Citizen participation

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Citizen participation describes (in Germany) the participation (" participation ") of the citizens in individual political and economic decisions and planning processes ( citizens' commune ) . Citizen participation is also spoken of when citizens participate in municipal infrastructure via energy cooperatives .

The term is not sharply delimited in theory and is used in practice for a large number of different processes. In particular, it is often discussed (in Germany) whether direct democratic decision-making processes such as the referendum have to be included in the concept of citizen participation . In the narrower sense of the word, the term citizen participation often does not include direct democratic procedures (in Germany), but in a broader sense of the word (and incorporating in-depth direct democratic experience), these procedures belong to the meaning of the term. In some sources this affiliation is undisputed. In encounters, it is increasingly pointed out that these are not selective or even restricted processes, but a broad culture.

“Anyone who does not involve citizens in politics and administration for fear of waking sleeping dogs is wrong. Because especially if you don't involve him / her, then the dog wakes up and then he bites too. "

- Gisela Erler : January 2018

"Direct democracy is deeply connected with citizen participation - it relies on the participation and competence of the citizens"

- Georg Kohler : January 2015

“Participation is not a selective process related to specific projects and problem solving, but a culture. Ways and means had to be found to build up and enable a culture of participation. "

- Workshop participant, ETHZ April 2014

"Direct democracy and citizen participation: two sides of the same coin"

- Fabian Reidinger : July 2013

Quality, comparisons, impact

Empirical studies prove the importance of a lived social and political culture on the effect of direct democratic , participatory instruments, processes and procedures. Depending on who initiates these processes, with what intentions and goals, and with whom the power and decisions lie, they can:

  • either serve to (further) concentrate or maintain political power,
  • or play a role in the competition of political parties for electoral favor,
  • or the citizens, the civil society further, or new, empowerment (citizen empowerment) , contribute decisively to the (real, full) citizen participation / participation.

For example Uwe Serdülle and Yanina Welp in Direct Democracy Upside Down (Direct Democracy Upside Down) , analysis and comparison of “bottom-up” referendums at national level in all countries worldwide in the period 1874–2009, which are securitized in 38 countries , but only took place (at least once) or (more often) in twenty countries. The authors limit their investigation to "bottom-up" referenda actively initiated by citizens and civil society, in contrast to other authors who take the term broader. In the years 1874–2009, 537 bottom-up referenda took place - for the individual countries see the table in: Referendum (and there the political significance and role of referendums ). Historically, “top-down” procedures can over time lead to more citizen  participation ( codetermination , codecision, co-creation, participation).

Andreas Gross and Bruno Kaufmann assess and compare the quality of direct democratic procedures (citizen participation) in European countries as follows (2002, rating 1a to 6b in brackets):

  • the avant-garde : (1b) Liechtenstein, Switzerland
  • the Democrats : (2a) Italy, Slovenia, Latvia, (2b) Ireland, Denmark, Lithuania, Slovakia, the Netherlands
  • the cautious : (3a) France, Spain, Austria, (3b) Sweden, Norway, Hungary
  • the fearful : (4a) Poland, Great Britain, Finland, Estonia, Belgium, (4b) Iceland, Luxembourg, Germany, Greece, Czech Republic
  • the hopeless : (5a) Romania, Portugal, (5b) Bulgaria, Malta
  • still below: (6a) Cyprus, (6b) Turkey

Spectrum of citizen participation

Levels of citizen participation
Increasing level of participation
( en.  empower)
( en.  cooperate)
( s.  involve)
  consult get    advice ( en.  consult)  
( en.  inform )
Levels of civic participation with increasing civic influence - from informing , consulting , involving and cooperating to empowering

Citizen participation is presented as a “spectrum” and divided into procedures with increasing influence of the citizens, with increasing “levels” of participation. The spectrum ranges from information to the transfer of responsibility - from informing to empowering. The aim of the empowerment is to put the final decision in the hands of the citizenry and there is a promise to implement exactly what the citizens have decided. Balanced and objective information is the basis of citizen participation. The public may then be asked for advice to present their objections as an analysis, alternative or other decision. Structured public participation includes all of the citizens' aspirations and concerns and ensures that everything is understood and taken into account in the participation process. In a further developed form of citizen participation, politics and administration act as partners of the citizens who work together as an alliance on alternatives and find a preferred common solution. (see cooperation )

Empowerment as the most far-reaching form of public participation corresponds in this classification to the greatest influence, participation of the citizens - cf. Democracy ( ancient Greek Δημοκρατία 'rule of the people' , from δῆμος dēmos ' people ' and -kratie : κρατία kratía ' rule '):

“Democracy - form of government in which the 'people' (Greek demos ), d. H. the entirety of the full citizens, not an individual or a small group of powerful people who have state authority. In the pre-modern era , democracy was an exception, the rights of participation were… limited… and were considered a privilege of special groups. Only modern democracy, which began to prevail after the American and French Revolutions, granted political rights as a [component] of human rights , the guarantee of which became one of the main tasks of the democratic state. "

Even today an “ iron law of the oligarchy ” is described in the case of party-political democracy and citizen participation, a “representation and thus participation gap” - “There is a risk that [the] interests [of the voters, non-voters and party members] are members ] are no longer represented by the elected politicians. A representation and thus participation gap between the population and politics becomes visible ”.

Increasing level of involvement / levels of citizen participation
by informing the Empower ( empowerment )
(s. Inform )
(. En consult )
(s. Involve )
(en. Cooperate )
(s. Empower )
Objectives of participation Balanced and objective information to aid the public in understanding the problems, alternatives, options and / or solutions. Get feedback from the public on analysis, alternatives and / or decisions. Working directly with the public throughout the process to ensure that public concerns and expectations are consistently understood and addressed. Partnership with the public in every aspect of decision making, including developing alternatives and choosing preferred solutions. Final decisions in the hands of the public.
Promise to society We'll keep you up to date. We'll keep you up to date, listen to you, acknowledge your concerns and expectations, and let you know how your suggestions influenced the decisions. We work with you to ensure that your concerns and wishes are incorporated directly into the alternatives developed and give you an account of how your suggestions influenced the decisions. We seek your advice and creativity in formulating solutions and integrate your advice and recommendations (as far as possible) into the decisions. We implement what you have decided.

For entrepreneurial citizen participation, the objectives and the promise to society and thus their classification in the table above depend on two factors:

  • the form of participation of the energy cooperative in the municipal infrastructure company; this is agreed by the municipality and potential other shareholders with the energy cooperative.
  • the self-set goals of the energy cooperative; these are explicitly set by the members in the general assembly .

For common goals of energy cooperatives see Energy Cooperative .

In addition to the categories "inform" ... "empower" mentioned in the table, the aspects "investment in the energy cooperative" and "participation in the economic return" are also important for the entrepreneurial public participation, which must be explicitly explained to the citizens in order to prevent them from participating to convince.

Citizen participation - formal and informal

With regard to the binding nature of public participation, a distinction is made between two types of participation procedures: on the one hand, the legally prescribed or formal participation procedures (also called written participation) and, on the other hand, voluntary citizen participation (informal participation).

Logo-staedtetag-bw-germany.svg   Objectives of citizen participation *
formally informal
100%   4. Decide   4. Cooperate
  3. Agreement
      / conduct
  3. Help shape
  2. Listen   2. Consult
    0%   1. Inform
Degree of participation
In the case of public participation, different rights are granted with a graduated intensity of participation.

* Source: Association of Cities in Baden-Württemberg , AG Citizens' Participation (2012)

The Citizens' Participation Working Group of the Baden-Württemberg Association of Cities (2012) proposes a four-level structure for the formal and informal citizen participation to classify the intensity of citizen participation and shows the growing influence of citizens. It sets out the following overarching goals of citizen participation :

  • Promote trialogue between citizens, local council and administration
  • Increase trust through comprehensive transparency
  • Increase identification with the city and acceptance of local political decisions
  • Ensure the best possible quality of decisions

as well as general information and recommendations for citizen participation :

  • Positive attitude
  • Openness and transparency
  • Holistic decision planning
  • In trialogue to the decision
  • Include all sections of the population

In the case of formal participation procedures in the highest perfection, the citizenship decides; Informal procedures aim for cooperation as the best possible goal. The legislature can make regulations that certain preliminary stages are not exceeded. (see financial reservation ) Then the citizenship is only heard (see hearing ) or asked for advice (consultation) .

In the case of the initiative, a distinction is made between participation in the top-down procedure (the first step is taken by the executive or municipal administration) and the participation of citizens in a bottom-up procedure (citizens take the initiative of their own accord). ( [A clearly formulated] see (1). Bottom-up 'pull' rather than top-down 'push' : Proposals are promoted "from below" (pull) rather than push through "from above" instructions of the management (push) from new Security concepts of the natural gas and oil producers and cf. (2) Community Organizing , German  community organization , colloquial: Organizing the local people ).


Direct democratic participation


( direct democracy in the narrower sense)

In Germany, the procedures are organized separately for municipalities, federal states and federal states. The German cities belong either to the municipalities or to the federal states.


In Germany, the citizens of a municipality have the (evidenced) right to apply for residents / citizens in a direct democratic way and to bring about citizens ' decisions with the help of a citizens' initiative, through which the will of the majority of the citizens can also be enforced against the city or local council and the administration . These are instruments of a bottom-up policy .

States and federal government

→ Main article: Direct democracy in Germany and there →  Direct democracy in the federal states and →  Debate about the introduction of referendums at the federal level

Land-use planning

In Germany, land-use planning is a top-down procedure for formal public participation that is regulated by laws and other legal provisions and initiated by the administration, in which bottom-up elements (unsolicited suggestions from the public) can be integrated. The parties involved (citizens, associations, other authorities) formulate statements, objections, concerns or suggestions and send them to the developer. The latter is obliged to take into account all of the statements made within the framework of the so-called weighing process. He must check their relevance for the procedure and take them into account accordingly. (See also above : "Consult", "Involve")

The public participation (public participation) in the land-use planning is regulated by a federal law, namely § 3 Building Code (BauGB). Two-stage public participation is planned there. It is divided into early public participation, where public events are often held to inform the public, and a public display, which usually takes place in the planning office. The early public participation is carried out with a first draft, often parallel to the participation of the authorities . The public display is the last step before the weighing and the Council decision.

By involving the public , everyone should have the opportunity to protect their interests and legal positions in the master plan procedure or in their planning procedures (such as planning approval or spatial planning). The legislature assumes that public participation as early as possible increases the acceptance and quality of the land-use planning.

In the first phase of public participation, the public should be informed “as early as possible about the general objectives and purposes of planning, significantly different solutions that may be considered for the redesign or development of an area, and the likely effects of planning; she is to be given the opportunity to comment and discuss. ”The planning municipality decides for itself how this participation will be carried out. Common forms of participation are citizens' meetings and plan notices in publicly accessible places (town hall, administration building, savings banks). Increasingly, the Internet is used for the simplified and accelerated implementation of participation procedures e-participation . Corresponding private and public services are available for this purpose, e. B. Participation server . It is not permitted to hold public participation exclusively via the Internet (OLG Lüneburg). Authorities and public agencies may also only be given additional information via the Internet as part of early participation (Section 4 (1) BauGB).

Due to the early public participation and mostly parallel to this, the participation of authorities and (also private) companies of general interest , which are considered to be the bearers of public interests , the planning takes on a more binding character and is finally referred to as a draft plan , which can also be legally binding. However, the second phase of citizen participation is a prerequisite for this.

"The drafts of the land-use plans are to be publicly displayed for a period of one month with the reasons and the already existing environmental statements, which are essential in the opinion of the municipality. The place and duration of the display as well as information on the types of environmental information available must be made known at least one week in advance as is customary for the location; It should be pointed out that comments can be submitted during the display period and that comments that are not submitted on time can be disregarded in the decision-making process on the master plan. "

The statements form the core of the assessment material , which the municipality must examine in the assessment process, which is central to the land-use plan procedure. The (formally) incorrect implementation of this process can lead to the invalidity of the master plan. The public is informed about the participation procedures by means of local notices . This is often done in local government gazettes or through publications in local daily newspapers. (See also "Inform" above.)

Entrepreneurial citizen participation in municipal infrastructure

In Germany, citizens can formally, albeit indirectly, participate in the infrastructure with the help of an energy cooperative . H. Acquire property. For this purpose, the citizens participate in the energy cooperative (through membership and investment), the energy cooperative in turn participates in the communal company responsible for this infrastructure (e.g. municipal utilities). This model assumes the willingness of the local decision-makers to involve the energy cooperative as a representative of the citizens. Examples can be found in Thuringia ( large city Jena ) and the Rhine-Main area ( medium -sized town Mörfelden-Walldorf ).

Even more direct citizen participation is achieved by the energy cooperative acquiring a complete municipal network and operating it. In Berlin, this is the aim of an energy cooperative. The award procedure is still pending.

Informal public participation

In the case of informal (not legally prescribed) citizen participation, a multitude of forms can be observed, ranging from simple citizens' meetings to moderated events such as the future workshop to complex participation processes such as Local Agenda 21 or quality of life through proximity . Large-scale public participation can also occur in the context of city ​​marketing .

While formal public participation involves direct communication between those involved and the authorities, voluntary public participation generally places much greater emphasis on discursive procedures. The citizens should "talk" to each other about a topic, exchange arguments and ideas and thus develop solutions together. In such procedures, the administration often takes on an advisory role in which it contributes its specialist knowledge on the topic neutrally without determining the content of the discourse. These discursive approaches have the great advantage that the ideas and thoughts of those involved are publicly visible, while with formal citizen participation the individual citizen is "left alone" with the administration, which often appears to be overpowering for the individual. The decisive factor for the success of voluntary public participation is the creation of relevance. So the subject of the procedure should be something that is of interest to the target audience. At the same time, those involved have to know that the results they have worked out flow into the decisions actually made by politics and administration. If these requirements are not met, many people are unwilling to invest time in participating in the process. In municipal practice, voluntary citizen participation focuses on all conceivable municipal political issues. This ranges from participation in the most important municipal plans, such as budget or land use plans, through area plans , to individual construction projects or activities for crime prevention or environmental protection.

The citizens' panel is based on a representative sample of eligible voters who are asked about local political issues in writing or via the Internet. But citizens who do not belong to the sample can also fill out a questionnaire, which is then also evaluated. The aim is an effective dialogue between citizens and politics.

Goal orientation of politics and administration

Typology of basic goals of public action
1.  Legitimation 2.  Performance
institutional /
1a  legality 2a  efficiency
  • consistency
  • Compliance with rules
  • legal correctness
  • Equal treatment
  • thrift
  • economics
  • Technical expertise
  • Speediness
individual /
1b  democracy 2b  flexibility
  • participation
  • public discussion
  • Popular opinion
  • Voting majorities
  • " Citizenship "
  • Informality
  • interactive execution style
  • personal treatment
six possible conflict fronts
  • Legality  vs. democratic participation (1a vs. 1b)
  • Efficiency  vs. Flexibility (2a vs. 2b)
  • Democracy  vs. Efficiency (1b vs. 2a)
  • Democracy  vs. Flexibility (1b vs. 2b)
  • Legality  vs. Flexibility (1a vs. 2b)
  • Legality  vs. Efficiency (1a vs. 2a)
    Areas of Conflict Geser 1997.png
Source: Geser 1997

Shaping citizenship and participation is subject to a wide range of legal requirements and social influences. According to Political parties law has the duty to “promote the active participation of citizens in political life” and “to ensure a constant lively connection between the people and the state organs .

The goal orientation of public administrations is divided into four areas ( legality, democracy, efficiency, flexibility , according to Hans Geser , who also describes six possible conflict fronts among them). Administrative action is determined by laws and citizens' growing claims to justice. The administration is subject to the pressure to innovate through the new control model , an organizational theory to increase efficiency. The acceptance of decisions is shaped by increasing expectations that citizens should be involved (administrative fields of legality and democracy ). In the case of residents, the administration should act individually and flexibly and be “ close to the citizen ”.

Legitimacy has become ' discursive '. It often only comes about through mutual conviction and negotiation, ” states the German Association of Cities . The theses on the further development of local democracy explain that tried and tested forms of representative local democracy and direct democratic forms of citizen participation are important elements of a living local democracy and must be brought into a complementary relationship to one another.

The study commission “Citizen Participation” submitted a final report of its three-year deliberations to the Rhineland-Palatinate state parliament . In the discussion on citizen participation are principles of empowerment (dtsch: empowerment ) as a collective process of empowerment sung.

Development of citizen participation

In Germany , including Austria , the first binding projects [?] For citizen participation were presented as manuals and guidelines at the beginning of the millennium . When they are very young, they are tried out locally or regionally and mostly wait for a probation in individual cases from numerous local procedures (as of 2013). Austria, with a number of local initiatives, regulates the procedures in the ministerial initiative Participation and Sustainable Development Europe and country guidelines / handbooks in the countries and cities. The societies of Denmark and the Netherlands show, each in their own way, a participatory culture that flows into participatory processes and initiatives on a larger scale, especially in cities and metropolises. In Switzerland , participation in society and politics is strongly expanded and anchored, accompanied by legally binding forms (expanded political rights of (so-called) direct democracy ).


The German-speaking Community (DG) has in 2019 a permanent Citizen Council ( permanent / permanent Citizens' Council ) introduced that "the citizens confers a large say in the design of everyday politics" . Its members are determined by lottery . To this end, the Parliament of the German-speaking Community unanimously adopted a decree on February 25, 2019. On specific topics are independent Citizens' Assemblies ( town hall meetings ) used.

After the 2010 election, Belgium was due to its political system, which is also common elsewhere - which does not require a “fragmented” party landscape (see also conflict democracy , party democracy vs. concordance democracy , consensus democracy ) - without a government for one and a half years. In response, the G1000 initiative was born with an online public consultation, a one-day gathering of 704 people and a smaller gathering of 32 people over several weekends. Both bodies represented a cross-section of the population. G1000 resulted u. a. to the permanent citizens' council in the Ostbelgien region , which is due to start work in 2020. The members are determined by lot , are active for 18 months, set political issues and make recommendations to parliament.

“In addition to the existing parliament, the German-speaking community of Belgium should have a permanent system of political participation using the drawing of lots by the citizens. After a model that was designed in collaboration with experts from the G1000 organization, every year a permanent citizens' council is ( Citizen Council ) decide on the topics to be discussed. Each of them is by an independent Citizens 'Assembly ( Citizens' Assembly ) discussed working out a concrete policy recommendations. Both bodies are made up of citizens who are drawn in by lottery . The parliament of the German-speaking community undertakes to implement these recommendations in its political decision-making process. "


  • Smart City Network (since 2013) - a network, forum, national cooperation, initiated by the responsible Danish ministry and Aarhus University . The forum is open to organizations and institutions in Denmark to exchange knowledge, experiences and ideas about Smart City initiatives. It is intended to help “explore thepotential for Smart City solutions” and “support the development of Smart City initiatives throughout the country”, also with ICT solutions, and “to bring city actors, citizens together with decision-makers”.
  • Smart Aarhus - Aarhuser and also a leading part of the Danish Smart City Network , which also promotes “national and international cooperation between cities and regions”. The Smart Aarhus Secretariat coordinates the Danish Smart City Network and the Connected Smart Cities Network , an international forum for Smart City solutions. Smart Aarhus supports “urban development based on stakeholder and citizen participation”, with “social, economic and ecological sustainability playing a central role”.
  • Introduction of the euro (2000) - Before the political decision to introduce the euro as the common currency, 364 citizens were involved in Odense in 2000. In a “ Deliberative Polling ” (Danish: “Folkehøring” ) they discussed Denmark's participation in monetary union. Further interviews took place immediately before the start of the debate and three months after the end of the “Folkehøring” .


In Germany, citizen participation in a narrower interpretation is practiced comparatively often, especially at the municipal level. It is used less frequently at the state and federal level. Exact figures on the extent and extent of citizen participation are only available for direct democratic forms for the whole of Germany: data on referendums and referendums are collected in the citizens' initiative database of the Institute for Democracy and Participation Research (IDPF) at the Bergische Universität Wuppertal. So far, there has only been a systematic survey of the dissemination of participation procedures for Baden-Württemberg on dialogue-oriented forms of public participation. A research project at the University of Stuttgart recorded dialogue-oriented participation events using web scrapings. The data show that dialogue-oriented participation processes are widespread. In a sample of more than 800 municipalities, a good 2,500 dialogue-oriented participatory events were identified over a period of three years. In more than two thirds of the municipalities, at least one participation event has taken place within three years. On average, there is one participation event per municipality and year, whereby this value is positively related to the size of the municipality.

Citizen participation can be aimed at the participation of the entire population or only for certain groups, such as young people or residents of a district.

In April 2013, the German Association of Cities recommended that the municipalities deal systematically with the local culture of participation and planning and prepare a management report . The further development of guidelines and municipal statutes is recommended as a possible consequence ; theses on the further development of local democracy are presented below . In a provisional list, the Citizens' Participation Network of the Cooperation Foundation names a number of German cities and districts with planned or binding municipal rules on citizen participation (as of January 2020).

A manual from the Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure is approaching the concrete implementation of public participation , the "Law for Improving Public Participation and Standardization of Plan Approval Procedures" (PlVereinhG) from May 2013 as well as the first municipal council resolutions on guidelines for public participation and the like are approaching . a. from Bonn , Darmstadt , Gießen , Görlitz , Heidelberg , Heilbronn , Karlsruhe , Kiel , Landau in the Palatinate , Leipzig , Nürtingen , Pforzheim , Soest , Überlingen , the municipality of Weyarn and Wolfsburg . In Wuppertal , the first nationwide department head for citizen participation Panagiotis Paschalis was elected, during whose term of office the guidelines were developed in a participatory process together with the citizens and approved by the council on November 13, 2017, and the participation instrument planning cell was used for a preliminary decision on a factual issue . Many competencies of independent cities can be found in the municipalities belonging to the district at the higher level of the districts, which is why participation concepts are also found in such; for example in the district of Göppingen or in the district of Marburg-Biedenkopf .

Due to national regulations, certain topics are excluded from public participation, such as finances, the budget and salaries. The financial reserve prevents citizens from voting, even though "almost everything you do and decide in politics is financially relevant."

In interviews conducted in depth psychology in a Bremen study, politics, administration and citizens express very different ideas and expectations about citizen participation. There are three value patterns. Leaders from politics and administration consider citizens to be selfish and not sufficiently competent to represent the interests of the common good. Citizens should be heard, but not participate in decision-making. Other parts of politics and administration are in favor of public participation - but in regulated procedures. The third predominantly middle-class group has the feeling of being excluded. Politics over their heads is rejected; they want to participate and have a say, to be part of politics.

Citizens' Council Democracy

In 2019, Mehr Demokratie and Schöpflin Foundation , supported by the Mercator Foundation , carried out the Citizens' Council Democracy as a “ lot-based deliberation ” project. From June to November 2019, the project on reforming and strengthening German democracy ran as a participation process in four procedural phases, with the aim of developing recommendations to supplement parliamentary-representative democracy.

The citizens' council presented the results on September 28, 2019. On the Day for Democracy (November 15, 2019), the recommendations were presented to the public in the form of a citizens' opinion at a major event in Berlin and presented to representatives of politics.


Emmanuel Macron had the government hold a Grand Débat National ( Great National Debate ) in 2019 , with a series of encounters that build on experiences with his conversations with citizens during the 2017 election campaign. The debate was not least a reaction to the yellow vests movement . It was open to everyone, the subject areas were given:

  • Ecological transition
  • Taxation
  • Democracy and citizenship
  • Organization of the state and public services

The sequence:

  • Opening of the debates, January 15th, grand speech by the President, who also had his letter to the nation published on January 13th
  • National Thematic Conferences, 11. – 13. March
  • Local assemblies conclude on March 15th
  • Online contributions will be concluded on March 18th
  • Regional citizens' conferences, 15./16. March and 22./23. March
  • Debate in the National Assembly, 2/3 and April 9th
  • Publication of summaries, April 8th
  • Senate debate, April 10

The government "undertook to take all opinions and proposals into account, in accordance with the method and rules of debate, based on the principles of transparency, pluralism and inclusion, neutrality, equality and respect for the word of each individual."

During the debate, 1,932,884 contributions were received online, 10,134 local encounters took place, citizens' books (cahiers citoyens) were available in 27,374 municipalities and 27,374 letters and emails were received. The whole process was accompanied by the media with attention, commented critically and supported online on its own website (, where all results are also accessible.


The Irish Constitution of 1922 provided for several direct democratic procedures, but only one of them was applied once. After the constitutional reforms of 1937, only one direct democratic procedure remained - the mandatory constitutional referendum , which de facto came into force in 1941. Since then the Irish have voted in around forty referendums ( referendums ) on constitutional amendments - with a simple majority of the voters, there is no voting quorum . Despite the designation "mandatory", these are votes from above - because a previous parliamentary decision is necessary (simple majority in both chambers of parliament).

2013-14 convened a / e by the government convened / r Constitutional Convention ( Constitutional Convention ) , consisting of 33 members from politics, 66 members from the civil society and an independent chairman. The task of the convention was to discuss essential constitutional questions and to submit proposals to parliament. Ten topics were dealt with. Most of them were scheduled for a weekend, and for more controversial ones like gay marriage two weekends. The Convention made over thirty recommendations to Parliament. The topics were:

  • Reduction of the presidential term of office from seven to five years and adjustment to the local and European elections - government adopted two recommendations and rejected one - proposal rejected in referendum (May 2015)
  • Lowering the voting age - Government accepted proposal - Referendum planned (as of 01/19)
  • Review of the parliamentary electoral system - government rejected five out of ten recommendations, promised to set up an electoral commission to process the remaining proposals (as of 01/19)
  • Right to vote for Irish citizens living abroad in presidential elections - Ministerial working group considers options - Referendum promised (as of 01/19)
  • Regulations for same-sex marriage - the government took over both proposals, approved the referendum and also supported the content of the recommendation - adopted in the referendum, May 2015 (62.1% yes, 37.9% no, participation 60.5%)
  • Role of women in home and public life - ministerial working group is considering options, government simply wants to remove the constitutional article - referendum to follow (as of 01/19)
  • More participation of women in politics - the ministerial working group should continue to discuss the issue
  • Removal of blasphemy from the constitution - the government approved both proposals, including the referendum - in the referendum, October 2018 (66.4% yes, 33.6% no, participation 64.1%)
  • Parliamentary reform (presidency, secret ballot, committees) - no formal response from the government - most of the twelve recommendations implemented in June 2016
  • Economic, social and cultural rights - government rejected both recommendations

2016-18, the newly elected government set up the so-called Citizens' Assembly ( town meeting ) a similar meeting a 99 representative and randomly selected ( lottery ) selected citizens consulted on fundamental political issues - including the regulated in the 8th Amendment issue abortion. For one year on twelve weekends with experts, scientists and lawyers, as well as those directly affected (such as women and doctors on abortion issues), including representatives of the Catholic Church and NGOs. The topics were:

  • Eighth constitutional revision - abortion, unborn child rights and women's rights
  • How best to respond to the challenges and opportunities of the aging population
  • Fixed legislative periods of parliaments
  • The manner in which referendums are held
  • How the State of Ireland can lead the way in fighting climate change

Irish Citizens Assembly Principles :

  • Transparency, openness - the meetings worked transparently, all plenary sessions are broadcast live, all documents are freely accessible
  • Openness, inclusion - the meetings are open to all parts of society
  • Fairness, inclusion, competence - the entire spectrum of opinions is heard on every topic, the information and documents for the meetings are of the highest quality
  • Openness, equality of votes - every member has the opportunity to express his or her opinion if they so wish
  • Efficiency, competence - the meetings make the best possible use of the limited time together, all documents are distributed in advance so that one can prepare appropriately
  • Respect, equal treatment - everyone is free to express their views without fear of personal attack or criticism
  • Collegiality, cooperation - those involved work together on friendly terms and tackle their task together


The Dutch developed participatory processes primarily in their metropolises of Amsterdam and Rotterdam . They introduced them to urban development on a larger scale in the 1970s (at that time there was also a lively exchange with the German, especially Berlin initiatives for participatory urban development - see also Urban renewal Berlin> 1970s and 12 principles of urban renewal ).

