Public Participation in Policy Development (NZ0016)

Commitment 5: Public participation in policy development
Objective:
The Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC) will assist
the New Zealand public sector to develop a deeper and more consistent
understanding of what good engagement with the public means (right
across the International Association of Public Participation’s spectrum of
public participation).5
Ambition:
New Zealanders increasingly experience a more timely and collaborative
approach to public participation when policies are developed, and consider
their concerns, diversity of views, life experience and time are valued in the
policy process.
Improvements in public participation can result in better design of policy
and services, and increase their legitimacy. Improving public participation
requires an informed approach to applying public participation methods
throughout the policy development process. Developing a deeper
understanding of what good engagement looks like and providing guidance
about best practice methods across government, will achieve a more
consistent and coherent approach to public participation.
Status quo:
To date the majority of consultation has been in the ’inform and consult’
part of the IAP2’s spectrum, involving relatively limited degrees of public
participation that often occurs in the later stage of the policy development
process. There are substantial opportunities to improve the degree of
participation by the public, community organisations, businesses and
employee groups in the development of policy and the design and delivery
of government services. Improvements in public participation in recent
years have been driven by agency-specific or sectoral policy agendas,
demand from stakeholders and proactive action by key individuals at all
levels. Across government, responsibilities related to public participation
have evolved separately and are somewhat ad hoc.
The drive for improved public participation is part of a wider change in
public management in which the traditional role of the citizen has already
moved from “voter” to “customer”, and is now moving from “customer” to
“co-creator”. Under this view, policy and services are designed with, rather
than for, people, respecting their knowledge and beliefs, and their active
role in their own lives and those of other New Zealanders. Lead agency: Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet
Timeline: October 2018 – June 2020
Commitment 5: Develop a deeper and more consistent understanding within
the New Zealand public sector of what good engagement with the public
means (right across the IAP2’s Public Participation Spectrum)
OGP Values Public Participation
Verifiable and measurable milestones to fulfil
the commitment
Start date End date
Extend existing Policy Method’s Toolbox public
participation guidance (https://www.dpmc.govt.nz/
our-programmes/policy-project/policy-methodstoolbox-0) to include a decision tool that will assist
agencies and Ministers to:
• Choose the appropriate engagement approach
on the public participation spectrum when
they tackle a specific policy or service design
issue
• Understand the characteristics and enablers of
effective public participation at whichever point
on the spectrum they choose
• Ensure that the engagement approaches
selected appropriately include and reflect the
diversity of those interested and affected by
the policies.
October
2018
March 2020
Develop and share recent case studies documenting
New Zealand innovation success stories in public
participation in the policy development process
October
2018
March 2020
Identify a ‘live’ policy issue in which to trial public
engagement in policy development that is higher on
the public participation spectrum than inform or
consult, as a demonstration project
October
2018
March 2020
Widely disseminate the results of the above actions March 2020 June 2020

5. Public participation in policy development [54]

Objective:

“The Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC) will assist the New Zealand public sector to develop a deeper and more consistent understanding of what good engagement with the public means (right across the International Association of Public Participation’s spectrum of public participation)”.

Milestones:

1. “Extend existing Policy Method’s Toolbox public participation guidance [55] to include a decision tool that will assist agencies and Ministers to:

• Choose the appropriate engagement approach on the public participation spectrum when they tackle a specific policy or service design issue;
• Understand the characteristics and enablers of effective public participation at whichever point on the spectrum they choose;
• Ensure that the engagement approaches selected appropriately include and reflect the diversity of those interested and affected by the policies.”;

2. “Develop and share recent case studies documenting New Zealand innovation success stories in public participation in the policy development process”;
3. “Identify a ‘live’ policy issue in which to trial public engagement in policy development that is higher on the public participation spectrum than inform or consult, as a demonstration project”;
4. “Widely disseminate the results of the above actions”.

Start Date: October 2018

End Date: June 2020

Context and Objectives

The objective of this commitment is for all public sector departments and agencies to understand clearly what good public engagement means and to apply that knowledge when inviting the public to participate in policy creation. It considers a key issue raised during engagement on the action plan and earlier: that co-design of government policies and services with New Zealanders of different cultures, ages, genders and localities is rare. [56] These submissions reinforced concern expressed in the IRM progress report on the 2016-2018 action plan that the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC) was developing Commitment 7’s Policy Methods Toolbox only with and for policy agency colleagues and not consulting with the public. [57] Subsequently, DPMC consulted the Expert Advisory Panel, which advised that the guidance was fit-for-purpose and endorsed a key recommendation by the IRM researcher to develop standards for public consultation on policy initiatives. [58]

This commitment picks up on that recommendation and embarks on foundation work by DPMC to fundamentally change how government agencies create policy and engage with the public. The then Head of the Policy Profession [59] said in December 2018:

“There are many potential benefits of government actively drawing citizens more into its policy decision-making processes, including: gaining more insight into the impacts and causes of policy issues, and the nature of policy opportunities, a fuller appreciation of possible policy options [and] a better understanding of the likely benefits, costs and risks of all policy options.

