1st SEMINAR IN LISBON Project phase: DIAGNOSIS Objective of the 1st seminar: describe our practices, share on WHAT

we do (describe the practices that we are involved in), and HOW we do it (Methodologies) Do not create abstract definitions on what is PARTICIPATION and PARTICIPATORY PROCESSES but start from the participatory processes that we are actually involved. Do not remain at the descriptive level of WHAT we do but move on to the HOW we do it (methodologies). In order to go deeper in the HOW we implement these processes; we will formulate questions in order to start a dialogue with our experience (to ourselves and to the participants). The questions will enable us to identify some of the elements that we think is possible to modify in order to create more participatory processes.

In order to achieve these objectives several activities have been used aiming to: Focus on ourselves as actors involved in different participatory processes. Observe an experience that has been presented as a study case Create the right spirit and motivation among the participants in order to work on the virtual platform.

DAY 1: 3rd of December Morning

Presentation of the Project
Presentation of the facilitators (in his/her own language) name, organisation, country Presentation of the participants - name, organisation, country PPP presentation of the project and reference to previous experiences. (Susana ppt) Divide participants in 3 groups (per country). Analyse the logo of the project, identity the key words and objectives.

Presentation of the working groups in plenary

Key words from the Project logo and objectives (in national groups)
Key words Impacts Together Multiply Transformation Circle Digital Dynamic Concentric Balance Expansion Opacity Goals Capacity building/ empowerment Resources development Questioning and transforming democracy Lobbying and advocacy

People Diversity Growth Citizenship Network Foundations Sustainability Red Antenna Up, down, around Tree Antenna

Learn about concrete experiences, case studies and key elements; Foundations of participation and methodology; Interdisciplinary - to learn through the experience of others; To create a network; To create our on way to do. Exchange experience on a local level Conceptualize on the term of participatory democracy Undertaking initiatives at local and regional level

Participation Raising awareness Growth Networks Direct democracy Collective procedures

Presentation of the Project scheme: components and phases

Create a visual map of the group

On a big Poster we drew a map representing the three countries. Each participant wrote on 5 different post-it the personal, professional and organisational characteristics. They put it on the map and then they compare with each other. Each time they find someone with a similar or complementary characteristic they draw a line connecting the two post-it.

Exercise: The river and the stones

Reflection in Plenary about the exercise

From the exercise crossing the river (debriefing)

Precipitation, over thinking, too many opinions, concern about (focus on) my opinion. What helped What didnt help Collective approach Negotiation Time, threat, opposition, risk, stress, challenge, Attention to different Conditions rules. profiles Support Trust Process Adaptation Communication Cooperation Learning Responsibility Safe environment Participation vs. Equity/ balance effectiveness (big Initiative group vs. small group) Organization + representation Plan Win-win

Expectations of the project and the seminar

Each participant wrote on a post it of different colour what he/she expects that: the project will bring to me, I will bring in the project, and it will bring to my organisation. They have put the post-it in the big poster (umbrella) under the specific question.

Participants wrote on different post -it the expectations they have in relation to the first seminar and they put them under the umbrella.

Ppt evaluation

DAY 2: 4th of December Morning Obstacles/ facilitators of participation

Work in 4 groups. Each group reflected on which are the obstacles and which the facilitators of participations. Presentation in plenary and debate. Facilitators and Obstacles (group work)
Facilitators Obstacles Sharing Lack of time Open to Fear (failure, acceptance, etc) environmental stimuli No instruction Motivation Individual issues Freedom Pleasure Balance Find a group Confrontation/ conflict Time Different profiles Personal needs/ Self/etero Insecurity worries/ dreams conscience Lack of communication Sense of belong Critical thinking/ different profiles Negotiation Adaptation Out In In Good communication Motivation and sense Out of responsibility in the Empathy subject Active listening Self confidence Scale and time As potential facilitator or To share a code Education obstacle Accessibility to physical information Means to participate and tools Accessibility Short process Feedback Possibility to interact and change the plan Both possible facilitators or obstacles Compromise The difference Communication Distance Network Time Engagement Resources Feeling that you can Share values and goals make it Plan Transparency Well defined goals Listen Trust Resources Team work Enough time

Questions rose from the presentation of the group work What makes it go wrong? Whats internal/ inherent vs. external? Participative methodology maybe enforcing (not free) The shape is not important Short or long term processes? Crisis/ insecurity as obstacle or opportunity? Do different profiles make collective building impossible? How to generate trust between what is different importance of individual work during participatory process. How relations of trust and power are built in the process?