Strong Stories ( Strong Stories , 2010) - This Dutch approach is not a binding, detailed framework for further structural development (such as the cantonal structure plans or communal building and zoning regulations in Switzerland).

This strategy, and its concrete concepts, are based on so-called “stories”, in which goals for further development in all matters are derived. The participatory processes start long before the formal steps (such as the plan in Switzerland). Those who are directly affected - residents, companies - are approached at an early stage, their concerns and suggestions are seriously incorporated into further solutions with the official solution proposals. Under the confidence-building prerequisite that the quality of the results (buildings, landscape, urban spaces) should not be deteriorated, but rather improved.

In addition to serious participation, there is a second element that characterizes this approach - pragmatic territorial approaches. Based on the informal national spatial concept (similar to that of Switzerland ), regional strategies for spatial development are derived. This approach also helps to overcome political boundaries by primarily defining goals and not measures or instruments (this differs from spatial planning in Switzerland ).


  • Widening of the Meuse in the province of Limburg - Six possible strategies resulted from parallel discussions with those affected, authorities and experts. As a result, all groups involved were brought together in a one-day workshop, where they derived a consensual and affordable solution.
  • Metropolitan Region Amsterdam - In the largest urban region in the country, the starting points of the "stories" range from the old town to the airport and its potential. With 36 surrounding municipalities, the city has developed such a development concept for the entire metropolitan region andapproved itpolitically. In 2006, it broke away from the communal perspective that had been customary until then, as it still dominates elsewhere in large cities (as is still the case in Switzerland).

The method of “stories”, their joint development, became part of the culture of participation in the Netherlands. Today it is also used in various networks and projects, such as B .:

  • Amsterdam Smart City ( ASC ), Amsterdam Smart City - Smart Stories (2009-2011 and beyond) - an open collective that brings people of Amsterdam, companies, knowledge institutions and authorities together to create “the city of the future design ”,“ to develop innovative solutions for social, economic and ecological issues in the metropolis ”so that“ Amsterdam will remain livable in the years to come ”. She is also looking for ways to save energy. Sixteen projects were developed in the first two years - in the areas of work, living, mobility and public space. ASC would like to help bring partners together to initiate projects in which intelligent technologies and different approaches are tested and " best practices " for the implementation of these and similar initiatives are developed. In doing so, she considers collaboration on all possible levels to be essential in order to achieve sustainable results. It requires that, regardless of the form (public, private, informal), close participation by (end) users must be guaranteed. All inputs, acquired knowledge and experience are passed on openly. Only economically viable, financially viable solutions can be implemented, whereby the network also supports the initiatives in where to find the skills and how to apply them.


In addition to locally committed projects, there is participation and sustainable development Europe as an initiative of the Federal Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management to develop civic participation in Austria .

Guidelines for public participation include a. in front of the provincial capital Graz. The Vorarlberg state government presented the Citizen Participation Handbook for the state and municipalities , the City of Vienna the practical guide on citizen participation .

The federal state of Vorarlberg , located in the west of Austria, anchored "elements" of (so-called) participatory democracy in the state constitution in 2013 . In a first step, “ citizens' councils ” will work out proposals on specific issues in a simple, inexpensive and quickly implementable procedure (see short form of a planning cell ). These are then discussed in a “ citizens ' cafe ” and a “ resonance group ” from politics, administration, specialist institutions and the public with regard to possible consequences. A country guideline regulates the details.


Ongoing direct democratic participation

(direct democracy in the broader sense) → Main articles: Direct democracy in Switzerland , community assembly (Switzerland) , political community (Switzerland)

Structured forms of participation, such as studios, investment, civil, dialogue forums or conferences, -werkstätte, workshops (see tables below) - including under Danish, German or Dutch model (inter alia in the.. Urban Development on the chair Kees Christiaanse at the ETH Zurich ) - are in Switzerland used rarely because the participation is well developed in Swiss society and politics and anchored and has legally binding forms, as developed political rights of direct democracy - direct democracy in the broader sense - far beyond what is called “elements” or “instruments” of direct , participatory or deliberative democracy goes .

Individual procedures - in particular referendums on popular initiatives and referendums - are, in general terms, known outside of Switzerland. However, Swiss-style direct democracy - direct democracy in the broader sense - contains a number of closely interwoven processes, procedures and relationships without which it could not exist. How, u. a., the federalism emanating from every single citizen and the municipalities , the all inclusive, broadly coordinating, negotiating and balancing democracy of concordance , the fundamental, developed political rights * (part of the people's rights ), the (such as the concordance) all inclusive, broad tuning with each other, aushandelnde and balancing political will , the full sovereignty of the citizens * and citizens, the consultation process , which also comes in converting the vote results (referendums) into play - u. a. m. (* Note: for female citizens at federal level only since 1971 )

The political rights enshrined in the Swiss Federal Constitution guarantee popular votes, popular initiatives and referendums at federal level , as well as cantonal constitutions at cantonal and communal level . Together with the consultation process , in which everyone in the legislative processes, such as u. a. also in the early project planning, his objections and v. a. can make constructive contributions, this leads to transparency, striving for agreement and a balance of interests - so-called concordance .

As a result, a wide variety of interests are brought in, coordinated with one another and continuously developed. Restrictions, exclusions from voting topics, such as financial reservations - in contrast to many other countries such as Germany or Austria - are almost never applied in Switzerland. The most common form of participation is the quarterly voting on a wide variety of topics at municipal , cantonal and federal level .

This also includes larger infrastructure projects (including financing decisions), such as the coordination of:

Parish assembly, Landsgemeinde

Many communities know the community meeting at which the voters from the local council (depending on the canton executive , administrative , and legislative tasks, "quasi-legislative") current transactions to be submitted (such as the budget, the accounts of the local government tax rate changes, construction projects, projects, Land use planning, Tempo 30 zones, land sales or purchases, community mergers, granting citizenship, hiring a teacher, etc.), which can be discussed, supplemented, changed, and even rejected for revision - it is often the voters who decide who are in some communities it all residents, nor in the assembly about them. As in the assemblies of the Landsgemeinde , which still know two cantons ( Appenzell Innerrhoden and Glarus ) - here too, many decisions are made directly by the voters ( direct democracy , direct democracy in Switzerland ).

Examples of participation procedures

At the federal level
  • PubliForum Transplantation Medicine (2000, "Consensus Conference", "Citizen Panel" of 30 randomly selected citizens from all parts of Switzerland),
  • Regional participation in the search for a location for radioactive waste (2011, organized interest groups and the population - "regional conferences" in all six siting regions - participation in the sectoral plan procedure for deep geological repositories, regional interests in all stages, communities, measures, desired development of the region),
In the cities
  • Projects of the Nextzürich group (since 2013, a network of "spatial and transport planners and architects who are rethinking public participation" , initiated by Markus Nollert and Sabeth Tödtli, inspired by Nexthamburg , networked in the Next Network )
  • Dialog Chur West (2013/2014) → in the main article: Chur West
  • SBB - The Swiss Federal Railways applied a participationprocess in 2017 for the Neugasse development in Zurich-West . For the conversion of a 30,000 square meter area, they - supported by a 16-strong specialist committee and an author collective of around 15 people - collected ideas and suggestions from around 200 participants in four workshops within eight months, which the team of authors included in their concept presented in the fifth workshop at the end of 2017. The SBB will also develop all 150 areas in Switzerland that will become free in this way. This also includes all of the areas that have become free in the city of Zurich with a total area of ​​around 140,000 square meters.

City of Basel - In2005, the canton of Basel-Stadt enshrined the participation of its residents in its constitution. Paragraph 55 says: "The state involves the neighborhood population in its opinion-making and decision-making process, provided that their concerns are particularly affected." Since then (as of 2019), the canton administration has carried out almost sixty participation procedures. Depending on the project, these were time-consuming and lasted from a few hours after work to several years. People who are normally excluded from the political discourse should also be heard explicitly: foreigners, young people, children.

City of Neuchâtel / Neuchâtel - The government of the city of Neuchâtel / Neuchâtel implemented participatory procedures in 2014 and 2015/16:

  • Center & gare ( Zentrum & Bahnhof , 2015/16) - presentations by the planners, with “participatory encounters, workshops ” and subsequent “handover night” about redesigning public spaces and mobility issues in the city of Neuchâtel that lead to a “shared vision” should. Over 150 residents and 33 organizations took part, developing 70 proposals, 53 of which they accepted by consensus. The city takes them into account in the ongoing planning.
  • Center & rives ( Zentrum & Seeufer , 2014) - Design concept Ring (2010) of the former Expo.02 area Jeunes-Rives , which will be used as a recreational area by the lake, the harbor, the square A – M. Piaget and for the construction of a new department store in the city center - even before the city government submitted it to the city parliament. She organized an exhibition and had questionnaires filled out, of which around 1,200 came back - 45% found the project excellent, 37% good, 3% could not do anything with it. The concerns and wishes expressed by the population from the meetings, " workshops ", in which around 60 residents took part, were integrated into the planning. In 2015, the city government submitted a planning loan to parliament, backed by the general support of the population. In doing so, she broke the standstill that had lasted since the end of the State Exhibition in 2012. In 2003, a first project for the creation of a park with a lake border at the “ urn ”failedbecause no satisfactory alternative was presented for the 300 parking spaces that would have fallen victim to the green area. After that, it remained quiet for a long time - until the city government changed its strategy.

City of Zurich - In the Zurich municipal council (city parliament) an informal, cross-party grouping was established in 2017/18, which wants to enable more innovation in political processes and brings in corresponding parliamentary approaches (such as New Forms of Participation and Hardbrücke, District 5 ):

  • New forms of participation (2017, 2018 ...) - Christine Seidler and Jean-Daniel Strub ( local councilors , both SP ) suggested trying out new instruments and forms of participation in urban and neighborhood development . Even with larger construction projects, people should be better involved than the previous votes allowthe voters . To this end, in 2018 the municipal council transferred a corresponding postulate “Framework credit to strengthen the participation of the neighborhoods in urban development” (2018, Motion 2017) of the two to the presidential department of the city of Zurich responsible for urban development. They suggested it also happens that, by so-called " participatory budgeting ", "district budgets" or " Participatory Budgeting want to decide," the people in the neighborhoods in the future for smaller projects themselves where in the neighborhood they see a need for action and where they talk money .
  • Hardbrücke, Kreis 5 (2017 ...) - Pirmin Meyer and Shaibal Roy ( local councilors , both GLP ) suggested using new forms of participation to check whether the space under the Hardbrücke in Kreis 5 could be converted into a promenade in the summer could. The neighborhood population and the neighboring companies should be able to express their opinion. The postulate "Pilot project for a conversion of the space under the Hardbrücke into a pedestrian zone and promenade during the summer months" (2017) was approved by the head of the civil engineering and waste disposal department, Filippo Leutenegger , on behalf of the city ​​council (city government), despite a formal rejection requested by the local council. accepted.

The administration of the city ​​of Zurich maintains "mild forms" of citizen participation, which leads to criticism (including Thurgauerstrasse West ):

  • Thurgauerstrasse West (2014 ...) - The city of Zurich used " round tables " in the urban planning of the large development on Thurgauerstrasse in Zurich North ( Grubenacker , area of ​​65,000 m²), where "a lively and well-mixed part of the district" is to be built, with non-profit apartments, commercial space, an old people's center and apartments for the elderly, a school building and district park. In March 2018, the city ​​council referred the public design plans and the “Thurgauerstrasse” zone plan change to the municipal council. After the “round table” in June 2017 with representatives of the city administration and residents, IG Grubenacker presented a manifesto on the sustainable development of the quarterin June 2018, in which it recommended that thelocal council refer the design plan back to the city council and demand holistic planning. The IG criticizes both the content and the approach of the urban planning and makes several demands - u. a. the planning perimeter would have to be increased and the administration would have to enable real participation in consultations, decisions and implementation.


Participatory instruments in three European cities - A group of scientists, Oliver Dlabac ( ZDA / UZH ), Daniel Kübler ( FHNW ), Juliet Carpenter ( Oxford Brookes University ), Roman Zwicky ( ZDA / UZH ), is currently (2017-2020) studying the Use of participatory instruments in three European cities: Birmingham , Lyon and Zurich . Based on the urban planning concept of the “just city”, they examine urban developments in terms of social hot spots, displacement, affordable housing and the orientation of public facilities, since the 1990s until today, with a focus on “enabling” actors, processes and democratic institutions. You would like to supplement previous work on the role of “leadership”, democratic control and participatory planning processes with an integrated view, using the example of three cities with different national planning systems and local democratic institutions (UK, F, CH). The results of the study will then be discussed with political decision-makers, administrative bodies and political activists and then published.