Collectively, these insights can markedly improve the quality of our advice … Done really well, our engagement with the public and key stakeholder groups can have another important benefit: mobilising support for implementation – with implementation then happening more smoothly as a result”. [60]

This work meets OGP’s access to information and public participation values by releasing new government guidance on public engagement and addressing the broader operating environment to enable participation in civic space. DPMC will add an engagement approach decision tool to the Policy Methods Toolkit for government policymakers to develop and share success stories of public participation in policy development, trial public engagement in policy development at the International Association for Public Participation’s (IAP2) Spectrum of Public Participation level above ‘inform’ or ‘consent’, [61] and disseminate results. This guidance could be read with the Guide for Central Government Engagement with Local Government, released and published online in June 2019, following DPMC work with a working group of central and local government representatives. [62] The Cabinet Guide has been updated to link to that guidance from within the consultation section. [63]

The milestones are specific enough to verify objectively. If fully implemented as designed, this commitment would have only a minor impact on policy creation unless usage of the Toolkit is made mandatory in the Cabinet Manual. Then engaging the public in policy creation would become the norm. They would acquire expertise through these activities and by using the guidance developed by DPMC. Transformational change could follow a trial at IAP2’s top level of ‘empower’, which would test the wisdom of the crowd and any agency concerns that have been precluding engagement at this level. Full evaluation would also be needed, in addition to the planned case studies.

Next steps

While this guidance might encourage more co-creation of policy, the IRM researcher was advised that without a lot more work guidance by itself does not have a history of making change without leadership, a direction to change, training and action. [64] This view supports another stakeholder’s recommendation that DPMC’s ‘live’ policy trial tests policy co-creation at the IAP2 ‘empower’ level. [65] Government advises that as part of the discovery phase of the work on the public participation guidance and decision tool, it is considering the wider issues that act as barriers for effective engagement with the public and identifying initiatives outside of guidance that could support greater participation in policy making. [66] This analysis needs to consider whether standards for public consultation on policy initiatives are still needed.

If this commitment is carried forward to the next action plan or if there are improvements to the implementation of this commitment, the IRM researcher recommends that:

• The DPMC considers supplementing this commitment and increase impact by building capacity to understand and apply the Toolkit. This new work would give further strength to the work of the Policy Project.

The IRM researcher recommends that in future action plans, if this commitment is carried over, consider including elements such as:

• continue to apply IAP2 co-creation policy, create Cabinet Guidance, and train policy staff;
• Develop minimum standards for government consultation exercises, such as providing adequate timeframes for the public to effectively engage with consultations;
• measure policy agencies’ uptake of the Policy Methods Toolkit; and,
• with civil society, evaluate whether this form of public engagement has made implementation of policies smoother, as anticipated by the Head of Policy Profession in December 2018.

5. Public participation in policy development

Substantial:

Aim of the commitment

This commitment aimed to enable all public sector departments and agencies to understand clearly what good public engagement means and to apply that knowledge when inviting the public to participate in policy creation. [45] It continued work from the 2016–2018 action plan, focusing on civil society’s key issue that the government rarely co-designs government policies and services with New Zealanders of different cultures, ages, genders, and localities. [46]

Did it open government?

Marginal

While this updated commitment [47] is complete, its foundational work has only brought about marginal change in government practice of citizen participation. The Policy Methods Toolbox [48] now includes extensive community engagement practice advice: the Community Engagement Design Tool, the Guide to Inclusive Community Engagement, the Good Practice Guide for Community Engagement, Principles and Values for Community Engagement, Getting Ready for Community Engagement, and Selecting Methods for Community Engagement. [49] The project reduced its scope from both policy and service design to only focus on policy design and its welcome pivot to engage community groups and engagement specialists significantly stretched the original commitment.

The commitment team’s assessment of NZ’s Child and Youth Wellbeing Strategy revealed active engagement, [50] including by the Youth Voice Project’s The Hive [51] where youth submitted critiques on government policy such as the Biodiversity Strategy and climate change, and the Youth Plan. [52] Case studies in 2021 revealed community engagement on the Criminal Justice Reform Programme, the Digital Identity Transition Programme, and the Farming Systems Change Project. [53] Policy practitioners, community members and organisations, and engagement specialists, who were surveyed by the Policy Project, agreed the government needs to improve how it engages. [54]

The project is now publicising its community engagement advice beyond its policy practitioners cohort. Advice has been given via the CabGuide [55] to the Tier 2 Policy Leaders’ Network, at a Policy Forum on community engagement, and at Policy Training Network meetings. [56] The Policy Project’s promotion of the Community Engagement Design Tool across government for determining which IAP2 level to adopt is a direct result of its fundamental change toward civic participation as a result of this commitment. [57] As of 30 June 2021, the Policy Project had presented to 400 practitioners, emailed government policy practitioners, and promoted resources online and on social media. [58] There were around 3,400 page views between January and June 2021.

There is early online evidence that agencies are applying the guidance. For example, the Ministry of Social Development’s work on improving social cohesion and public engagement, [59] and the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the terrorist attack on the Christchurch masjidain encouraged agencies to undertake more IAP2 “involve” and “collaborate” levels of engagement. [60] The Policy Project has used the community engagement guidance to support agencies responding to the Royal Commission’s recommendations.

Overall, this commitment made marginal improvements to government bodies’ public participation practice – although it is too early to identify noticeable change. Outside of this commitment, during the implementation period, a network of environmental organisations noted a substantial contraction in opportunities for public participation in the policy areas of environmental law, resource management, and housing and urban development. [61] Stakeholders also noted that for some ministries, consultations favoured CSOs that were “familiar faces,” and with the COVID-19 pandemic, rushed introduction of bills minimized time for public input. [62]

However, in terms of the commitment’s particular project, EAP members recognised willingness to broaden engagement, saying that the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC) has exhibited strong leadership. The project has cross-government leadership at executive levels, an engaged reference group, an active policy community, and works with diverse communities such as Te Arawhiti (the Office of Māori Crown Relations). [63] Success will require continued DPMC policy oversight and leadership, and active open government support and advocacy by the Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission (TKM). To embed these practices in agencies, TKM could link implementation of the guidance and tools to its assessments of agency Chief Executives meeting their duty under s. 12 of the Public Service Act 2020. With this central government leadership and investment in growing capability across government, deeper and more consistent community engagement and collaboration in government policy creation can be achieved.