www.southampton.ac.uk/socsci 1

Public engagement and evidence-based policySome niggling concerns…NCRM Research Methods Festival 2008

Graham Smith

gsmith@soton.ac.uk

www.southampton.ac.uk/socsci 2

Public engagement in social research• The social science agenda

• The political agenda

• Particular interest in ‘deliberative methods

– Citizens’ juries, deliberative polls, consensus conferences, etc.

www.southampton.ac.uk/socsci 3

Fishkin on the deliberative poll• ‘The deliberative poll is unlike any poll or survey

ever conducted. Ordinary polls model what the public is thinking, even though the public may not be thinking very much or paying much attention. A deliberative poll attempts to model what the public would think, had it a better opportunity to consider the question at issue’ (Fishkin 1997: 162).

www.southampton.ac.uk/socsci 4

Our own take…• Can ICT be utilised to increase the numbers

engaged in a deliberative event?

• 1000-plus (near) randomly-selected citizens debating policy issues related to ‘building resilient neighbourhoods’ (e.g. anti-social behaviour, social cohesion) online over a three week period.

• Pre- and post-deliberation surveys plus buzz polls.

• Compare results to control group and ‘deliberations’ with smaller citizens’ jury.

www.southampton.ac.uk/socsci 5

A disservice to citizens?• Social scientific or political experiments?

• Engagement one-step (or more) removed from the political decision making process.

• Potential for raising unrealistic expectations amongst participants.

• Potential research fatigue for certain populations.

• Public engagement can be empowering (for both public and social scientists), but also potential contribution to citizen disaffection and disengagement?