See also - Kees Christiaanse (Chair for Architecture and Urban Design, Institute for Urban Design, ETH Zurich ), Christian Schmid ( Network City and Landscape (NSL) at ETH Zurich)

Research and practice

Discussion, questions about participation - from workshops at the ETH NSL Symposium Strategies and planning instruments for polycentric urban regions. Case studies Amsterdam and Zurich , ETH Zurich , April 4, 2014 (slightly edited):

The question arises, why projects are not carried out more often like this (as presented in the impressive examples)? Why are the rules and regulations (in general) so complicated and tightly structured that they almost do not allow participation? Today participation often happens at the community level and is limited to sending papers and forms back and forth. Who initiates participation, from whom does the desire to express oneself come from? From the people themselves, or is the plaything in the hands of the public sector and this goes to the population? For sustainable participation, the planners have to communicate with generally understandable images and concrete details. Do you need communication experts for this? How can participation also be implemented on a larger scale, for example when it comes to a vision or a structure plan?
You have to go outside, into the city, into the communities, publicly discuss ideas and suggestions and create ways for the participation of different actors: on the scale of the “future images” (“stories”, “stories”, for example Amsterdam) and in which there is interdisciplinarity there is still a lot of room for maneuver and design. Good examples of participation exist.
Of course, people from different areas of expertise have to be involved. But the people who should have a say often do not understand the experts. So how can you change communication? Instead of communication experts being employed as mediators between experts and the general public, the experts themselves should learn to convey their ideas and projects to laypeople.
(Somehow) communication usually takes place, but the point is to communicate on both sides - i.e. to have a (real) dialogue. It is important to enable (real) communication between those involved. It is about forming alliances (creating and developing common ground) and taking the decisive people with us and involving them in the process. “Stories” (“future images”, “stories”, Amsterdam as an example) must be told in such a way that a majority of people understand them and find them good.
It is also important that ideas are not only expressed but also discussed. In many cases, opinions and wishes are asked, but these then disappear into nothing. People are often not informed as to whether their inputs also had an impact. The limits of participation must be clearly defined and communicated right from the start. After all, it is not a “request concert” either, not all wishes can be taken into account. The risk that too many people will be disappointed is great. You have to do some preliminary research (do good research, obtain skills) and carry out feasibility studies to see what is possible (in a specific case).
The scale plays an important role. The smaller and more concrete an idea, the better people can imagine it and feel addressed. As soon as projects get bigger, participation also becomes more complex.
In principle, the initiative for a participation process lies with the public sector, which is justified by the fact that it also grants the approval at the end. Initiatives, groups like Nextzürich are non-profit associations without a large budget, the initiators have "simply" started to express their opinions. For example, the city of Bern, however, has institutionalized participation with a neighborhood commission. It serves as a mediator between the population and the city. Is it possible to do both together? Sure, it works.
Participation is not just a selective process related to specific projects and problem solving, but actually a culture. Ways and means had to be found to build and enable a culture of participation.

Digital democracy, participation platform (2017 –...)

In the Manifesto for Digital Democracy : Digital Democracy - Switzerland, we have to talk! (2017), an initiative of the UZH Digital Society Initiative (DSI) , appeal to the initiators and scientists ( Abraham Bernstein , Professor of Computer Science, UZH and Digital Society Initiative ; Fabrizio Gilardi , Professor of Policy Analysis, UZH; Maximilian Stern , staatslabor and foraus ) for consciously and positively using digital instruments in direct democracy . They invite all Swiss citizens to contribute their ideas for shaping digital democracy and set out the following principles for this further development of Swiss democracy :

  1. Digitization enables a more direct democracy, but does not guarantee it
  2. digitization should turn more affected people into participants
  3. Digital democracy should not only simplify existing processes, but redesign them in the interests of the citizens.
  4. digital democracy must find a balance between agility and stability
  5. this requires resources and the willingness to test on a small scale - in the following three areas:
  • talk to each other
  • decide together
  • determine collectively

They have set up a digital democracy brainstorming platform for ideas, suggestions, how to improve democracy with digital means and voting on them .

United Kingdom


Nicola Sturgeon had a number of in April 2019 Citizens' Assemblies ( town hall meetings ) announced modeled after those in Ireland, "to discuss the most important constitutional issues of Scotland" :

  • What kind of country do we want to build?
  • How can we best tackle the challenges we face, including those that will result from Brexit?
  • What other work should be done to give people the details they need to make informed decisions about the future of the country?
    - Scottish Government, June 2019

Around 120 “broadly representative” selected people from all over Scotland will be discussing the future of Scotland over six weekends - topics such as Brexit and Scotland's independence, including public finances and what they would look like in an independent Scotland. Also about topics that you bring in yourself - like u. a. a better future for younger generations and how to get politicians to listen more than talk.
The meetings took place from October 2019 to April 2020, the first in Glasgow and Edinburgh . Politicians from across the political spectrum are also invited to the meetings in various cities. Participants will receive up to £ 1,200 to participate free of obligation. The Scottish Government is providing £ 1.4 million to cover the costs. They also include spending on an “awareness campaign” among the public.
The final report on Scotland's future will be debated in Holyrood . The Scottish Government will respond to the proposals within 90 days and provide information on further steps.


In July 2019 60 representatives of the people were from across the country to the first Citizens' Assembly ( town meeting ) in Wales called. In Newtown , at Gregynog Hall , they discussed the question “how the people of Wales can shape their future through the work of the National Assembly for Wales” . After two days (weekend July 19/21, 2019) of consultation and discussion, the results and recommendations were recorded in a detailed report. Participants were selected to “accurately reflect the makeup of the Welsh public” - age, educational level, ethnicity, gender, geographic origin, knowledge of the Welsh language, and voters and non-voters in the 2016 National Assembly of Wales elections.


Citizen participation in the political process
according to Council of Europe , INGO participation (2009)
Levels of participation
Increasing level of participation by INGOs
      Partnership *)
( en. Partnership)
    Dialogue **)
( en. Dialogue)
( en. Consultation)
( en. Information)

*) joint decision making, co-decision making ( Council of Europe , INGOs )
(en. joint-decision making, co-decision making )

**) broad and collaborative (en. broad and collaborative )

The stages of the political decision-making process
Six steps in the decision-making process - INGOs and public administration can at each of them interact (s. Six steps in the cycle of the decision-making process - INGOs and public Authorities can interact at each of synthesis )

( en: reformulation) 






        Agenda-Setting *) (de: setting


 Decision **)

*) The European Citizens 'Initiative (ECI , en. European Citizens' Initiative, ECI) is also called "agenda-setting tool" (dt. Instrument ) of EU citizens referred
**) common decisions, Mitentscheide ( Euro Europe , INGOs ) / In decisions of the EU are left to the EU institutions ( Commission , Parliament , Council ) (however, the influence of various lobby groups from business and society is considerable)

At the European level, there have been multiple efforts for several years to formalize civic participation and to integrate it firmly into political processes. Often, however, citizen participation, participation of civil society , the participation of organizations ( NGOs , INGOs ) that represent various issues is understood.


(at EU level, EU-wide)

The usual way of the EU institutions to involve the citizens of the EU, i.e. to take their opinion into account, is opinion polls , surveys (consultations), public discussions (dialogues) and, since 2012, receiving petitions with proposals to the Commission ( EBI / ECI ).


Since 1978, the Commission takes into account the opinions of citizens in Euro barometer customer surveys , such as that of 2018 for the future of Europe / Future of Europe (including "climate change") .

Aarhus Convention

In the international treaty of the Aarhus Convention (2003), public participation in environmental matters was decided for the first time and then implemented in the European Directive 2003/35 / EC and in national legislation. It assigns environmental protection rights to every person.

Thus, in 2006, in Germany , as an implementation of this EU directive, the right to information , the opportunity to express themselves and the extended access to courts arose . Details are regulated by the Public Participation Act , the Environmental Information Act , the environmental impact assessment, etc. a.
Since the European Law Amendment Act construction of 2,004 public participation in the German planning law for the European Directive 2003/35 / EC as "public participation" (is English public participation ), respectively. This term has not caught on in municipal practice; Citizen participation is still used here.
Barroso Commission

Under the Barroso Commission (2004-14), debates with citizens took place in fifty-one citizens' dialogues in EU countries. A final Europe-wide event followed in Brussels with participants from all cities that had organized a debate, and with the participation of the President of the Commission, the Commissioners and representatives of the European Parliament as well as national and local politicians.

European Parliament

The aim of the “Citizens Agora” adopted by the European Parliament in 2007 was to “establish a new alliance between the European project and EU citizens by introducing a structured dialogue between European civil society (represented by professional organizations, associations or trade unions) and the Parliament ” , it should “ build a bridge between the European Parliament and European civil society ” .

The first agora took place on the 50th birthday of the EU in November 2007, as “a new platform for 'dialogue with the citizens'” . Over 400 representatives of non-governmental organizations were invited to discuss “the future of the EU” with representatives of the European institutions .

The two or three-day online opinion polls of the citizens took place within the framework of the thematic Agora encounters - on June 12th and 13th, 2008 on the subject of climate change , with around 500 invited representatives of the organizations in Brussels, with five workshops and an accompanying Agora survey and on 26, 27 and 28 January 2011 on the topic of crisis and poverty: poverty and exclusion of older EU citizens , with members of the European Parliament, members of the Economic and Social Committee (EESC) and members of non-governmental organizations as representatives of organized civil society. Before that, preparatory talks with invited groups of citizens took place in two thirds of the Member States . On January 26th, 27th and 28th there was a “ consensus conference ” in Brussels, with one or more participants from each member state - “an opportunity to exchange their personal experiences” and other participants who are interested in the Citizens' Agora To make recommendations . The discussions and recommendations formulated at the consensus conference were summarized in a report.

In the meantime, this Eurobarometer opinion poll of the EU Parliament seems to be no longer used.

European citizens 'initiative, European citizens' referendum

Since 2012, EU citizens can use the formal instrument of the European Citizens 'Initiative ( EBI , English: European Citizens' Initiative, ECI) sent a proposal to the Commission. In the Convention on the Future of Europe (2002–03), this democratic instrument of political participation in the European Union was adopted, enshrined in the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe and incorporated into the Treaty of Lisbon (2007/09). The European Commission explains the procedure on its web, where it also invites you to "take the initiative" and provides information as well as tools for registration and processing.

Introduced in April 2012, the ECI is more like a petition than a popular initiative - the first successfully organized European citizens' initiative Right2Water (German: Water is a human right! ) Had practically no consequences, as the European Commission decided. A European alliance, The ECI Campaign - For a European Citizens' Initiative that works!

A European Citizens Referendum ( EBR , English: European Citizens' referendum ECR) is some time in discussion (80 / 90s, together with EBI / ECI), which in recent times (since the 00s) leads to more concrete proposals and procedural requests . So also in the EU Convention 2002/03, with other ingredients Direct Democracy / European citizens legislation ( Direct Democracy / European Citizens' Legislation ) , were broadly endorsed and formally proposed by Caspar Einem and Maria Berger the EU Convention have been submitted.

Even after the introduction of the first steps towards the EBI / ECI, both its expansion and the introduction of the EWC / ECR remain under discussion. Finally, the calls for more direct democratic participation of the citizens of Europe find their way into the European election programs - including those of Europe Écologie Les Verts (EELV / Greens / EFA ), which in the EP elections 2019 “European, thematic, binding referendums on citizens - or parliamentary initiative and, furthermore, also support the calls for the European parliamentary initiative.

Juncker Commission

Under the Juncker Commission (2014–19), citizens' surveys were announced in the March 2017 White Paper on the Future of Europe . An online consultation on the future of Europe with twelve questions was launched in May 2018 , developed by a group of 96 citizens, which "gives citizens the opportunity to express their expectations, concerns and hopes" .

There were civil dialogue conferences held in which the Commission, the Commission members and some officials of the Commission participated, "there have been debates in the style of a town hall debate conducted in accordance with Juncker's invitation to the members of the College of Commissioners, to become politically active in the transmission of common agenda to citizens and listening to the common concerns that come from them ” .
The report on the Citizens' Dialogue and Consultation (2019) was presented to the “Heads of State and Government of the EU-27 as material for reflection” for their EUCO meeting in Sibiu on May 9, 2019.

Emmanuel Macron

Just like the Joint Report initiated by Emmanuel Macron on the European Citizens' Consultations , which took place from April to October 2018 at national level as public debates or in other formats.

Von der Leyen Commission - Conference on the Future of Europe

It remains to be seen whether - during the upcoming debates of the conference on the future of Europe (from February 2020 - start of phase 1 ... questions of citizen participation , according to the schedule in the "non-paper" of the French and German governments) - more participation by citizens The promise made by Ursula von der Leyen in her candidate speech emerges: “I want the citizens to have their say at a conference on the future of Europe ... [which] bring Europeans together and our young ones Giving people, civil society and the European institutions a strong voice as equal partners ... ”2

Council of Europe, INGOs

In 2009, the Conference of International Non-Governmental Organizations ( INGOs ) of the Council of Europe (CoE / CdE) adopted a code of conduct for citizen participation in the decision-making process . It describes the "participation of citizens" (en: "civil participation" ) - but understood as the participation of NGOs - at different levels in the cycle of a political process.

