The Future of Public Participation: Better Design, Better Laws, Better Systems

• Date: 01 December 2015
• Published date: 01 December 2015
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/crq.21142

C R Q, vol. 33, supplement 1, Winter 2015 S35

© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. and the Association for Confl ict Resolution

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/crq.21142

The Future of Public Participation: Better Design,

Better Laws, Better Systems

Tina Nabatchi

Emma Ertinger

Matt Leighninge r

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, confl ict resolution practitioners faced

a dilemma: they understood how to design better ADR processes but

were often unsure of their authority to off er ADR and were entrenched

in systems that made it diffi cult to use ADR. Today, public particip a-

tion faces a similar dilemma. We know what good participation looks

like, but using better participation is challenging because of legal and

systemic impediments.  is need not be the case. In this article, we

assert that tapping the full potential of public participation requires

better designs, better laws, and better systems.

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, confl ict resolution practitioners and

specialists faced a dilemma: they understood how to design better alter-

native dispute resolution processes (ADR), but they were often unsure of

their legal authority to off er ADR and were entrenched in organizational

systems that made it diffi cult to use it. By the mid-1990s, things began to

change. A series of legislative acts (e.g., the Negotiated Rulemaking Act

and Administrative Dispute Resolution Act) authorized federal agencies

to use ADR for a wide variety of disputes, and research emerged to guide

organizations on best practice for dispute systems design (e.g., Costantino

and Merchant 1996). By the early 2000s, ADR had become a fi xed feature

in the landscape of government (Nabatchi 2007).

Today, public participation faces a similar dilemma. Practitioners

understand how to design better participation processes, but government

offi cials are often unsure of their legal authority to use those processes and