European Citizens‘ Consultations

Workshop 1: Methodology

An introduction into the main building blocs of the ECC process

2

Overview over the ECC

3

Agenda Setting Event:General Features

First step of the ECC process: 200 citizens from all Member States were invited on 7/8 October 2006 to Brussels to set the agenda for the further process

Objective: the citizens were asked to identify those topics they find most important for the European Union to focus on in the future, selecting those that have the greatest potential and relevance for the national debates

Recruitment: 8 citizens from each Member State were selected randomly from all walks of life reflecting the diversity of the population

The participants were divided into small discussion groups supported by facilitators, interpreters, and resource persons.

4

Agenda Setting Event:Design Elements

Bilingual tables: Accompanied by a table facilitator and an interpreter, the participants discussed the given topics Results of the table discussions were recorded by the table

facilitator using a laptop and sent to an editorial team The editorial team incorporated the inputs into the ongoing

development of the topics and produced an overview of the results

Market place: open space event, where the participants could talk about the results of the table discussion and the information given by posters and speaker cornersPan-european conference: representatives from each table presented and discussed their results at a round tableAt the end of the first day, citizens selected the topics they found most important for a debate on the future of Europe.During the second day, the citizens worked on enriching the topics.

5

Agenda Setting Event: Agenda

6

Citizens‘ Juries:General features

Function of the juries within the ECC: deepening of information and test for the national consultations

Random selection of participants from the register (25 for each jury)

Participants are freed of their duties and get paid for their work

Experts give controversial information concerning the discussed topic

Deliberations take place in small working groups of changing composition

Results are published in a „Citizens‘ Report“

7

Citizens‘ Juries: Agenda

8

Citizens‘ Juries:Structure of the Working Units

9

National Consultations: General features

From February to March 2007, 27 national consultations in all EU-Member States on four weekends (5-10 simultaneous events per weekend)30 to 200 randomly selected citizens per event discussing the three at the Agenda-Setting-Event selected topicsComparable results – the 27 national, i.e. “(Swedish, Estonian…) Citizens’ Perspectives on the Future of Europe” which were handed-over to citizens at the end of the weekend The format and structure of each national Citizens’ Perspective was the same with static and variable content to make the results comparable across countries:

introduction citizens’ visions for each of the three topics and their definition of the EU’s role in achieving these visions project description demographic data on the participants impressions, i.e. quotes and pictures (variable)

Participation of high-ranking policy-makers and intense media coverage

10

National Consultations: Design elements

Each citizen was assigned to a group discussing mainly one of the three topicsEach group was professionially facilitated; facilitator was supported by a co-facilitator (mainly note-taker)Results of discussion were recorded on moderation wallsAll groups followed the same agenda (vision drafting, EU-role)Groups rotated at serveral points to give feedback to other groupsDifferent design for large-scale events (more than 60 participants) and small eventsVoting in larger events via electronic voting technology (TED)

11

National Consultation: Agenda

Setting Activity Plenary Welcome / Introduction

Citizens obtain information on schedule of the day, process as a whole, their role, and the format of expected outcomes.

Plenary Voting Citizens share demographic data (gender, age, profession etc.) among themselves and across locations

Day 1:

Morning

Table groups

Generating objectives: Citizens are split into three groups (one per topic). For each of the 3 topics, all citizens complete the phrase “In 2020, I would like to live in a Europe that…”. Their input is recorded on cards and put on a pin board.

Table groups

Grouping objectives: In each group – for one topic only, citizens try to group or categorise these ideas and to name this category. They thereby condense the variety of ideas to several strong objectives.

Table groups

Challenging the objectives: Resource persons, i.e. experts, join the groups. Citizens try to detect problems or trade-offs regarding their objectives. Experts complete missing challenges.

Rotation Citizens visit other groups to learn about the objectives they came up with Plenary Opinion snapshot:

Each citizen is given 15 votes (5 for each of the 3 topics) to express which of these objectives he/she consider most important. This serves as a rough guideline to help citizens focus their subsequent discussions

Day 1: Afternoon

Tables groups

Formulating an achievable vision: Based on their objectives, trade-offs and the results of the opinion snapshot each group is asked to come up with one achievable vision on the Europe they would like to live in.

Plenary Presentation and sharing of results: Citizen representatives present the vision of their group. They then learn what the groups in the other countries have come up with.

Table groups

Role of the EU: Citizens define whether they see a role of the EU or not in achieving this vision.

Rotation Content Feedback : Citizens visit other groups and obtain and exchange feedback on the results.

Table groups

Editing: Citizens work the feedback into their results. Last chance for final amendments.

Plenary Confidence Voting: After being presented the final results, citizens vote to express whether they are satisfied or feel comfortable with these results.

Plenary Feedback-Voting Day 2: until early afternoon

Plenary Closing Ceremony / End of National Consultation

12

National Consultations: Pan-European Integration

Events starting at the same time (taking into account different time zones)All events followed a common agenda Integration points: exchange of data and to keep the process in sync. sharing of demographic data (on day 1) sharing of interim results (drafts of the EU vision, impressions, quotes) in the morning of the

second day exchange of voting results from the confidence and feedback vote (in the afternoon of day

2). Live impressions from the other countries through Skype connection“Tour d’Europe”: Live exchange between countries Ambassadors or exchange students were invited to join the national consultations

13

Synthesis EventBasic features

27 national reports as the basis for a European synthesis exercise on the 9th and 10th of May 200727 citizens (1 volunteer from each national event), accompanied by their respective national partners, worked on a pre-drafted synthesis reportSynthesis report highlighted common ground and areas of divergence between the national outcomes. Citizens counter-checked their national results with the draft report and amended and edited as appropriate. Working language: English Result: “European Citizens’ Perspectives on the Future of Europe”Event followed by a press conference with Margot Wallström, Gérard Onesta, Jean-Luc Dehaene

14

Synthesis Event: Input

The draft synthesis report had been drafted, cross- and double-checked by a team of 8 members from different organisations inside the ECC coordination board Each statement of each national report was put down in an excel sheet and checked for similarities with or differences to all other reports. The result was a “matrix” containing all input and clustering similar input. The draft synthesis was structured according to these clusters and composed of the statements made at the national consultations. After each statement a bracket indicated which country panel supported the statement. A final cross-check of all reports guarantees that the main results of all national reports are part of the European Perspectives.

15

Synthesis: Methodology

Open space with a plenary area and three corners, each devoted to one of the three topics and equipped with a laptop and a screen displaying the draft synthesis report pin boards that featured the national results in both the original language and English as well as the draft

synthesis report a facilitator and a note-taker

Each citizen received a copy of their national report, which they cross-checked with the draft synthesis report to determine

whether it included the main statements whether the national consultation was mentioned in relation to the correct statement whether the statement reflected what was said at the national consultation

Amendments were made in cooperation with the facilitator and a note-taker who entered it – live on screen – into the draft synthesis. In case of doubt, the lead facilitator was consulted who discussed with the parties involved and mediated were appropriate.