« Previous | Contents |
Listen
BUILDING CONSENSUS FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING IN SCOTLAND: A REVIEW OF BEST PRACTICE
ANNEX C DECISION CHECKLIST FOR CONSENSUS BUILDING IN SPECIFIC CONTEXTS
From the analysis in this report of the key principles and issues underpinning consensus building, a set of key questions and principles have been identified. These are set out in this Annex as a set of questions, which can be used in two ways. Firstly as a decision checklist for policy makers and others considering whether and how to carry out or engage in consensus building. And secondly as a basis for evaluating the quality of a given consensus building process. The set of questions and principles are drawn together from the four stages of consensus building discussed in this report. They consider, in turn, preliminary issues about whether to use consensus building; process design questions; and internal and external issues raised by taking the decision to pursue a consensus building approach. The questions and principles should help in making transparent the key decisions that are made, and so assist policy makers, evaluators and researchers to approach consensus building reflectively. Addressing these questions and considering the extent to which the principles hold, makes it possible to acknowledge the many ways in which consensus building is attempted in less than ideal circumstances, and may lead to the conclusion that in certain situations it is not appropriate to attempt it.
Key questions in determining the appropriateness of a consensus building approach
What is the broad aim of consensus building - conflict resolution or complex management?
Is consensus building appropriate in this situation?
What are the instrumental, political and ethical rationale(s) for consensus building?
Do conflicting goals exist between different groups? If so, do intractable differences exist between them, or is it plausible that new positions or common ground will emerge from discussion?
Are there challenges to the consensual principle?
Is there potential for democratic legitimacy?
Are sufficient resources available to sustain a legitimate process? |
Design of consensus building approaches
What principles underlie the process (will a conflictual or non-conflictual approach be adopted)?
Is prioritisation necessary between aims of inclusivity of participants; holistic policy making; and process goals? If so, what is the order of priority?
Exclusion: which of the possible actors in the process are going to be parties to the consensus which is built? what issues will be covered?
What kind of consensus building is being sought - broad based participative, narrow partnership, or a hybrid?
Where is consensus to be located: which parties will be involved in the consensus building process; and in which arena will consensus building take place?
What will the relationships be between those 'inside' and 'outside' the process?
Is consensus to be achieved in events, processes or institutional design?
What factors are likely to limit the extent of initiators' control over the process? Is non-participation likely to jeopardise the legitimacy of the process?
Have key process decisions, including those relating to principles and design, been explicitly and accountably addressed? |
Consensus building processes: internal issues
All participants should recognise and accept the principles (with consequent limitations and constraints) of the particular consensus building approach that is being used.
A willingness to learn, explore common ground and be open to shifting positions should be shared by all those taking part.
Process goals and outcomes should be shared by participants.
There should be a shared commitment among participants to abide by outcomes. Legitimacy, accountability and transparency:
Upstream process decisions need to be accountable.
Trade-offs and decisions about exclusion need to be explicit and accountable.
Clarity needs to be established and maintained about the location of consensus.
Representativeness of the participants should be ensured. The process itself:
Decisions should be made by consensus.
Openness, honesty, and trust should exist.
Effectiveness of the method: the adopted consensus building approach should suit the objectives and needs of the different participants.
There should be a common, accessible information base?
Adequate time for discussion should be allowed before decision-making.
Multiple options should be identified. |
Consensus building processes: external issues
Linkage
Do structures exist to link consensus building processes with decision making and implementation within the policy process?
Does the consensus building process integrate with other policy processes? Or does it (potentially) conflict?
Are other consensus building processes operating in the same area on different policy issues, possibly with an overlapping set of stakeholders, or of processes operating at different levels with similar goals?
What is the balance of power between interests and stakeholders at different levels? Impact
What level of influence will consensus building process outputs have?
Has discussion been foreclosed by taking the decision before discourse has commenced? Barriers
Should consensus building be institutionalised to avoid any risks or problems that have been identified?
Is there a need for other types of institutional and/or cultural change to reduce barriers to consensus?
Are there potential external influences that may come into play to negate the outcomes of the consensual process? Broader outcomes
Is social capital being built?
Is the process cost effective? 1 |
1This is a difficult criterion to evaluate until the full process of decision making through to, and including, implementation (e.g. siting of required facilities) is complete. A general weakness in analysis of consensus building is that researchers seldom extend their attention downstream to the implementation phase once decisions have been taken, and so the question of cost-effectiveness is overlooked.
« Previous | Contents |