3.

Participatory Policy-Making

CSOs bring expertise, commitment, and grassroots perceptions to the policy-making process. They can often mobilize popular support for or against policies proposed by governments, and they can offer alternative policies and solutions to problems. Frequently, CSOs have led the way in showing the connections between environment, development and social issues, and in drawing out the implications for public policy. They often provide early-warning and information-gathering services that help to establish the policy agenda and independent monitoring of policy implementation, helping to enforce treaties and conventions.

Some observers believe that this movement by CSOs beyond advocacy towards broader participation in the public policy realm will lead to significant changes in methods of governance in the next century. The growing range of actors involved in policy forums makes the challenge of governance more complex, but it can also greatly increase the capacity of the governance system to meet the complex demands placed on it. CSOs bring to policy-making a much greater range of information, perceptions, and potential solutions than official bodies could hope to generate on their own. This is especially true in the area of sustainable development. Many development mistakes have occurred because bureaucrats, national and international, failed to foresee or ignored the likely effects of new projects.

CSOs have often been frustrated by their lack of substantive input to UNCED and other UN conferences, and disillusioned by the outcomes.

The CSOs with goals and tactics most like those of governments tend to be the most comfortable working within the system. Those that possess fewer governmental traits are more likely to be frustrated and may choose other means of attaining their goals outside of such forums, especially by using strategies that draw media attention and appeal directly to public opinion. This difference underlies tensions between "inside' and " outside' CSOs. Some voices among CSOs, especially in the South, argue that participation in joint consultative conferences and committees give greater legitimacy to organizations like the World Bank without delivering any significant changes in their policies or democratizing their practices in individual countries. They also point out that CSOs are unlikely to be involved in the most critical international negotiations. For example, negotiations on the Multilateral Agreement on Investment - described by the Director of the World Trade Organization as the "constitution of a single global economy'- are taking place with few such consultations. In many countries, CSOs have limited ability to operate freely let alone to participate in shaping public policy. Democratization in such countries requires much more than multi-party elections, currently a fixation of many Western governments and aid agencies. It demands a strengthening of the capacity of CSOs and a political environment that permits them to participate actively in policy-making.

[improving policy through participation]

Continuum of Participatory Processes

1. Democratic structures - citizens have access to information and education and the legal right to assemble, vote and speak.
2. Consultations - citizens, experts and/or various CSOs are consulted by government decision-makers. Examples include Round Tables, public hearings, electronic conferencing, etc.
3. Negotiations - citizens and/or their associations negotiate with the public or private sector on a range of policy or project decisions ranging from siting waste facilities to positions taken in international fora.
4. Partnerships - a combination of public, private and civil sector participation in decision-making with each group having equal power..