Search

Abstract: Attempts to evaluate public consultations, participatory technology assessment, and deliberative democracy have typically considered impacts on either policy or participants. The determination of impacts on policy institutions has been limited due to the challenges of tracing effects through the policy process, or penetrating bureaucratic walls. This paper presents findings from a retrospective study exploring the institutional lessons learned from a 2001 Canadian national public consultation on xenotransplantation. The consultation was conducted through an arm’s-length process and involved the use of citizen juries in six regional sites. We conducted in-depth interviews of regulatory and policy actors who were engaged in early policy discussions and the consultation process. We reviewed evaluations of this process, both internal and external, which gave us richer insights into what institutional actors saw as the impacts of this consultative experience on their policy environment. Participants in our research identified a broader shift toward openness in policy culture which they linked specifically to the innovative consultation process employed for xenotransplantation. We argue that beyond input into policy decisions, a consultation may have an impact in terms of its contribution to overall shifts in institutional culture (related to institutional learning), such as an “opening” of technological decision processes to a broader range of actors, knowledge, and values. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This paper is the preliminary result of research undertaken in Canada during the period August-September 2003, and which is part of a comparative study of several other countries in order to examine the actors, processes and interactions which intervened in the formulation of public policy and the development of learning in public institutions and organizations. In this research the logic motivating the actors, as well as their perspectives and practices in the processes of public agenda formulation in Canada are demonstrated. Documentary techniques, seminar discussions, interviews and observation are employed. The results demonstrate differentiated processes in organizational and institutional practices of new and traditional actors in the formation of public agendas, and which define two large themes: differentiation between government and politics and the re-institutionalization of rules on a local level. All this expresses the tension between the two forms of governmental philosophy that are debated over between the neo-pragmatism of emerging demand sectors for new government and the colaborative market forms of government, implemented by traditional actors who propose good public government. In local public management the municipality is expressed as a point of intersection between policy management and government, and it incorporates learning experiences in community networks, which suggests a new hermaneutic language for the management of municipalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]