#!trpst#trp-gettext data-trpgettextoriginal=38#!trpen#Saltar al contenido#!trpst#/trp-gettext#!trpen#

DEMORESET

#!trpst#trp-gettext data-trpgettextoriginal=1299#!trpen#Menú#!trpst#/trp-gettext#!trpen#

PHASE 3

WEAVING OUR EXPERIENCES.

The organizations and practitioners improve their practices and strengthen their collaboration and action networks through an expert mobility residency model.

During this phase, the prototypes were tested for re-applicability, adaptability and effectiveness. This implementation was made possible thanks to an expert mobility residency model, in which people with specific expertise accompanied all actions.

ACTIVITY ONE

residence for the action.

GOAL

Extituto accompanied and provided technical support to 5 deliberative units, organizations or professionals in order to implement the 5 prototypes previously developed during the Demo.Reset/Lab.

MODALITY

Virtual - 2 months 100%

ACTIVITY TWO

RESIDENCE FOR EXPERTS

GOAL

Develop an international residency program for experts.

HOW?

RESULT

This prototype seeks to bring the peasantry and small landowners engaged in livestock, fishing and agriculture closer to participatory mechanisms.
The workers discuss about creating a citizen assembly capable of making decisions about the development of agriculture and claiming rights.
As a community, they are looking for innovative ways to turn their demands into a matter of public interest.

Residents:

  • Danny Goto | Org. Innovations for Development (I4DEV
  • Sanskriti Menon | Org. Cee India
  • Kunal Jaiswal

Hosts:

  • Nilesh Heda | Org. Samvardham Samaj Vikas Sanstha

This prototype was born as a response to the challenge of rebuilding trust between communities and decision makers in the midst of socio-environmental conflicts.
We opened spaces for creation and exchange, where we used the Legislative Theater technique. This technique allows us to intervene in a problem by means of acting in different scenes.
We emphasize the importance of influencing, from creativity and innovation, alternative spaces that enable exchange based on individual and collective experiences.

Residents:

  • Aluna Serrano
  • Kati Rubin
  • Fernanda Menin

Hosts Frederick Odinga and Obi Jane prepared together with former Demo.Reset General Coordinator Sebastian Calderon a workshop for the youth of Mathare, an informal neighborhood in Nairobi.
In the workshop, group discussions focused on youth participation in democracy.

How do young people express themselves in politics?

What are the most effective ways to express themselves politically before public institutions?
What would they like a youth participation platform to have in order to influence democratically?

At the Summer School, 27 participants came together to learn, share experiences and explore new ways to strengthen the capacity of local governments and NGOs to design, implement and evaluate democratic innovations.
Participants prepared to become trainers in their own settings.
Collaborations were now established with organizations and government agencies in their own contexts to enhance existing participatory democracy initiatives and develop new ones.

Residents:

  • Daniel Schugurensky | Arizona State University
  • Dú Pente | JNP Juventude Negra Política

Hosts:

  • Patricia Santamaria | Ollin A.C.
For three months, the team embarked on a mixed-mode, virtual and face-to-face program to build a toolbox to facilitate the creation of regional HUBs for democratic innovation. What was this experience like? This prototype defined key steps for the construction of the toolbox. The organizations that make up CILA launched a campaign for testing and mapping democratic innovation. A mapping that revealed great experiences!
  • 96 organizations were mapped in the GLOBAL SOUTH of Latin America.
  • 5 key interviews were conducted to understand their networking and the issues addressed.
  • Difficulties were identified in the collaborative networks, such as lack of financial and technical capacity.
All this information was systematized to strengthen participatory democracy.

Residents:

  • Sofía Castillo | Sur Institute
  • Viviana Villa | Extituto de Política Abierta
  • Karla Luna | Ollin Org

Hosts:

  • Fiorella Wernicke | Asuntos del Sur
In participatory budget research, the focus is usually on institutional designs and overall impacts. What about the experience of participants? Surprisingly, there is little systematic information on this subject. However, knowing their experiences is fundamental to evaluate the true performance of these instances of citizen participation. Participatory Budgeting is a democratic process in which community members decide how to spend part of the public budget. Each year:
  • They contribute ideas.
  • They transform them into proposals.
  • They vote to decide which proposals to fund.
This is how the community gets involved in decision making! With this prototype, it has been proposed to collect valuable information about the experiences of Participatory Budgeting participants around the world.

Objective:

To get a systematic and representative view of experiences in different continents and socio-economic contexts.
The survey will become a regular product of People Powered, completely free of charge! Designed to be accessible to all.

Residents:

  • Rocío Annunziata | Instituto de Investigaciones Políticas Universidad Nacional de San Martín
  • Alberto Ford | Universidad Nacional de Rosario

Hosts:

  • Patricia Mariel Sorribas
  • Nuestro Córdoba
view phase 4

Melisa Ross

PhD candidate at the Berlin Graduate School for Social Sciences (BGSS) of Humboldt University in Berlin, Germany, and a research fellow of the Healthier Democracies project led by Public Agenda in New York, USA. “My research focuses on the Latin- American left turn, postneoliberalism, citizen participation and democratic innovations”.

Azucena Morán

Research associate at the Institute for Sustainability Research – Helmholtz Center Potsdam. Her transdisciplinary work explores deliberative and participatory responses to planetary challenges. She serves on the Editorial Board of Participedia and on the Steering Committee on Democratic Innovations of the European Consortium for Policy Research (ECPR).

Yanina Welp

Associate researcher at the Albert Hirschman Center on Democracy, Graduate Institute, Geneva (Switzerland) and editorial coordinator of Agenda Pública. Between 2016 and 2019 she was co-director of the Latin American Zurich Center, at the University of Zurich. She has a PhD in Political and Social Sciences from the Pompeu Fabra University (Barcelona, Spain) and a degree in Political Science and Social Communication Sciences, both from the University of Buenos Aires (Argentina). She obtained the Habilitation with the Venia Legendi in Latin American Studies from the University of St.Gallen (Switzerland). She is co-founder of the Red de Politólogas. She specializes in the study of political participation, a topic on which she has published books, articles, and book chapters.

Claudia Chwalisz

Claudia is the lead author of the first OECD report on deliberative democracy: Innovative Citizen Participation and New Democratic Institutions: Catching the Deliberative Wave (2020; co-authored with Ieva Cesnulaityte), and she led the development of the OECD Good Practice Principles for Deliberative Processes. She oversaw the development of the OECD Evaluation Guidelines for Representative Deliberative Processes (2021) is the author of a new OECD paper on Eight Ways to Institutionalise Deliberative Democracy (2021). She co-ordinated the OECD Innovative Citizen Participation Network of leading international practitioners, academics, public servants, artists, and designers, and she edited the OECD’s online digest Participo.

Yago Bermejo

Yago has been working on democratic participation projects for more than 10 years. He has experience in facilitation, process design and strategies for the use of democratic digital tools. From 2016 to 2019, he has been responsible for ParticipaLab, a democratic innovation laboratory, at Medialab Prado, in coordination with the Participation Area of the Madrid City Council, in which he has developed numerous projects related to Decide Madrid as well as the design of the Observatory of the City and the G1000 of Madrid, pioneering experiences in the use of lottery and deliberation in Spain.

Susan Lee

Susan is a student and democracy practitioner from Seoul, South Korea. In 2020, she co-founded the World Citizens’ Assembly, a prototype for a global citizen’s assembly based on iterative pilot testing, with Yago Bermejo Abati. In 2021, Deliberativa began co-incubating the Global Assembly, the first sortition-selected global citizens’ assembly in the lead-up to COP26. Deliberativa coordinated the delivery of pilot tests on multilingual virtual deliberation to inform the final Assembly design. As part of the Implementation Circle, Susan supported the recruitment and management of 100+ global partners to implement a decentralized sortition and train local hosts of Assembly participants. In the fall of 2021, she co-designed and implemented the deliberative process and output consolidation methodology. Susan has been the main spokesperson for the GA since the project launched; you can see some of Susan’s media work here and here. Susan is interested in imagining participative models of global governance, decolonizing deliberative democracy, and placing youth at the front of the deliberative wave.

Maria Paulina Ibarra

Executive Director of Fundación Multitudes, a non-profit organization based in Chile. She has global experience in transparency, citizen participation and accountability, having worked with organizations such as Open Government Partnership and the World Bank. She holds a BA in Communication from Marymount University, and an MA in Communication from Georgetown University.

Andre Noel Roth

He is a Political Scientist (1990), Master in Political Science (1994) and Doctor in Economic and Social Sciences, mention in Political Science (1999) from the Université de Genève-Switzerland. He has been professor of public policy analysis in Switzerland and in several universities in Colombia and Latin America. Since 2006, he is a Research Professor (currently tenured) attached to the Department of Political Science of the Faculty of Law, Political and Social Sciences (FDCPyS) of the National University of Colombia, Bogotá. He has held the positions of Coordinator of the Doctorate in Political Studies and International Relations, Director of the journal Ciencia Política, Director of the Instituto de Investigación Socio-jurídica UNIJUS and Vice-Dean of Research and Extension of the FDCPyS. He is also Director of the Research Group “Analysis of Public Policies and Public Management”. Public Policy and Public Management Analysis” (APPGP) (category B Colciencias 2021), Coordinator of the Innovation in Governance Innovation in Governance Laboratory (GobLab) of the FDCPyS, Co-coordinator of the group Comparative Public Policy group of ALACIP and Co-editor of the journal Mundos Plurales (FLACSO-Ecuador). Ecuador). He has published several books and dozens of chapters and articles on public policy and administration. administration.

DELIBERATION

Deliberation is understood as a conversation among diverse actors and with diverse opinions in which space, time, methodologies and procedures are available so that the actors involved can carefully consider the pros and cons of a decision before adopting it, seek the best ways to express their opinions and/or influence the decisions of local authorities on a topic of common interest.

DIFFERENTIAL

  • The differential of the practices is related in the first place to the specific community origin of those who develop them: Indigenous peoples, LGTBIQ+ Communities, collectives or other forms of association and collaboration between young people, women and social movements.
  • The differential of the practices is related in second place; with the singular forms, procedures, aesthetics and rituals, which have been developed by the communities to carry out conversations, processes of informed decision making and actions of influence on local authorities. In this context, the differential is centered on recognizing and mapping the aspects of each practice: How does the word circulate, what procedures are used to better “understand” the problems among all those involved, what role do bodies, images, symbols, other aesthetics play, how is the memory of what is said constructed, how are spaces distributed so that the conversation is conducive, how is time managed for the conversation, are decisions made, how is the conversation carried out, and how is it carried out?

PRACTICE

It is that methodology, process, space and/or tool developed and implemented by communities and civil society organizations with the intention of convening spaces for conversation and decision making on issues of common interest; among community members and/or with local authorities in which it is intended to achieve some kind of collective influence.