10-16 people) which meetsfor just a short (1-3 days) time. Dynamic Facilitation is used so each Wisdom Council can address a "Monster Problem, and co-determine unified conclusions. Each Wisdom Council presents its perspective to the public as a reflection of what we "all" are saying, ultimately stimulating an ongoing creative whole-system We the People conversation that reaches shared conclusions. |
What's the purpose? |
To better involve citizens in making better policy. The citizen intervention helps decision-makers know which option the citizenry would want if they became better informed and had the chance to talk thoughtfully about the issue. |
To involve everyone in solving the big impossible-seeming problems and facilitate a system change to "Wise Democracy," where a living "We the People is the ultimate authority. This becomes possible if large systems of people can be facilitated to think together creatively. |
Who sets this up? |
Usually the government. This way funding is provided for what can be an expensive process. And it assures that elected officials will listen. |
By government, or even better, a well-meaning, non-partisan group. This group is facilitative, having no role in the content of what is addressed or determined. |
What kind of thinking? |
Deliberation. The aim is to help both citizens and representatives be well informed, deliberative, rational and less emotional in weighing options and deciding what's best. |
Choice-creating. The aim is for people to address "Monster Problems" in a way that is heartfelt, creative and collaborative, where shifts and breakthroughs are normal. Group unity is the only possible result. |
Who is the facilitator? |
A neutral, well-informed moderator guides people on a step-by-step journey to good decision-making, which may include moments of dialogue, analysis, discussions, and deliberation. Usually a vote is held at the end. |
Someone skilled in Dynamic Facilitation helps the group engage the issue and one another in the spirit of "choice-creating”. The ongoing nature of the Wisdom Council Process facilitates a "We the People" conversation, eg. one ongoing whole-system choice-creating conversation. |
How are the random people determined? |
A stratified random selection. Because this is a one-time intervention, the group needs to be big enough to reflect major parts of the population, hopefully in their proper proportions. |
A pure random selection each time. Because this is an ongoing series of mini-publics, over time all portions of the population will participate in a proper proportion. |
Who is the primary audience? |
Decision-makers. The Citizens Assembly reports its recommendations to decision-makers who might be elected officials or the voting public. |
The general public. Each Wisdom Council reports a REFLECTION to the public of what we are all thinking and feeling. In this way the series of Wisdom Councils facilitates a public conversation in the spirit of choice-creating |
What are the results? |
Better policy decisions. The Citizens Assembly's recommendations help to reduce the power of special interests in favor of the public interest. It educates the general public about the issue and provides a greater sense of the public will. |
Action happens in many different ways: by influencing individual, organizational and governmental decisions, a new spirit of community and ultimately a new system, which transforms people's motivations. Impact happens both through the process and the whole-system conclusions. |
Example of use ... |
In 2004 in British Columbia, 153 random citizens met monthly over a year to investigate how best to hold elections. Different options were presented to the Citizens Assembly and after careful deliberations a vote was ultimately taken. 146 to 7 the Citizens Assembly recommended that a “single transferable vote” (i.e. ranked order voting) system be adopted. Then there was a public referendum on the issue, which required 60% of the vote. Despite overwhelming support within the Assembly, the media treated the issue with false equivalency. There was not enough support for the action to pass. |
Mauthausen example ... Near Mauthausen, Austria, are the ruins of a large NAZI concentration camp. Many locals were glad it was falling down and wanted it to be forgotten but three Wisdom Councils were convened. Young people were exclaiming, “We are finally talking about this!” and adults were thrilled because “Now the healing can begin.” The Wisdom Council conclusions included a unified position that “we need to protect this memorial” and “it needs to become a Center for Human Rights education.” From this abbreviated Wisdom Council process, used as an intervention, three local communities established bi-annual Human Rights conferences held at the War memorial, led by the youth. |
How might this be used to address global issues like climate change? |
Citizens Assemblies have been used at local, national and global levels on the issue of climate change. This builds interest, knowledge and momentum for policy measures at the national and local levels. But there are no official global "decision-makers" to act on recommendations. |
A few people with adequate resources can initiate a global Wisdom Council Process. See "The ToBe Project." Key is to facilitate “one ongoing global choice-creating conversation” where all the people get involved, face the issue and come to shared perspectives. This "We the People" can wisely steward the well-being of humanity and the biosphere. |
2) In the short video below the Wisdom Council Process is referred to as the Bürgerräte (or "Citizens Council") vs. the Citizens Assembly.
Other resources
- Episode #34 of “Facilitating Public Deliberations”, Jim Rough is interviewed by Dr. Lyn Carson, Director of Research at the New Democracy Foundation in Australia. Jim describes how the Wisdom Council Process is distinct from "Deliberative Democracy".
Please Donate to the Center for Wise Democracy! ... All donations are tax-deductible. We are a 501-c3 organization.