Canada
The most exemplary instance of governance dialogue in Canada has been the creation of citizens’ assemblies in British Columbia to settle the long contentious issue of electoral reform in a manner free of accusations of "self-interested influence" by politicians. The initial Citizen’s Assembly on Electoral Reform was an independent, non-partisan assembly of 160 randomly selected British Columbians who looked at how votes cast in provincial elections translate into seats in the Legislature. Nowhere else in the world had randomly selected citizens been so empowered to shape the electoral process. The assembly was unanimously endorsed by the parties in the legislature, and parties and community leaders outside it. It was composed of 160 members, 80 women and 80 men, from all of the province's 79 electoral districts.
Their year was divided into three phases: Learning about electoral systems, January-March 2004; public hearings, May-June; and deliberation, September-November. Their final report and recommendation was delivered on 10 December 2004. On May 17, 2005, in conjunction with the provincial general election, British Columbians will vote in a referendum on the Citizens’ Assembly’s recommendations.
Now the province of Ontario is planning a similar Citizens’ Assembly as well as a citizens’ jury on electoral financing.
Other governance dialogue initiatives have been undertaken, but were not found nearly so promising in the scholarly literature: Operational planning level consultation efforts in Manitoba were found to be below established standards. Canada’s extent and quality of public participation in environmental policy-making is found to lag far behind the U.S. The government officials running the assisted reproductive-technology consultation process were found to have preferred strategies that minimized the extent of governance dialogue. Unrealistic and inadequately considered expectations on the part of public officials are found to have had a debilitating impact on a citizen engagement process in Saint John, New Brunswick. Observers have pointed to a variety of considerations – including Canada's centralized governance structures, general taxation funding methods, and the “passive rights” regime of universality – that may all militate against effective and legitimate implementation of governance dialogue practices in the field of Canadian health care policy-making.
All in all, notwithstanding the exemplary initiatives around electoral reform, Canadian public administrators are perceived to be in need of new practices to raisae the country’s governance dialogue efforts to the level of international best practices.
Canada's efforts have been documented lately in the following works:
Thomas C. Beierle and David M. Konisty, “What are we gaining from stakeholder involvement? Observations from environmental planning in the Great Lakes,” Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy
Keith Culver and Paul Howe, “Calling all citizens: The challenges of public consultation,” Canadian Public Administration
Meredith Edwards, “Participatory governance into the future: Roles of the government and community sectors,” Australian Journal of Public Administration
Eric Montpetit, “Public consultations in policy network environments: The case of assisted reproductive technology policy in Canada,” Canadian Public Policy
Candace Johnson Redden, “Rationing care in the community: Engaging citizens in health care decision-making,” Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law
A. John Sinclair, “Public consultation for sustainable development policy initiatives: Manitoba approaches,” Policy Studies Journal
Debora L. VanNijnatten, “Participation and environmental policy in Canada and the United States: Trends over time,” Policy Studies Journal
IPAC Events
