2 results
ten - Public consultation and participation in Belgium: directly engaging citizens beyond the ballot box?
- Edited by Marleen Brans, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Faculteit Sociale Wetenschappen, David Aubin, Université catholique de Louvain
-
- Book:
- Policy Analysis in Belgium
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 05 April 2022
- Print publication:
- 15 March 2017, pp 215-234
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
This chapter looks into the growth of diverse types of public inquiries and public consultation arrangements in policymaking. These arrangements bring to the table individual members of the public who otherwise have no direct policy – advisory – role, given the predominance of neo-corporatist style advisory bodies in Belgium (Van Damme and Brans, 2012). In some of these new public consultation and participation forms, citizens are not at the end of the delivery process, but are actively engaged in framing policy problems, and selecting and evaluating policy solutions. Nonetheless the rationales behind these consultation and participation processes may differ widely as to perspectives on democracy (Mayer et al, 2005). Some inquiries and consultations are conceived from an instrumental perspective from which it is believed that engaging citizens in policy analysis has something tangible to contribute to policy, by, for instance, enriching knowledge of specific policy problems, or by fostering policy support necessary for implementing solutions. From a more substantive view on democracy, citizen participation is rooted in participatory and deliberative democracy, and expected to contribute to the legitimacy of the decision-making process (Michels and De Graaf, 2010).
This chapter analyses the variety of public consultation and participation arrangements in Belgium at different levels of government in order to clarify the public's role in policymaking and analysis beyond the ballot box. To this end, a framework of analysis in three dimensions is used: Who participates? How do they participate? Why do they participate? This analysis focuses on public consultation and participation forms that are ‘arranged’ and managed by public authorities, but we also include recent experiments such as the G1000 citizen-led initiative. Such an initiative proposed a bottom-up approach for public participation in the agenda setting of policy problems and even in the formulation of public solutions.
Policymaking and public consultation
The increasing complexity of the policy environment has been critical for the policymaking process. On the one hand, so-called ‘wicked problems’ combining scientific uncertainty with societal dispute challenge traditional ways of policymaking (Jacob and Schiffino, 2011). Governments are increasingly dependent not only on external information, knowledge and expertise, but also on external support and commitment in order to successfully deliver policies (Barker and Peters, 1993).
seven - Policy advisory bodies in Belgium
- Edited by Marleen Brans, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Faculteit Sociale Wetenschappen, David Aubin, Université catholique de Louvain
-
- Book:
- Policy Analysis in Belgium
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 05 April 2022
- Print publication:
- 15 March 2017, pp 151-170
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
In modern democracies, policy advice and policy analysis have a common path. Policy advice helps in analysing policy problems and providing public solutions. One major evolution is that policy advice – solicited by and offered to policymakers – is instrumental (Mayer et al, 2005). It is used to help counter the reduced policy-analytical capacity of governments. Such reduction in capacity results from the increasing complexity of policy problems and their solutions (Jasanoff, 2005; Painter and Pierre, 2005; Howlett, 2008). Advice may be provided by institutionalised advisory bodies. Stakeholder experts may also be solicited for instrumental reasons. When stakeholders hold the key to successful implementation, it is wise for policy formulation to take into account their input. The motives of policymakers to request and receive policy advice from citizens may alternatively be grounded in substantive democratic arguments, favouring legitimisation of decisions thanks to the empowerment of civil society actors, stakeholders and citizens (Brans and Vancoppenolle, 2005; Montpetit, 2008; Schiffino et al, 2013). Therefore, the way policy advice supports policy analysis and policymakers varies in the extent to which it is expert advice, stakeholder advice or a mixture of both.
As a consensus system with neo-corporatist traits, the Belgian advisory system is populated with strongly institutionalised advisory bodies. These bodies play an important role in the policymaking process at all levels of government and hence tend to be highly integrated into the formal policymaking cycle. This chapter discusses the advisory bodies that have been established, supported and regulated by Belgian governments at both national and subnational levels of policy. The aim is primarily to answer three questions on the context and characteristics of policy advice in Belgium in general and policy advisory bodies in particular. The first question pertains to how and why these advisory bodies are established by policymakers. Second, we investigate the role of different types of expertise in these advisory bodies. Third, we discuss their influence on policymaking in Belgium. By reflecting on these questions, we show that the Belgian institutionalised advisory system struggles to meet four important challenges in policymaking, that is, managing growing competition from advisers, blending expert advice with representative opinion, securing societal support for policy interventions from groups other than traditional representative organisations, and ensuring political primacy in the policy process.