 |
 |
 |
||||||||
 |
 |
|||||||||
 |
 |
 |
Section
D:
Choosing The Method, A Guide to Community Consultation and Research Methods
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
 |
||||||||
Citizens Jury
| Summary | A panel of between 12 and 20 people, meet for 2-5
days to examine an issue in depth. Members of the jury are chosen
from the general public to reflect the make-up of the community
but, as the numbers are so small, cannot be truly representative.
They hear evidence from expert witnesses, discuss the issue and
their final recommendations are reported back to the Council. Although
the Council will take the final decision they are committed to
taking full account of the jury’s recommendations. |
|
| Examples | Wigan Council held a 4 day citizens’ jury with
16 residents in May 1999 to help decide on the pattern of school
holidays across the borough. The jury’s task was to examine
the relative merits of the existing 3 term system against either
a 4 or 5 term system. The jury heard evidence from local and national
experts including representatives of parents, governors, students,
head teachers and teachers, unions and the business community. Grimethorpe village in South Yorkshire ran the first young people’s citizens’ jury in November 1999 involving twelve 11-16 year olds for 2 days. Jurors were asked to asked to recommend ways in which young people could help reduce levels of crime and drug use locally. Evidence was heard from local residents, academics, the police, the local MP and the Leader of the Council. |
|
| Useful for | Important, complex and controversial issues where
public input is needed. Fully involving citizens in the decision
making process. Where the Council is committed to acting on the
advise of the jury - the jury will quickly lose credibility if
it’s recommendations are not given considerable weight. |
|
| Not useful | Where there is a need to consult large numbers. Where
a representative view from the public is required. Jurors are not
representative of the public and as they have been given much more
information than the general public, may view the issue differently. |
|
| Equal Rights | The venue needs to be accessible and convenient for
all participants. Jurors with hearing impairments would have to
be accommodated (e.g. with signers, written material, a hearing
loop). Asian language jurors would need translators. Top |
|
| Costs | Experience from citizens juries held elsewhere indicates that the costs can be anything from £15,000 to £25,000. This depends on the level of expenses paid to jurors and the amount of bought-in expertise. This excludes other staff time, which is likely to be considerable. |
|
| Time Scale | 2-3 months |
|
| Contact | Mike Barnett | 01274 432221 |
| Citizens’workshop |
A variation on the citizens’ jury is a citizens’ workshop,
where participants Workshop meet for a day to consider an issue. This would be suitable for less complex issues. A citizens’ workshop has the advantage of being a lot cheaper and would be easier to recruit to as less time is required. |
|
| Top | ||
| Section C | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 | Section E |
 |
 |
 |
||
|
Introduction and Framework Section A Section B Section C Section D Section E |
||||
 |
 |
 |
||
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
