New Thinking

Added by Karin Gavelin, last edited by Karin Gavelin on Jan 24, 2007  (view change)

THE STRATEGY CONSULTATION IS NOW CLOSED.

Many thanks for all the excellent and useful comments. We are currently planning how the final strategy will be published, which we expect to happen in spring.

If you have any further comments or queries, don't hesitate to get in touch: karin@involve.org.uk.

NEW THINKING: IMPROVING UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WORKS

Steers from the Involve visioing day in July 2006 indicated that Involve should:

  • Move away from focusing on methods to consider social and organisational culture and power relations.
  • Research needs to contain genuinely new thinking and move away from re-packaging existing ideas.
  • Focus on learning from participants' perspectives.

What we will aim to do:

Involve's research will continue to focus on the practicalities and principles of participation. To do this we will seek to develop new projects in the following areas:

  • The barriers to participation; the economic, cultural and social factors which inhibit public engagement.
  • The triggers of active citizenship; the economic, cultural and social factors which encourage public engagement.
  • Institutional change; exploring institutional cultures and their implications for public participation.
  • Understanding the impacts of participation on participants; e.g. the contribution it can make to personal and social well-being, and how participants can be supported to take part.
  • The power relations between institutions and citizens; how institutional and cultural change helps or hinders greater accountability for decision-making.

Involve will also develop innovative thinking by working with an explicitly diverse group of project partners on research projects.

What we will not do:

  • Research that is not directly related to empowerment or public participation.

Measuring Success:

  • Recognition that we have offered original thinking in an accessible way to public policy debates (e.g. references made to our work).
  • Being asked to provide research/policy support directly (i.e. no tendering process).
  • Transferring learning – assisting in accelerating shared learning between different contexts/sectors.

What do you think about the statement above?

  • Do you agree with the statement?
  • Is there anything you do not agree with?
  • Is there anything you think is missing ?
  • Is there anything you do not understand?

Let us know by clicking on 'Add Comment' in the bottom left corner of the screen.

You can comment anonymously, or let us know your name by writing it in the comment box or by first registering on the wiki - click 'Sign Up' in the top right hand corner of the screen.

Click here for the next section

Return to the Strategy Homepage

Consultation Links:

Labels

 
(None)

Comments (4)

 

  1. Dec 07, 2006

    Tom Burke says:

    The issue of methods vs culture and power is very important and something I grap...

    The issue of methods vs culture and power is very important and something I grapple with (as in where to prioritise work). I think it would be good to involve to look 'beyond' methods. However, it is also important to realise that whilst we have learnt a lot about methods, the dissemination and spreading of good practise of these continues to be difficult and ad-hoc in many sectors.

    I don't really understand the final "Involve should focus on learning from participants perspectives". I assume this means the participants of participatory decision making processes. Whilst I think this is very important, involves contacts and expertise might be better focussed on also learning from those who do this day in, day out. There learning is also crucial. Perhaps make it clear its not an either/or.

  2. Dec 08, 2006

    Phil Green says:

    What works should be what works from point of view of citizens those who we wish...

    What works should be what works from point of view of citizens - those who we wish to involve.  These things can ever so easily be from the perspective of those who are already involved eg institutions - not confident proposed measures of success will avoid this (and so be very meaningful)

  3. Dec 08, 2006

    Phil Green says:

    Suggest the positive is ultimately more useful than the negative eg triggers mor...

    Suggest the positive is ultimately more useful than the negative - eg triggers more important than barriers.

    'Triggers' is perhaps too narrow in scope - wouldn't something like:  'optimum conditions for active citizenship' be better? eg interest in not just triggers, but how it grows and matures.

    Again seems to be missing the citizen to citizen perspective. 

    Suggest there is a strong need to consider the importance of open source (information not software), including copyright/ copyleft questions. 

  4. Jan 02, 2007

    Michael Shepherd says:

    This looks like a pretty good research agenda.  I agree that "what works" n...

    This looks like a pretty good research agenda.  I agree that "what works" needs to be qualified - as does defining what "works" means.  Perhaps there is something about the role of street level professionals in enabling participation that could be usefully added and further work on how participants themselves act - what they are able to do to develop their participation and enable (what they view as) positive outcomes.

Add Comment