Group dynamic A- observers Group Bs From the debriefing of the rules/ participation exercise

Facts, sensations, interpretation Understand the rules We solved problems Deciding on a strategy Anticipating challenges Roles distribution Leader choice first (dropped after) Spontaneous leadership No visual communication/ couldnt participate (all) Breaking the rules and be aware of it Its easiest to give the answer How strict are the rules we have? What possible scenarios Decision on who will go to the facilitator Different levels of having initiative Not enthusiastic Group B as participants of group A Rely on perception of 1 person Not happy about carrying 4 persons Impact of the leader

More cohesion after solving things together More energy when the group is united Better communication (more and more) Strategy organization, clarifying/ forming, fusion (production) High level of participation Easy flow of communication 4 more engaged, more expecting what may come Satisfaction because of task accomplishment Focus on the outcome I wanted to be a part of the group If I found the I should solve it Common Knowledge of the rules Cooperation within group A No team work within group B because of focus on task and other group What for to do this Time is important (looking for a solution).

Afternoon
Presentation of participatory practices
Participants organised the space and they have prepared the material in order to present their experience form the organisations that they work or are active in. Participants organised the way that these presentations will be done. Visit the experiences.

DAY 3: 5th of December Morning

Go deeper in the analysis of the HOW and WHY of the participatory processes.
Presentation of the study case (Felix) (ppt) Participants in groups elaborate the questions in order to establish a dialogue with the experience that Felix presented. The aim of the questions was to understand the HOW the participatory process was implemented. Four groups were created in order to go deeper in the HOW the participatory processes are implemented. Each group worked on a different topic: Who participated, in what they participated, Why they participated, for what they participated and How they participated. The following questions were elaborated by the groups. Susana: CLEAR model Lucrecia: ppt

Ideas generated on discussion about participation

Active engagement; Different meaning; Different levels & strategy; Participation, participatory democracy; Commitment, Quality criteria Does participation need a framework; Bottom up vs. top down.

How much participatory is a process? Work done in groups in the sequence of the questions presented by Lucrecia
Who participates? How does participation takes place? What for to participate? In what do ones participate? (When what part of the process)?

Elements that came out from participants practices (how)

Who Who not? People who are interested People who can contribute Context Organization of the process + power Express = Listen (ability, motivation, open act) Tools and method (adapt, appropriated, accessibility; comfortable) Culture Empowerment To change, improve attitudes, community Relations between whos Roles of him/ her: Promoter? Gender/ age/ organizations (quantitative data) Facilitator Rules Ambient Transparency Feedback about results Time To enable people to take part of To confront visions and needs

How

What for

Impact To protect Transform ideas Promote values (?) to change the way you perceive the world In what people participate Initial phase

To channel/ organize motivations To change or affect local social policies; To get access to information To create sense of belonging (be part of) Identifies the problem Common rules/ goals vision Decision process

Planning phase Priorities decision Implementation - monitoring (action) Evaluation/ follow up Other ideas - Relevant to people; - How open (flexible); - Scale, context, external factors.

DAY 5: 6th of December Morning

How we will continue?
Summarising the objectives of the project and identification of the key elements: next seminar in Barcelona, in April. Work on the virtual Platform in order to share the how of our practices, create groups of collaborative work, and identify the topics of interest in order to plan the next seminar. Presentation of the actual situation of the platform. Discussion in order to adapt the platform to the needs of the project and the participants. Create a common calendar for the following activities until the next seminar.

Evaluation of the seminar

Each participant visited the umbrella and took the Post it with the expectations stated in the first day. They said to the group if their expectations have been fulfilled or not.

They needed to know WHO PARTICIPATES in a process and what are the elements they could observe? HOW do you participate?
What participatory mechanisms do we use (informative, consultative, deliberation, representative, direct democracy)? How are the decisions taken, how do we arrive at consensus? How we organise the working groups (governance)? By project, by theme, by territorial criteria, do the territorial and thematic criteria overlap?

Is the process open to new actors (entities, organisations, persons)? Where do the resources available for the process come from (financial & human)? How do we manage them? Do we keep open different channels for participation? Do we take in consideration the different profiles of the possible participants? How do we disseminate: strategy for external communication, relations to the Media...

IN WHAT DO WE PARTICIPATE? Do we work on a theme that the people involved consider important? How did we identify this theme? Among whom? Which moment of the process have we opened to participation (identification of the problem/theme, definition of proposals, planning, monitoring, evaluation,..)? WHO PARTICIPATES? How do we identify the relevant actors? Are we sure that all actors of the community are involved? (Youth, children, seniors, immigrants..)? If we work specifically with a group, have we taken in consideration all the possible profiles of it, (educational level, socio-economic level, gender, )? Did we try to involve the political, social and administrative actors? Did we try to open the process more to the formal networks (associations) in order to arrive at the non formal one (groups, collectives, individuals)? Do we work only with people who think like us? (They are having affinities, are next- us) or do we include people that think differently? FOR WHAT DO WE PARTICIPATE? To what extent the process is influencing or tries to influence public issues? