IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v84y2021ics0149718920301993.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The evaluation of citizen participation in policymaking: Insights from Portugal

Author

Listed:
  • Falanga, Roberto
  • Ferrão, João

Abstract

While citizen participation in policymaking is on the rise worldwide, the scholarly debate centring around its evaluation has not developed to the same extent. The article discusses the methodology and findings of the evaluation of the project “Portugal Participa: Caminhos para a Inovação Societal” which started at the end of 2014, and was implemented in 2015 and 2016, in Portugal. As the project promoted actions at both national and local levels, the evaluation accounted for both layers with a major focus on the analysis of procedures and outputs to examine its success. Through the application of a multi-method approach – data collection and analysis, cost-effectiveness assessment, interviews, pre-post surveys, and counterfactual focus groups – involving a wide array of agents – political representatives, civil servants, NGOs, citizens, national academia, and the funding sponsor – findings have helped retrieve three main insights that aim to contribute to future research on the evaluation of citizen participation in policymaking, which should shed light on: the (re)connection of multiple agents; the role within the governance systems; and the pursuit of social inclusion.

Suggested Citation

  • Falanga, Roberto & Ferrão, João, 2021. "The evaluation of citizen participation in policymaking: Insights from Portugal," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:84:y:2021:i:c:s0149718920301993
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2020.101895
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718920301993
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2020.101895?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brinkerhoff, Jennifer M., 2002. "Assessing and improving partnership relationships and outcomes: a proposed framework," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 215-231, August.
    2. Thomas Webler, 1999. "The craft and theory of public participation: a dialectical process," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(1), pages 55-71, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Julien Vrydagh, 2022. "Measuring the impact of consultative citizen participation: reviewing the congruency approaches for assessing the uptake of citizen ideas," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(1), pages 65-88, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schweizer, Pia-Johanna & Bovet, Jana, 2016. "The potential of public participation to facilitate infrastructure decision-making: Lessons from the German and European legal planning system for electricity grid expansion," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 64-73.
    2. Ortwin Renn & Andreas Klinke, 2013. "A Framework of Adaptive Risk Governance for Urban Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(5), pages 1-24, May.
    3. Blackstock, K.L. & Kelly, G.J. & Horsey, B.L., 2007. "Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 726-742, February.
    4. Natalie A Jones & Pascal Perez & Thomas G Measham & Gail J Kelly & Patrick D’Aquino & Katherine Daniell & Anne Dray & Nils Ferrand, 2008. "Evaluating Participatory Modeling: Developing a Framework for Cross-case Analysis," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2008-11, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    5. Clare Bayley & Simon French, 2008. "Designing a Participatory Process for Stakeholder Involvement in a Societal Decision," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 195-210, May.
    6. Diederik de Boer & Meine Pieter van Dijk, 2016. "Success Factors for Community Business Wildlife Tourism Partnerships in Tanzania," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 28(4), pages 555-570, September.
    7. José María Agudo-Valiente & Pilar Gargallo-Valero & Manuel Salvador-Figueras, 2019. "Perceptions of Final Beneficiaries about the Performance of Cross-sector Partnerships: A Case Study Applied to the 2008 Zaragoza International Exhibition on Water and Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-20, July.
    8. Mario La Torre & Annarita Trotta & Helen Chiappini & Alessandro Rizzello, 2019. "Business Models for Sustainable Finance: The Case Study of Social Impact Bonds," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-23, March.
    9. Thomas C. Beierle, 2002. "The Quality of Stakeholder‐Based Decisions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(4), pages 739-749, August.
    10. Babiak, Kathy M., 2009. "Criteria of effectiveness in multiple cross-sectoral interorganizational relationships," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 1-12, February.
    11. Agota Giedre RAIŠIENE & , Svitlana BILAN & Vainius SMALSKYS & Jolita GECIENE, 2019. "Emerging Changes In Attitudes To Inter-Institutional Collaboration: The Case Of Organizations Providing Social Services In Communities," REVISTA ADMINISTRATIE SI MANAGEMENT PUBLIC, Faculty of Administration and Public Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 2019(33), pages 34-56, December.
    12. Leda Stott & David F. Murphy, 2020. "An Inclusive Approach to Partnerships for the SDGs: Using a Relationship Lens to Explore the Potential for Transformational Collaboration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-23, September.
    13. Jaime Moreno-Serna & Teresa Sánchez-Chaparro & Leda Stott & Javier Mazorra & Ruth Carrasco-Gallego & Carlos Mataix, 2021. "Feedback Loops and Facilitation: Catalyzing Transformational Multi-Stakeholder Refugee Response Partnerships," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, October.
    14. Misener, Katie & Doherty, Alison, 2014. "In support of sport: Examining the relationship between community sport organizations and sponsors," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 493-506.
    15. Everingham, Jo-Anne & Rolfe, John & Lechner, Alex Mark & Kinnear, Susan & Akbar, Delwar, 2018. "A proposal for engaging a stakeholder panel in planning post-mining land uses in Australia’s coal-rich tropical savannahs," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 397-406.
    16. Lea Stadtler, 2016. "Scrutinizing Public–Private Partnerships for Development: Towards a Broad Evaluation Conception," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(1), pages 71-86, April.
    17. Brinkerhoff, Jennifer M. & Brinkerhoff, Derick W., 2021. "Partnership evaluation: An application of a developmental framework to the Governance and Local Development project in Senegal," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    18. Fernandez, Jesus C. & Landicho, Leila D., 2014. "Prospects and Dilemmas of Institutional Networking: Case of the Southeast Asian Network for Agroforestry Education (SEANAFE)," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), vol. 11(2), pages 1-16, December.
    19. Samir A. Guseinov, 2019. "Prospects for Public-private Partnership in the Development of the Electricity Supply Sector Based on Environmental and Intelligent Technologies," Administrative Consulting, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration. North-West Institute of Management., issue 3.
    20. Prain, Gordon & Wheatley, Christopher & Odsey, Cameron & Verzola, Leonora & Bertuso, Arma & Roa, Julieta & Naziri, Diego, 2020. "Research-development partnerships for scaling complex innovation: Lessons from the Farmer Business School in IFAD-supported loan-grant collaborations in Asia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:84:y:2021:i:c:s0149718920301993. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.