Key Steps of a Consensus Process

1. How to do an internal agency’s assessment
2. How to do an external stakeholder’s assessment
3. How to select and work with a facilitator or mediator
4. Establishing a representative group
5. Establishing ground rules
6. Disclosing timing and funding constraints
7. Phases of work
8. Finalizing the Agreement

Key Step 4: More Information on Key Steps

More Information for Point #1

“Necessary interests” means the categories of persons or groups with a stake in the issue. These stakeholders or parties can include the government that sponsors the process, other governments with jurisdiction and affected publics – including citizens and organizations. The interests can also include parties with an indirect interest, such as elected officials who need to be kept informed. Sometimes parties emerge when a proposed solution would affect them. These new stakeholders should then be included in the discussion.

A second part of this principle addresses how the people will be represented. Some interests may choose not to be directly involved, even though they have no objection to others working together to solve a problem. Some may prefer to participate only when certain issues are considered or if proposed solutions would affect them directly. Others may consider the effort a waste of time, but will not object if others try. If that is the case, remaining parties may need to decide whether to proceed without those who abstain, especially if those absent interests could block a decision or interfere with implementation later on.
(Return to Key Step #4)

More Information for Point #2

Public policy consensus processes usually affect more people than can fit around a table. Thus, while the number of persons participating directly is limited, they must produce a decision that is acceptable to all affected interests. Participants are the people who come to the meetings and sit at the table. In consensus processes for complex public issues, participants usually represent groups, caucuses, or constituents. In a representative process, each participant is actually part of two different discussions, one with the other participants at the table itself and the second with their own constituents. This is especially true when a participant represents a collection of parties with similar interests who may not have worked together before.

It is important to distinguish between “representative of” and “representing”. The right of interest groups to select their own representatives is central to self-determination. An agency may create an advisory committee of people whose views it expects will be representative of the diverse interests – a farmer whom the agency believes can speak for the concerns of farms, for example. But that approach may not work for processes that are intended to develop workable agreements. Those processes need to have explicit linkages and clear communication channels between participants and their constituents.
(Return to Key Step #4)



















More Information for Point #3

In a consensus process the most important procedural decision is whether or not there should even be a process. Without a veto over that decision by each interest, the process is not voluntary. If government agencies are going to step outside traditional procedures and share decision making power – in effect making traditional procedures a less important venue for obtaining public comment – then all affected parties must be represented unless they consent to being absent.

This also means that any party may withdraw from the process at any time. The withdrawal of a party calls into question the legitimacy of the process, since by being there the party presumably was one of the necessary interests.
(Return to Key Step #4)



















More Information for Point #4

A major incentive for participating in a consensus process if having a direct role in making decisions. In a consensus process, the parties must also agree to the structure of the process, the ground rules that will guide it, and the terms of the agreement. It is essential that ground rules be mutually agreed upon by all participants and not established solely by the sponsoring agency.
(Return to Key Step #4)

More Information for Point #5

If some key interests are not organized or are too diffuse to be represented in a discussion, a consensus process may not be appropriate. In general, parties must be organized enough to designate spokespersons who can represent them. Sometimes facilitators can help parties overcome these problems.

In other situation, financial or technical assistance may make a difference. Some parties may be able to participate effectively if experts are available to help them understand complex scientific or legal matters. Others may be able to participate if they are reimbursed for travel, taking time off work, or for childcare. As a rule though, if a necessary party cannot participate effectively, the agency should not try to proceed with a consensus process. These points are discussed more fully later.
(Return to Key Step #4)



















More Information for Point #6

This includes the people who will actually carry out a decision, as well as those whose political or financial support is essential. The commitment necessary to implement an agreement depends on ownership of the solution. That ownership derives from stakeholders having a direct role in the decision making.
(Return to Key Step #4)

More Information for Point #7

This includes those who must comply with the outcome and those in position to challenge the decision in court.
(Return to Key Step #4)

More Information for Point #8

The list of parties compiled by answering the first two questions often leaves out other affected interests, typically those lacking power. Government decisions, after all, may affect people with limited resources who lack the clout to challenge an outcome that may harm their interests. This is one reason why consensus processes are not appropriate for all public issues. When issues affect society at large and not just a subset of identifiable interests, ensuring representative participation can be problematic. If some interests are obvious but others are not so clear, there are real dilemmas about the appropriateness of a consensus process.

As part of the assessment, stakeholders are asked to determine which interests should be represented at the table and whether anyone else should be interviewed. Often the same names and groups come up. In fact, this indicates the situation may be ripe for a consensus process.
(Return to Key Step #4)