→ see figures on the right, as well as below: Matrix of citizen participation - participation levels and process phases (in overviews )


According to Andreas Gross and Bruno Kaufmann , the benefits of citizen participation are recognized in a growing number of nations and enshrined in law as a civil right. They also report that around half of all states worldwide allow referendums and that, compared to the previous decade, the number of national referendums has almost doubled in the last decade of the last century - most of them in Europe (248 of 405, alone 115 in Switzerland).

Referendums, popular initiatives

National referendums and popular initiatives are part of direct democracy and - in quite different views - are carried out worldwide. This is very rare in the UK, Austria, Canada and South Africa. There were up to fifteen of these participation procedures in Brazil, France, Poland and Sweden, according to a study in selected countries since 1949. They took place significantly more frequently in Denmark, Ireland, Australia and Italy (up to 72). They are used regularly in New Zealand (113) and Switzerland (584). Citizens in Germany (at the federal level, in contrast to the federal states), India, Japan and the USA have so far been excluded from these direct democratic procedures by the legislature (as of March 2013). (see list of referendums in European countries )

United States


In Oregon each year many are popular initiatives to vote . Surveys showed that many voters often did not understand exactly what they were voting on. That is why Citizens Initiative Reviews has been introduced - 24 citizens, elected by lot , deal with the contents of a popular initiative for four days and then formulate their position on a paper page, which is printed in the voting brochure.

Formats, forms, methods of citizen participation

To implement citizen participation in political decision-making and planning processes, a wide range of methods and instruments (“formats”) have been developed over the past few decades, with new ones being added continuously. Often, methods that were developed for conferences or workshops are used successfully in public participation. Each format has its individual advantages and disadvantages, so that not every procedure is automatically suitable for every objective or target group. The political-legal and socio-cultural environment also play an important role. For example, formats that are used regularly and successfully in one country can fail in another environment. Since the end of the 1990s, the use of the Internet has played an increasingly important role in citizen participation as a natural working tool today. The (de facto, de iure) obligation is also increasingly being discussed - from non-binding (still the rule today in Germany, Austria and most countries, for example) to “political” binding, which is based on a (one-off) political promise Decision-maker based, up to legally guaranteed binding force (→  political rights ).

→ in the following: overview - formats, forms, methods of citizen participation in overviews below

Benefits, problems and criticism, ways out and further development

From control to protests to more participation

The German political scientist Rainer Jogschies pointed out in 1984 in his case study Citizen Participation in Urban Planning with regard to urban land use planning that, contrary to a widespread assumption, formalized participation was not attributable to the political will to expand participation, but was introduced in the legislative process of the urban development law at that time, to act as a "restriction on the possible abuse of power " by the planners. The legal framework is therefore not necessarily conducive to democracy, since it primarily serves the "individual protective function" and thus the rule of law .

This assessment, dating back several decades, is increasingly giving way in Germany to a willingness to exchange ideas with the people. The cooperation with an interested citizenry is used both through an insight into the needs and opinions of different population groups as well as the knowledge of the local people. Communication is used to balance conflicting interests and identify stumbling blocks when planning projects.

The phenomenon of the so-called “ angry citizen ” (e.g. protests against “Stuttgart 21” ), which also occurs in Germany , indicates that in parts of German society the willingness to conflict and thus the need and the ability to defend one's own interests “against the authorities 'enforce' have increased significantly. Historically more recent models of participation such as - among many others (see formats, forms, methods of citizen participation above) the planning cell introduced by Peter Dienel in Germany in the 1970s and inspired by citizens' committees / juries - attempts (s) to counteract this. With such approaches it is increasingly criticized that it is hardly sufficient anymore to just consult a few (a few) selected people, to include them (without obligation).

In particular, the lack of (usually) rather not existing authorization (empowerment) some method results in their criticism:

“They are called arbitration, mediation, round tables, citizens' dialogue, consensus forum, dialogue day and so on. No matter what friendly terms are chosen, their common feature is that citizens and protest movements are drawn into the decision-making processes of controversial building projects and political plans - without being able to participate in the decision-making process. "

- Michael Wilk , February 2014

In the following, not (yet) or insufficiently existing processes and prerequisites are criticized - transparency , inclusion of "all" (procedures that are only open to a small group), liability, reliability, consistency (one-off procedures, usually “from above” "Used), participation also in the development of procedures and processes (" participation in participation ").

"Why are regulations so complicated and tightly structured that they almost don't allow participation? Today participation happens (only) at the community level and is limited to the fact that papers and forms are sent back and forth. The people who should have a say often do not understand the experts. In many cases, opinions and wishes are asked, but these then disappear into nothing. The risk that too many people will be disappointed is great. In principle, the initiative for a participation process lies with the public sector, which is justified by the fact that it also issues the approval at the end. "

- Workshop participant, ETHZ April 2014 (summarized)

More participation

Measures that should lead to more participation (“more participation”) and practical ways and steps to achieve this are discussed and proposed. In encounters, too, it is increasingly pointed out that these are not punctual or even restricted processes, but a broad culture.

“You have to go outside, into the city, into the communities, publicly discuss ideas and suggestions and create ways for the participation of different actors. Good examples of participation exist. Of course, people from different areas of expertise have to be involved. Instead of communication experts being employed as mediators between experts and the population, the experts themselves should learn to convey their ideas and projects directly to the layperson. It is about conducting a (real) dialogue, enabling (real) communication between those involved, forming alliances (creating and developing common ground) and including and involving the decisive people in the process. Stories (images of the future, “stories”, Amsterdam as an example) must be told in such a way that a majority of people understand them and find them good. It is important that ideas are not only expressed but also discussed. You have to do some preliminary research (do good research, obtain skills) and carry out feasibility studies to see what is possible (in a specific case). Participation is not a selective process related to specific projects and problem solving, but a culture. Means and ways have to be found to build and enable a culture of participation. "

- Workshop participant, ETHZ April 2014 (summarized)

Extended, broad, institutionalized and binding participation

The constructive role of an expanded, broad, institutionalized and binding participation (see also →  Political Rights ) is underlined by numerous authors - here is one of the examples, comparing S21 ( BW ) with NEAT ( CH ):

“Elements of direct democracy seem to make the implementation of large-scale projects (e.g. NEAT ) easier rather than more difficult, contrary to the fears commonly expressed (in Germany) (e.g. Stuttgart 21 ). Of course, it is not the referendum itself that causes this, but the compulsion for those in power to make their projects understandable to the population and to solicit support, as well as the resulting public discussion with the opponents of the project, in which must prove the respective arguments.
This compulsion is there where referendums are possible, while in the purely parliamentary system one can evade this task. "

- Gebhard Kirchgässner , January 2011

Position of the municipalities, their strengthening

Some of the individual projects for citizen participation in Germany focus (t) on the municipality as a “school of democracy”. According to Wolfgang and Mathias König , this is problematic; because with this metaphor the constitutional position of the local representative democracy is "twisted" (cf. subsidiarity ). These historical "roots" of democracy in Germany are - in contrast to the American "community idea" - demonstrably not in the commune. In terms of its constitutional and historical tradition, the sovereign character of the communal area administration is rather evidence of the subject society and not the idea of ​​a democratic civil society. Citizen participation in the municipality is characterized by a “double dual character”: First, “citizen participation” fluctuates between a purely helping understanding of participation (classic volunteer work) and a “serious” participatory claim. Secondly, the question arises, particularly with the participatory citizen participation variant, to what extent municipalities can anchor participation procedures themselves because the framework legislation is subject to the state legislature.

This is where further efforts are made to strengthen the municipalities in order to give them more tasks and competencies, including financial matters. In one - u. a. also by Karl-Martin Hentschel - proposed decentralization of decision-making powers and financial resources in Germany (as of 2014). The democratic representatives of the municipalities and the state parliaments should also be involved in an equal partnership in the negotiations on federalism reform as part of the reorganization of the state financial equalization (“Participation in processes of participation”).


Citizen participation matrix - participation levels and process phases

Source: Council of Europe , INGOs (2009) - see also: → Europe → Citizen participation in the political process and → Council of Europe, INGOs above ↑

Levels of INGO participation Phases of the political decision-making process








  • Working group or committee
  • Editing during the drafting
  • Joint decisions
  • Co-sheath
  • Strategic partnerships
  • Working groups or committee
  • Working groups or committee


  • Hearings and public forums
  • Citizens forums and future committees
  • Key contacts with the government
  • Hearings and Q&A forums
  • Expert seminars
  • Committees of involved interest groups and advisory institutions
  • Open plenary and committee meetings
  • Seminars on building capacities and competencies ( en: capacity-building)
  • Training
  • Working groups or committee
  • Seminars and advisory, deliberative forums


  • Petitions
  • Consultations online and other advisory techniques
  • Hearings and Q&A forums
  • Expert seminars
  • Committees of involved interest groups and advisory institutions
  • Open plenary and committee meetings
  • Events
  • Conferences
  • Forums
  • Seminars
  • Feedback mechanisms
  • Conferences, meetings, meetings
  • Consultations online


  • Easy and open access to information
  • Research, research
  • Campaigning and lobbying
  • Website for key information and documents
  • Open and free access to political documents
  • Website for key information and documents
  • Campaigning and lobbying
  • Webcasts
  • Input from research, research
  • Campaigning and lobbying
  • Open access to information
  • Website for access to information
  • Email notifications
  • FA
  • Public tendering process
  • Processes, procedures
  • Open access to information
  • Documentation of the findings (evidence)
  • Evaluations
  • Research studies
  • Open access to information

Overview - formats, forms, methods of citizen participation

→ on formats, forms, methods of citizen participation above ↑

NON-BINDING - u. a. also "informal", without legal anchoring, including "politically binding", decisions are reserved for the executive , legislative (additional source, reference: Nanz / Fritsche, 2012)


AUTHENTIC - "formally" de jure , with political rights guaranteed - see also empowerment ( Empowerment ) spectrum of citizen participation top ↑

Political process

other formats, forms, methods, procedures, v. a. also attendance procedures ( attendance procedures according to Nanz / Fritsche, 2012)

Political process

in Germany divided into:

Note: there are (still) referendums / referendums as well as initiatives / requests that are not (yet) guaranteed with appropriate political rights , as they are e.g. B. anchored in Switzerland:

Political forms
and attendance procedures

More forms, examples


Note: the originally participatory form can U. (size, balance of power, passivity of the members) get lost

Overview, comparison - common procedures and methods of attendance participation

(1)  Comparison, assessments by: Nanz / Fritsche, 2012, pp. 86–87.

Procedure Goal / function typical topics / context typical client / duration Number and selection of participants key actors, developers, rights holders / geographical distribution

21st Century Town Meeting Advice to decision-makers, consultation, co-decision binding decisions or feedback on questions of local development and politics
/ questions at local to national level
Municipalities, authorities
/ 1 day or one-off meeting
500–5,000 people, divided into small groups of 10–12 people
/ specific selection
/ v. a. United States
Appreciative Inquiry Influence on the public and society Development of long-term goals and measures
/ organizational or internal issues
Companies, municipalities, authorities
/ 1 day, possibly several years (usually)
10–2,000 people
/ varies, self-selection, random and targeted selection are possible
Case Western Reserve University
/ v. a. USA, UK
Citizens' opinion / planning cell Advising decision-makers, influencing public discussions concrete local or regional problems and planning tasks
/ questions at local and regional level
Local politics, local government, associations or similar actors
/ at least 4 consecutive days
100 people (4 groups of 25 people, usually)
/ random selection
Peter C. Dienel, Citizen Participation Research Center, University of Wuppertal
/ v. a. Germany, also Europe
Participatory budgeting Advice to decision-makers, consultation, civil decision Local finances (full or partial)
/ issues at local level
Local politics, local government
/ 1 day to several years
100–20,000 people
/ self-selection

/ worldwide, v. a. South America and Europe
Citizens Panel Advice to decision-makers Collection of opinions on local political issues
/ issues at the local level
Local politics, local administrations, other actors interested in regular opinion-forming
/ 3–4 times a year, a total of 3–4 years
500–2,500 people
/ random selection, recruiting if necessary
YouGov (ePanels), D : Research Institute for Public Administration Speyer
/ v. a. Great Britain, also Germany
Citizens Council Influencing public discussions, consulting, advising decision-makers concrete local problems and planning tasks
/ questions at the local level
Local politics, local government, associations
/ 2 days per citizens 'council, approx. 4 months, later a new citizens' council (with other people)
8–12 people
/ random selection
Center for Wise Democracy
/ Austria, USA
Charrette Influencing public discussions, advising decision-makers concrete local or regional problems and planning tasks
/ questions at the local level
Local politics, local government, associations or similar actors
/ at least 4 days (plus 1 day each for public preparation and follow-up), several meetings (2–4) at intervals of a few weeks are possible
No specifications, the more people involved, the more representative the results
/ self-selection, and also targeted selection (possibly with recruiting)
National Charrette Institute
/ v. a. USA, also Germany
Deliberative polling Information, influencing public discussions various topics of public interest
/ questions at local to transnational level
Political decision-makers
/ 2 surveys at different times, with a 2 to 3-day phase of information transfer in between
300–500 people
/ random selection (based on certain criteria)
James S. Fishkin, Center for Deliberative Democracy
/ Worldwide, v. a. United States
Consensus conference / citizens' conference Influencing public discussions, consulting, advising decision-makers Controversial issues of public interest
/ issues at local to transnational level
/ 3-day conference, 2 preparatory meetings
10–30 people
/ random selection
Danish Technology Assessment Authority
/ v. a. Denmark, also other European countries
Mediation Influencing public discussions, consulting, advising decision-makers Controversial topics of public interest
/ questions at local to regional level (usually)
Local politics, local government, authorities or similar actors
/ 1–2 days to several years
10–100 people
/ targeted selection

/ v. a. Germany, also other European countries
National Issues Forum information Providing information on socially relevant questions, if necessary feedback for decision-makers
/ questions at the local level (usually)
Municipalities, educational institutions
/ 1–2 days
10–20 people
/ self-selection
National Issues Forums Institute
Open space conference Influence on the public and society Collection of ideas and suggestions on various topics
/ questions on local to transnational level, organizational or internal issues
Administrations, authorities, associations, churches, educational institutions, companies etc.
/ 1–5 days
20–2,000 people
/ self-selection
Harrison Owen
/ worldwide, v. a. USA, Germany
Planning for Real Influence on the public and society, consultation concrete local or regional problems and planning tasks
/ questions at local to regional level
Local politics, local government, associations or similar actors
/ several events over a period of several weeks
/ self-selection
Tony Gibson, Neighborhood Initiatives Foundation, D : Technologie-Netzwerk Berlin e. V.
/ v. a. Great Britain, but also Germany
Scenario workshop / scenario conference Influencing the public and society, advising decision-makers Anticipating future developments and deriving recommendations in relation to various topics
/ questions at local to transnational level, organizational or internal issues
Administrations, authorities, associations, churches, educational institutions, companies etc.
/ 1- to 3-day block event or several meetings
25–30 people per group, several groups can work in parallel
/ targeted selection

/ v. a. Europe
World Café Influence on the public and society Versatile
/ questions at local to transnational level, organizational or company-internal questions
Administrations, authorities, associations, churches, educational institutions, companies, etc.
/ several discussion rounds of 20–30 minutes
12–1,200 people
/ self-selection
Conversation Café
/ v. a. USA, Great Britain, also other European countries
Future conference Influencing the public and society, advising decision-makers Anticipating future developments, deriving recommendations in relation to various topics
/ organizational or internal issues, including issues at the local level
Authorities, municipalities, associations, companies, etc.
/ 2–3 days
64 (36, 49, 81) people
/ targeted selection

/ v. a. USA, Great Britain, also Germany
Future workshop Influencing the public and society, advising decision-makers Anticipating future developments, deriving recommendations in relation to various topics
/ organizational or internal issues, including issues at the local level
Authorities, municipalities, associations, companies, etc.
/ 2–3 days
5–200 people
/ self-selection (within a natural group)
Robert Jungk, Robert Jungk library for future issues
/ German-speaking countries (=  AD ), especially Austria




  • Maarten Hajer, Susan van 't Klooster, Jantine Grijzen (Eds.): Strong Stories: How the Dutch are Reinventing Spatial Planning, Design and Politics No. 3 , Verlag 010, Rotterdam 2010, ISBN 978-90-6450-734-2 .

Web links

Articles, publications


Individual evidence

  1. ^ Martin A. Nowak: Five rules for the evolution of cooperation . In: Science . tape 314 , no. 5805 , December 8, 2006, p. 1560–1563 , doi : 10.1126 / science.1133755 , PMC 3279745 (free full text).
  2. Homepage. BürgerEnergie Jena eG, accessed on December 15, 2018 .
  3. 2016/2017: Participation in the gas and electricity networks of the city of Mörfelden-Walldorf. BürgerEnergieRheinMain eG, accessed on December 15, 2018 .
  4. a b Energy transition from below - The Strompiratin . In: July 21, 2013, accessed December 15, 2018 .
  5. Research Center for Citizens' Participation and Direct Democracy: , Philipps University of Marburg (but in newer approaches you are already further there)
  6. ^ Claudine Nierth: Can participatory citizen participation and referendums complement each other sensibly? (PDF) Retrieved March 9, 2019 . . Posted in Participatory Democracy vs. direct democracy. In: Guide to civil society . Foundation for cooperation , September 8, 2012, accessed on March 9, 2019 (eNewsletter 18/2012).
  7. More democracy in the alliance of diverse democracy , Susanne Socher, Claudine Nierth, Mehr Demokratie , mdmagazin 02/18.
  8. “… What is called Swiss political culture… is deeply connected to citizen participation. Direct democracy relies ... on the participation and competence of the citizens. [It] can only work if the citizens have the appropriate skills to ... politicize. … The common sense is a resource found in most people - sociologists agree on that. The political culture of Switzerland, whose institutions are anchored in citizenship [the "militia system"], is a special case. Many of Switzerland's advantages are related to this system. ... Take a movement like Pegida in Dresden or the citizens' protests in connection with the renovation of the train station in Stuttgart: Our system based on the participation and politicization of citizens would have caused such unease much earlier, the interests of the citizens would have been included earlier. It is no coincidence that we do not have a broad Pegida movement. ... But: Our system has come under pressure. The ultra-modern civilization we live in today calls into question all of the things that make Switzerland what it is. The “militia principle” is one of them. Reform may or may not work. I hope so, but I am skeptical. ... The discussion about it is important: What holds us together as a society? What does direct democracy mean to us? ”- Georg Kohler : Direct democracy has to be more than an outlet . Der Bund / Newsnet , January 14, 2015.
  9. a b c d e strategies and planning instruments for polycentric urban regions. Case studies Amsterdam and Zurich , ETH- NSL Symposium, Professorship for Architecture and Urban Development Prof. Kees Christiaanse , Institute for Urban Development, ETH Zurich , April 4, 2014 - from the workshop discussions, in particular:
    • Workshop on future images for polycentric urban regions and
    • Workshop on Working out the future development of the polycentric urban regions together: participation and identity
  10. ^ Fabian Reidinger: Direct democracy and citizen participation: two sides of the same coin ., July 4, 2013.
  11. a b c Uwe Serdäne , Yanina Welp: Direct Democracy Upside Down (PDF on, Taiwan Journal of Democracy 01/08, July 2012, pp. 69–92.
  12. a b Serdülle, Uwe and Welp, Yanina (2012) Direct Democracy Upside Down, Taiwan Journal of Democracy, 8 (1), 69-92 , commentary, summary of November 13, 2011, on Uwe Serdäne's blog , uweserdult.wordpress .com
  13. Serdält / Welp (2002), pp. 70ff
  14. Serdält / Welp (2002), p. 76.
  15. a b Andreas Gross, Bruno Kaufmann: IRI Europe Country Index on People's Legislation 2002. A design and rating report on direct democratic procedures and practices in 32 European countries . ( Memento of August 8, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF; 145 kB) Amsterdam 2002, p. 13, quoted from Helge Batt: Direct Democracy. (PDF; 4.1 MB) Direct democracy in international comparison. In: APuZ (10/2006). Federal Agency for Civic Education, March 6, 2006, pp. 10–17 , accessed on August 1, 2014 .
  16. a b c ( International Association for Public Participation 2006: 35 ( Memento of August 4, 2009 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF)) quoted from Mariska Wouters, Ned Hardie-Boys, Carla Wilson: Evaluating public input in National Park Management Plan reviews . (PDF; 415 kB) Facilitators and barriers to meaningful participation in statutory processes. In: Science for conservation 308. Publishing Team, Department of Conservation, Wellington, New Zealand , May 2011, p. 17 , accessed June 17, 2014 (English, ISBN 978-0-478-14872-5 ). - This publication was published in three parts: 1 (PDF) 2 (PDF) and 3 (PDF)
  17. ^ Georg Kreis , Andreas Suter : Democracy. In: Historical Lexicon of Switzerland .
  18. Christiane Bender , Elmar Wiesendahl : “Iron Law of the Oligarchy”: Is Democracy Possible? (PDF; 1.5 MB) In: From Politics and Contemporary History (APuZ), Volume 61, 44-45 / 2011. Federal Agency for Civic Education ( bpb ), October 31, 2011, pp. 19-24 , accessed on February 16, 2015 .
  19. Concept positively received - citizens become co-owners of the city's networks. FNP , December 2, 2016, accessed December 5, 2018 .
  20. a b c Notes and recommendations on citizen participation in local politics , Association of Cities Baden-Württemberg : AG Citizens Participation, vhw - Federal Association for Housing and Urban Development e. V., June 25, 2012 (PDF; 3.64 MB, 62 pages)
  21. ^ A b Christian Waldhoff : The financial reserve. (PDF; 123 kB) In: Perspectives and Limits “Direct Democracy”. Ralf Thomas Baus, Tobias Monday, December 19, 2012, pp. 71 - 78 , accessed on January 27, 2020 .
  22. Thomas Prorok, Karoline Mitterer, Nikola Hochholdinger, Anita Haindl: Structure, control and financing of communal tasks in urban regions. (PDF; 2.03 MB) Austrian Association of Cities 2013 - final report. KDZ - Center for Administrative Research , May 13, 2013, accessed December 15, 2015 (page 76).
  23. Patrick Hudson: Implementing a safety culture in a major multi-national . In: Safety Science . tape 45 , no. 6 , July 2007, p. 697-722 , doi : 10.1016 / j.ssci.2007.04.005 ( [PDF; 832 kB ]). HSE Culture Ladder (en. HSE Culture ladder, "Hudson Ladder" )
  24. Marcus Bloser: Crisis Communication in Participation Processes . (PDF; 2.73 MB) In: eNewsletter 04/2015. Citizen Participation Network, December 14, 2015, accessed on December 18, 2015 (“Hudson Ladder” in participation processes).
  25. a b c d direct democracy in the broader (and narrower) sense. In: Silvano Möckli : Direct Democracy - A comparison of the institutions and procedures in Switzerland and California, taking into account France, Italy, Denmark, Ireland, Austria, Liechtenstein and Australia , Paul Haupt , Bern, Stuttgart, Vienna, 1994, ISBN 3 -258-04937-8 .
  26. ^ BürgerEnergie Jena eG: Participation in the municipal utilities. Netzwerk Energiewende Jetzt eV, accessed on December 15, 2018 .
  27. BürgerEnergieRheinMain eG participates in the electricity and gas network in Mörfelden-Walldorf. Netzwerk Energiewende Jetzt eV, April 2017, accessed on December 15, 2018 .
  28. Vattenfall is fighting for the power grid - will Berlin's energy policy fail in court? September 20, 2018, accessed December 15, 2018 .
  29. New ways for political participation Böckler Impuls 20/2008.
  30. fast, usage: Swiss. Duden, accessed on February 10, 2014 : "Quotation: meaning - moving quickly, quickly"
  31. a b c Hans Geser : Democracy or Efficiency? Compliance with rules or closeness to citizens? The municipal administration in the field of tension between contradicting goal orientations . In: Swiss Community Studies, Sociological Institute of the University of Zurich. November 1998, accessed February 6, 2014 .
  32. (Paragraph 2, § 1, PartG): § 1 Constitutional position and tasks of the parties. Retrieved April 7, 2014 .
  33. a b theses on the further development of local democracy. (PDF; 43 kB) Main Committee of the German Association of Cities, November 7, 2013, accessed on April 2, 2014 . from theses on the further development of local democracy. German Association of Cities: Seeing citizen participation as an opportunity - promoting vibrant local democracy. In: press releases. German Association of Cities, Berlin, November 22, 2013, accessed on April 2, 2014 .
  34. ^ Pia Schellhammer: Third interim report and final report of the Enquete Commission 16/2 "Citizen Participation". (PDF; 1.4 MB) State Parliament Rhineland-Palatinate, printed matter 16/4444. State Parliament of Rhineland-Palatinate, January 15, 2015, accessed on February 8, 2015 .
  35. ^ Norbert Herriger: Empowerment Map: Discourses, Normative Framing, Criticism. In: APuZ. "From politics and contemporary history" - the supplement to the weekly newspaper "Das Parlament" - is published by the Federal Agency for Civic Education. Federal Agency for Civic Education ( bpb ), March 18, 2014, accessed on October 5, 2014 .
  36. The German-speaking Community plays an important role on Tuesday's front pages and in the editorials, namely with its citizens' assembly. In: The press review from Tuesday, February 26, 2019 , BRF , February 26, 2019.
  37. a b (en) German-speaking Community of Belgium becomes world's first region with permanent citizen participation drafted by lot - Ambitious model for innovating democracy designed by G1000 , G1000 / Foundation for Future Generations , February 26, 2019.
  38. G1000 - Platform for Democratic Innovation - The Path of the G1000 , 2010–2012,
  39. Why and how citizens 'councils work with lottery , Anne Dänner, Roman Huber, Citizens' Council Democracy / More Democracy , 2019 (PDF undated)
  40. (en) Smart City Network , on the Smart Aarhus web ,
  41. a b (en) AU Smart Cities , on the web of Aarhus University ,
  42. a b (en) Tomorrow's Cities are Digital and Human - Smart City methods: from ideas to action - Case examples , Ministry of Housing, City and Country, Denmark 2015, on the Ministry's website,
  43. (en) Smart Aarhus ,
  44. James S. Fishkin, Roger Jowell, Robert C. Luskin: Considered Opinions: Deliberative Polling in Britain. In: British Journal of Political Science 32. 2002, pp. 455-487.
  45. Citizens' petition database. Institute for Democracy and Participation Research (IDPF) at the Bergische Universität Wuppertal, accessed on February 19, 2020 .
  46. ^ BW investment landscape. University of Stuttgart, accessed on February 25, 2020 .
  47. Remer, Uwe; Cousin, Angelika; Seitz, Rosa: Summary of the results of the database doalog-oriented participation procedures. Institute for Social Sciences at the University of Stuttgart, accessed on February 18, 2020 .
  48. ↑ A culture of participation in integrated urban development. (PDF; 202 kB) Working paper of the civic participation working group of the German Association of Cities. German Association of Cities, Berlin, April 2013, p. 21 , accessed on January 25, 2020 .
  49. Municipal guidelines for citizen participation. In: Citizen Participation Network. Foundation for cooperation , accessed on January 25, 2020 .
  50. Handbook for good public participation Planning of major projects in the transport sector. Berlin 2014. See also: Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure: Manual for Good Public Participation - Planning of major projects in the transport sector ; both accessed on January 25, 2020.
  51. Nobert Portz: Dispute over flight routes: BVerwG advises more citizen participation in major projects. Citizen participation. German Association of Towns and Municipalities V., August 16, 2012, retrieved on July 9, 2014 : “The Federal Administrative Court endorses the theses drawn up and thus resolved by the DStGB for the 4th German Construction Court Day. There, the DStGB ( thesis 4 ) had called for greater involvement of the citizens and the affected communities, especially in the case of large-scale construction projects. “ Both links can no longer be resolved, tried 2020-01-25
  52. Law to improve public participation and standardization of plan approval procedures (PlVereinhG). Basic information about the process. In: Documentation and Information System. German Bundestag, June 7, 2013, accessed on January 25, 2020 (The link to the legal text in the Federal Law Gazette is given under Announcement . The PlVereinhG came into force on June 7, 2013. There are ongoing changes to the PlVereinhG .).
  53. ^ Working group on guidelines for citizens 'participation in Bonn: Guidelines for Citizens' Participation in Bonn. In: Council decision. Federal city of Bonn, March 27, 2014, accessed on January 25, 2020 .
  54. Citizen Participation Working Group for the development of guidelines for citizen participation for the City of Science Darmstadt: Guidelines for Citizen Participation in the City of Science Darmstadt. (PDF) So that everyone can participate. Science City Darmstadt , 2015, accessed on January 25, 2020 (The City Council adopted the guidelines for the participation of citizens in urban planning and projects on March 19, 2015).
  55. Citizens' participation statutes of the university town of Giessen - decided. University town of Gießen, accessed on January 25, 2020 (The city council of the university town of Gießen adopted the guidelines for structured public participation and a corresponding statute on Thursday, March 19, 2015. ).
  56. Civic participation. Decision and additional information. (No longer available online.) City of Görlitz, June 25, 2015, archived from the original on October 19, 2015 ; Retrieved on October 22, 2015 (On June 25, 2015 the city council passed the statute “Citizenship Participation in the City of Görlitz” (PDF; 50 kB).).
  57. Citizen participation. Developing the city together. City of Heidelberg, accessed on January 25, 2020 .
  58. Guidelines for active public participation in Heilbronn ; accessed on January 25, 2020.
  59. Citizen participation. Concept for systematic public participation. City of Karlsruhe, April 24, 2012, accessed on January 25, 2020 ( On April 24, 2012, the Karlsruhe municipal council adopted a concept for systematic public participation (PDF; 254 kB).).
  60. Public participation. State capital Kiel, August 22, 2013, accessed on January 25, 2020 (The council meeting of the state capital Kiel decided on the so-called key issues paper on the citizens' municipality on August 22, 2013 ).
  61. ^ Landau way of citizen participation. Guideline for citizen participation in Landau in the Palatinate. Landau in der Pfalz, May 21, 2015, accessed on January 25, 2020 (On June 23, 2015, the Landau City Council unanimously adopted the guideline for citizen participation in Landau in the Palatinate (PDF; 350 kB).).
  62. Guidelines on Citizen Participation. City of Leipzig , July 18, 2012, accessed on January 25, 2020 .
  63. Citizen participation in Nürtingen. (PDF; 1 MB) Version 6 final version; As of 07/31/13. In: AG Citizens' Participation. City of Nürtingen, July 13, 2014, accessed on January 25, 2020 (The final version of this concept was approved by the City Council on July 23, 2013. - Participation platform of the City of Nürtingen ).
  64. Guideline Citizen Participation Pforzheim. (PDF) Informal opportunities for public participation in Pforzheim. City of Pforzheim, Urban Planning + Communication, February 26, 2014, accessed on January 25, 2020 (The guideline for citizen participation in Pforzheim was adopted (unanimously) by the municipal council on April 1, 2014).
  65. Citizen participation. - Get involved in the political decision-making process. City of Soest, accessed on January 27, 2020 (On June 17, 2015, the City Council adopted the guidelines for citizen participation at the Soest city administration (PDF; 136 kB).).
  66. Rules of the game for citizen participation in Überlingen. Eight steps to citizen participation. (No longer available online.) Überlingen am Bodensee, May 27, 2015, archived from the original on June 9, 2015 ; Retrieved on October 23, 2015 (In its meeting on May 13, 2015, the municipal council unanimously decided on eight concrete steps for public participation . (PDF; 118 kB)).
  67. Statute for the continuation of citizen participation (Citizen Participation Statute). (PDF; 46 kB) Weyarn City Council , July 4, 2013, accessed on January 27, 2020 ( Weyarner Weg der Bürgerbeteiligung ).
  68. ^ City of Wolfsburg: Concept Citizens with Effect Wolfsburg. In: Council decision. Federal City of Wolfsburg, March 18, 2015, accessed on January 27, 2020 .
  69. Press release City of Wuppertal: Panagiotis Paschalis elected as new head of department March 9, 2015, accessed on November 25, 2019.
  70. Mehr Demokratie, Thorsten Sterk: Making citizen participation part of everyday life June 23, 2016; accessed on November 25, 2019.
  71. ^ Wuppertaler Rundschau : "Common rules of the game" February 22, 2016; accessed on November 25, 2019.
  72. ^ City of Wuppertal: Guidelines for Citizen Participation in Wuppertal ; accessed on November 25, 2019.
  73. Markus Deggerich: Troubled Relationship In Spiegel Online February 18, 2017, accessed on November 25, 2019.
  74. ^ District of Göppingen: Citizens' participation in the district of Göppingen ; accessed on January 25, 2020.
  75. Marburg-Biedenkopf district: participation concept ; accessed on January 25, 2020.
  76. a b c Uwe Serdäne: Protocol. (PDF; 512 kB) (No longer available online.) In: 21st meeting of the Enquete Commission 16/2 “Citizen Participation” - public meeting. Landtag Rhineland-Palatinate, December 6, 2013, p. 5 , archived from the original on March 2, 2014 ; accessed on February 23, 2014 .
  77. Uwe Serdäne: Enquete-Commission 16/2 “Bürgerbeteiligung”, hearing on December 6, 2013. (PDF; 214 kB) In: Submission 16 / 2-253 (written statement). State Parliament of Rhineland-Palatinate, December 6, 2013, p. 4 , accessed on February 25, 2014 . From templates of the Study Commission 16/2 , Phase 3: Participation procedure
  78. "Understanding what citizen participation means" Three questions for Marie Hoppe (Interview) In: mitarbeiten (3/2015) - Information from the Foundation for Cooperation. Foundation Cooperation, October 2015; accessed on November 25, 2019.
  80. ^ Citizens 'report on democracy: The recommendations of the Citizens' Council in Leipzig , 13./14. and 27./28. September 2019 , editors nexus Institut: Christine von Blanckenburg, Nicolas Bach, Leonie Hasselberg, Ina Metzner, Uta Zetek, Mehr Demokratie , October 2019.
  81. Initiative for more democracy: “Citizens' Council” makes recommendations. In: Tagesschau . November 15, 2019, accessed April 30, 2020 .
  83. Overview of the votes since 2001: (en, ga) Previous referendums / Reifrinn roimhe seo , Referendum Commission / An Choimisiúin Reifrinn ,
  84. ^ Referendums in Ireland. An overview , Daniel Alexander Davis, More Democracy , January 21, 2016.
  85. ^ Citizens' Assemblies in Ireland , Rebecca Hauschild, Mehr Demokratie , Nov. 3, 2017.
  86. a b (en. Ga) Convention on the Constitution - What was the Constitutional Convention? / Topics, recommendations and outcomes / How did the Constitutional Convention work? / Further information , on Citizens' Information , Web of the Citizens Information Board of the Irish Government (en. Ga)
  87. a b (en) Convention on the Constitution / An Coinbhinsiún ar an mBunreacht , (archive)
  88. a b On the trail of a democracy experiment , Roman Huber, Mehr Demokratie , April 16, 2019.
  89. a b (en. Ga) Citizens' Assembly - Citizens' Assembly / What was the Citizens' Assembly? / Issues for the Assembly / Members of the Citizens 'Assembly / How the Assembly worked / Further information , on Citizens' Information , Web des Citizens Information Board of the Irish Government (en. Ga)
  90. (en, ga) Citizens' Assembly / An Thionól na Saoránach ,
  91. Constitutional Referendum in Ireland: Liberalization of the Right to Abortion , Charlie Rutz, Mehr Demokratie , May 28, 2018.
  92. a b c d e Strong Stories: How the Dutch are Reinventing Spatial Planning, Design and Politics No. 3 , by Maarten Hajer, Susan van 't Klooster, Jantine Grijzen (editor), 010 (publisher), Rotterdam 2010, ISBN 978-90-6450-734-2 .
  93. a b c d e f g Paul Schneeberger: Participation instead of legal recourse in spatial development - In Switzerland, legalization is the reaction to the increase in people and buildings. Approaches from the Netherlands make it clear that it can also work the other way around. NZZ April 23, 2014.
  94. (en) Amsterdam Smart City ( - Topics: Infrastructure & Technology, Energy & Water & Waste, Mobility, Circular-City, Governance & Education, Citizens & Living, Smart City Academy
  95. (en) Amsterdam Smart City - Smart Stories , April 2011, online publication on
  96. (en) Amsterdam Smart City - Smart Stories , 2009–2011, video (4 min) and other amsterdamsmartcity videos on
  97. Participation and Sustainable Development Europe. Ministry of Life initiative. Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management , accessed on December 9, 2013 .
  98. Elaboration of guidelines for citizen participation. Resolution of the Graz municipal council. (No longer available online.) State capital Graz, May 15, 2014, archived from the original on July 14, 2014 ; accessed on July 4, 2014 (The test phase of the guidelines (PDF 638 kB) begins in autumn 2014 and lasts for one year.).
  99. Kerstin Arbter et al .: Handbook of Citizen Participation for the State and Municipalities . Ed .: Office of the Vorarlberg State Government; Office for future issues. Vienna, Bregenz 2010, ISBN 978-3-9502002-3-2 ( [PDF; 7,8 MB ; accessed on March 9, 2019]). Accessible through citizens' councils in Vorarlberg - democracy thrives on participation., accessed on March 9, 2019 .
  100. Participation practice book. (PDF; 14.47 MB) Developing the city together. In: Workshop report no. 127. Magistrat der Stadt Wien , Magistratsabteilung 18 - Urban Development and Urban Planning, 2012, accessed on December 8, 2013 ( ISBN 978-3-902576-64-4 ).
  101. Manfred Hellrigl: Activity report of the Federal Council. (PDF; 4 MB) In: Parliamentary Directorate of the Federal Council. Republic of Austria, June 2013, pp. 12-14 , accessed on July 27, 2014 : “The country is committed to direct democracy in the form of referendums, referendums and referendums and also promotes other forms of participatory democracy. (Art. 1 (4), LGBl. No. 7 / April 11, 2013) "
  102. Guideline of the Vorarlberg state government for the convening and implementation of citizens' councils. (PDF; 107 kB) (No longer available online.), January 31, 2013, archived from the original on August 12, 2014 ; accessed on July 27, 2014 .
  103. a b
  104. ^ A b Andreas Kley : Political rights. In: Historical Lexicon of Switzerland .
  105. ^ Rainer J. Schweizer , Ulrich Zelger : Föderalismus. In: Historical Lexicon of Switzerland .
  106. ^ Pietro Morandi : Concordance Democracy. In: Historical Lexicon of Switzerland .
  107. ^ Andreas Gross : People's rights. In: Historical Lexicon of Switzerland .
  108. ^ Silvano Moeckli : Political will formation. In: Historical Lexicon of Switzerland .
  109. ^ Thomas Maissen , Andreas Kley : Sovereignty. In: Historical Lexicon of Switzerland .
  110. Hans-Urs Wili : Consultation procedure. In: Historical Lexicon of Switzerland .
  111. Democracy in daily practice in Switzerland: basic elements, processes, connections - overview, practice, history, development , Vladimir Rott, Basis for discussion for more democracy (undated, with references to HLS )
  112. Maximilian Stern: Citizen participation in large-scale projects a la Switzerland: If everyone thinks of themselves, everyone is thought of. (No longer available online.) In: Cicero. New Responsibility Foundation , April 4, 2012, archived from the original on January 3, 2014 ; Retrieved December 20, 2013 .
  113. Peter Füglistaler: 20 years of the NEAT vote ( memento from July 18, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) , BAV -News, No. 3, September 2012.
  114. a b Gebhard Kirchgässner : Instructive contrast between “Stuttgart 21” and Neat - Direct Democracy seems to make it easier to carry out major projects , NZZ , January 12, 2011.
  115. [ The PubliForum in brief ( Memento from June 28, 2007 in the Internet Archive )] , Federal Office of Public Health FOPH, on , originally on
  116. Regional participation ( memento of July 25, 2018 in the Internet Archive ) , Federal Office of Energy SFOE, on
  119. Dialog Chur West ( memento from January 15, 2015 in the Internet Archive ) on the city of Chur's web,
  120. - Neugasse Zurich: Together expand a part of the city , the project site of the SBB
  121. Dorothee Vögeli: The SBB only want to plan with the population - unlike the Europaallee , the SBB involved the population from the start when developing the Neugasse area in Zurich-West. The participatory approach is now to be implemented across Switzerland. NZZ , December 4, 2017.
  122. Participation: Is this just an alibi exercise? - In more and more districts, the residents can not only vote, but also have a say. With different experiences , Barbara Achermann, Zeit Online , September 23, 2019.
  123. (fr) Démarche participative (participatory process) , City of Neuchâtel / Neuchâtel , on
  124. (fr) Jeunes-Rives - Démarche Participative Ville de Neuchâtel, Center et Gare , City of Neuchâtel / Neuchâtel , on
  125. (fr) Jeunes-Rives - Démarche Participative Ville de Neuchâtel, Center et Rives , City of Neuchâtel / Neuchâtel , on
  126. (fr) Large soutien au réaménagement des Jeunes-Rives à Neuchâtel (broad support for the rehabilitation of the Jeunes-Rives in Neuchâtel) , RTS Info , December 10, 2014.
  127. Andrea Kucera: Neuchâtel is looking for a connection to the lake - every redesign of the lake promenade in Neuchâtel since the Expo has failed - now people are relying on participation. And lo and behold: the population is moving along. At least for now. NZZ , December 10, 2014.
  128. ^ A b c André Müller, Daniel Fritzsche: Zurich is building the digital switch - and is facing radical administrative reform - the city wants to use digital technologies to communicate better and more efficiently with its residents. In order to become a real “Smart City”, Zurich has to go much further, demands an expert , NZZ 25 July 2018.
  129. Christine Seidler , local councilor, since 2003, on
  130. ^ Jean-Daniel Strub , local council, since 2008, on
  131. Christine Seidler, Jean-Daniel Strub: Framework credit to strengthen the participation of the neighborhoods in urban development - Postulate (2018) and Motion (2017, conversion into Postulate)
  132. The City Council of Zurich ( Corine Mauch , Claudia Cuche-Curti) to the City Council: Motion by Christine Seidler and Jean-Daniel Strub regarding a framework credit to strengthen the participation of the neighborhoods in urban development - rejection, acceptance as a postulate , February 7, 2018, therein Internal Research - Participatory Budgeting: Clarifications and evaluations of the Motions Draft Strub / Seidler, 1st summary, 2nd research in detail, 3rd evaluation of Participatory Budgeting, 4th appendices , left, August 16, 2017.
  133. Pirmin Meyer , local council, since 2017, on
  134. Shaibal Roy , local council, since 2014, on
  135. Pirmin Meyer, Shaibal Roy: Pilot project for a conversion of the space under the Hardbrücke to a pedestrian zone and promenade during the summer months , Postulate (2017)
  136. Thurgauerstrasse ( Memento of the original from July 26, 2018 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. on the web of the building construction department of the city of Zurich, (> Development Areas > Leutschenbach> Projects planned> Thurgauerstrasse)
  137. Stefan Hotz: The district on Thurgauerstrasse wants to have a say - IG Grubenacker expresses criticism of the city of Zurich's plans for a large-scale development in Zurich North in a manifesto. The residents are demanding a say and are against the construction of high-rise buildings , NZZ , June 22, 2018.
  138. Florian Schoop: It's still idyllic in this quarter in the north of Zurich, but the residents are afraid of conditions like in French banlieues , NZZ March 14, 2018.
  139. The democratic foundations of the Just City , Oliver Dlabac ( ZDA / UZH ), Daniel Kübler ( FHNW ), Juliet Carpenter ( Oxford Brookes University ), Roman Zwicky ( ZDA / UZH ), SNSF - Research project 2017–2020, with subsequent publication
  141. edited using own notes and discussions, -
  144. ^ Sarah Lechmann: Manifesto for Digital Democracy , News, November 19, 2017, on
  145. , on
  146. (en) Citizens' Assembly of Scotland , News, Scottish Government, 14 June 2019,
  147. (en) Scottish Government reveal cost of Citizen's Assembly and how money will be spent , The National , October 24, 2019.
  148. (en) Scottish Citizens' Assembly's gathers for first weekend , Judith Duffy, The National , October 27, 2019.
  149. (en) Citizens' Assembly to lay out vision of Scotland's future , Judith Duffy, The National , December 1, 2019.
  150. (en) Citizens' Assembly , on the 20th Anniversary Web of the Parliament of Wales, (en, cy)
  151. (en) National Assembly for Wales - Citizens' Assembly: Full Report , July 2019 (PDF, 5.26 MB), on the web of the 20th anniversary of the Parliament of Wales, (en, cy)
  152. (en) Wales' first Citizens' Assembly reports back - "We see a lot of arguments and negativity in politics on the news but the Citizens' Assembly was completely different." 27 September 2019, on the web of the Parliament of Wales, assembly. wales (en, cy)
  153. a b c Code of Good Practice for Civil Participation in the Decision-Making Process. Background. In: Conference of INGOs (international non-governmental organizations). Council of Europe, October 1, 2009, accessed August 6, 2015 . (German: Code of conduct for citizen participation in the decision-making process , (PDF 118 kB)) as "Recommendation (2007) 14 German" (Link) in Legal standards for Non-Governmental Organizations
  155. (en) European Commission> ...> Public Opinion> Eurobarometer Interactive> Future of Europe (including "Climate change") , October – November 2018, on the Commission's web
  156. Public Participation Act. Law on public participation in environmental matters according to EC Directive 2003/35 / EC. (No longer available online.) In: Federal Law Gazette 2006 Volume 1 No. 58. Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB), December 14, 2006, archived from the original on April 8, 2014 ; accessed on April 4, 2014 : Ҥ 9 Public participation. (Paragraph 1) The competent authority must involve the public in relation to the environmental impact of the project. The public concerned will be given the opportunity to express their views as part of the participation. "
  157. Britta D. Siefken: The so-called Public Information Directive 2003/35 / EG and its implementation in national law. In: Info-Point Europe - Hamburg's gateway to the European Union. Europa-Union Hamburg e. V., July 2005, accessed April 4, 2014 .
  158. (en) European Commission> Debate on the future of Europe> Calendar of citizens 'dialogues Citizens' Dialogues across the EU - Over a period of 1 and a half years, the European Commission reached out to citizens by visiting towns across Europe and asking them directly for their views , archived on 15/12/14,
  159. (en) Citizens' Dialogues as a Contribution to Developing a European Public Space - Report from the European Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions , European Union, 2014, on the web the Commission
  160. 'Agora' aims to close the gap between citizens and the EU , , Nov. 7, 2007 / May 28, 2012.
  161. a b no longer in operation: Bürger-Agora / Forum Agora (en / fr / de / it) on the web of the EU Parliament,
  162. Execution of the European Parliament's budget for 2007. (PDF; 212 kB) Transfer request C16 - financial year 2007. In: Directorate-General for Internal Policies to the Committee on Budgets. European Parliament, September 24, 2007, pp. 4 - 7 , accessed on May 12, 2014 (document CM \ 686272EN.doc).
  163. a b Agora. Select section below: The role of the agora and how it works . (No longer available online.) In: Service. European Parliament, archived from the original on January 8, 2016 ; Retrieved on January 6, 2016 (multilingual, no information on the date of publication or the latest version of the website).
  164. ^ A b Citizens' Agora on Climate Change , CIPRA, April 30, 2008.
  165. a b Poverty and Exclusion of Older EU Citizens , European Parliament / Eurobarometer, January 2011.
  166. The European Citizens' Initiative - Official Register - Take the Initiative , European Commission,
  167. Silke Wettach: Desire without consequences. EUROPE. First EU citizens' initiative ends without consequences. In: The Parliament, No. 13-14. German Bundestag, March 24, 2014, accessed April 20, 2014 .
  168. (en) For a European Citizens' Initiative | The ECI Campaign - For a European Citizens' Initiative that works!
  169. conference ... in mid-September ... almost hundred participants from twenty countries ... After much deliberation we decided to push for two ideas: first (also the first priority), a referendum on the European constitution; and second, the introduction of far-reaching elements of direct democracy (a right of citizens 'initiative including citizens' referendums and obligatory referendums for constitutional amendments) "in: A rollercoaster ride towards democracy , June 1, 2003 (January 20, 2005, Presentation EK / EP) / A rollercoaster ride toward the ECI (on the web of Democracy International ), Michael Efler , June 1, 2003.
  170. (en) Suggestion for amendment of Article: 34a , Caspar Eine , Maria Berger , on the Commission's web,
  171. one of the reports: (en) Referenda on the EU constitution is not enough , Michael Efler , Opinion, EUobserver , 25 March 2003.
  172. Michele Morelli: La democrazia partecipativa nella governance dell'Unione europea , Giuffrè 2011, p. 56.
  173. Sven Giegold , ongoing, as well as in: EU Commission shuts out citizens from TTIP decision , September 11, 2014.
  174. (en) Vladimir Rott: Europe of all the people (handout p. 2):
    European Citizens' Convention (ECC)
    European Citizens' Convention and Constitution (ECC + C)
    European Citizens' Initiative (ECI)
    European Citizens' Referendum (ECR)
    Académie européenne dʼOtzenhausen / European Academy Otzenhausen , conference on 16./17. May 2013: Une Europe fédérale? Solidarité - subsidiarité - démocratie / A federal Europe? Solidarity - Subsidiarity - Democracy , 15ème dialogue franco-allemand - Penser lʼEurope de demain / 15th Franco-German Dialogue - Thinking Europe further
  175. (fr) “des référendums européens, thématiques, contraignants, d'initiative citoyenne ou parlementaire”. In: Ecology, immigration, institutions ... Quels sont les programs des candidats aux élections européennes? , Margaux Duguet, Franceinfo , 10 May 2019.
  176. (en) White Paper on the Future of Europe - Reflections and scenarios for the EU27 by 2025 , European Commission, 1 March 2017,
  177. (en) European Commission> EUSurvey> Consultation on the Future of Europe - Get involved in this consultation to express your concerns, hopes and expectations about the future of the EU. This is not about drafting EU rules and regulations. This is about making your voice heard by EU leaders to help them steer the right priorities for the years ahead. This questionnaire was created by a panel of citizens selected on a random basis. It complements other initiatives from the European Commission on the Future of Europe. ongoing, on the Commission's website
  178. a b c (en) Preparing the Conference on the Future of Europe , EPRS European Parliamentary Research Service, Author: Silvia Kotanidis, Members' Research Service, PE 644.202 - December 2019.
  179. (en) European Commission> About the European Commission> Get involved> Citizens 'Dialogues - Attend a free Citizens' Dialogue and influence the debate on Europe. ongoing, on the Commission's website
  180. (en) Citizens 'dialogues and citizens' consultations - Key conclusions, 30 April 2019 , European Union, 2019, on the Commission's web
  181. (en) From: Presidency, To: Delegations, Subject: Citizens 'Consultations - Joint Report on the Citizens' Consultations on behalf of the Austrian Presidency and the incoming Romanian Presidency , Council of the European Union, Brussels, 3 December 2018, data
  182. (en) Conference on the Future of Europe, Franco-German non-paper on key questions and guidelines , French and German government (November 2019?, Undated)
  183. A Union that wants to achieve more: My Agenda for Europe, From the candidate for the office of President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen - Political guidelines for the future European Commission 2019-2024 , European Commission,
  184. Leitwerk: National referenda and popular initiatives (as of March 2013) in selected countries since 1949. From: Database / Center for Research on Direct Democracy, quoted from Robby Geyer: Direct Democracy and Citizen Participation. (PDF; 642 kB) In: Topic Sheets in Classes / No. 88. Federal Agency for Civic Education / bpb, May 2013, p. 01 , accessed on June 30, 2014 .
  185. Global Forum 2018: Learning from Rome - A Review. P. 21 in: mdmagazin 01/19 , Claudine Nierth, Roman Huber, Ralf-Uwe Beck, Alexander Trennheuser, Mehr Demokratie 2019
  186. ^ Rainer B. Jogschies: Citizen participation in urban planning. Frankfurt am Main / Bern / New York / Nancy 1984, ISBN 3-8204-5351-2 , p. 13.
  187. ibid., P. 188 f.
  188. a b c d Patrizia Nanz , Miriam Fritsche: Handbook Citizen Participation: Procedures and Actors, Opportunities and Limits , bpb (Volume 1200), 2012 (PDF 1.37 MB) →  to order the printed edition at
  189. ^ Citizens' jury in the English language Wikipedia
  190. Michael Wilk in the foreword to: Michael Wilk, Bernd Sahler (ed.): Strategic integration - Of mediations, arbitrations, round tables ... and how protest movements are manipulated - Articles against participation , Verlag Edition AV, February 2014, quoted on sharp-
  191. a b c Working paper on participation - elements, processes, connections , input in the position paper of the AK Citizens' Participation of More Democracy , 2013/15
  192. based on Willy Brandt's "We want to dare more democracy."
  193. Wolfgang König, Mathias König: Anchoring citizen participation in the municipality as binding. (PDF; 456 kB) The “double dual character” of citizen participation in the municipality and its consequences. In: eNewsletter 01/2014. Citizen Participation Network, April 10, 2014, accessed on June 23, 2014 .
  194. More democracy : Working group federalism / decentralized democracy - , initiated by Karl-Martin Hentschel
  195. ^ Karl-Martin Hentschel : The municipalities first! - “More Democracy” has founded a working group for decentralized democracy. He should develop a strategy to move the municipalities to the center of democracy. Why is that so important? (PDF) md magazin 04/14, p. 8, on
  196. ^ Adrian Reinert: Jahrbuch 2005. (PDF; 7.24 MB) MITARBEIT Foundation, Bonn, 2005, accessed on April 17, 2014 : “The topic-centered interaction (TZI) is one of the most widespread group work processes today. The focus of the method is on acting in the field of tension between the individual, group, task and environment. "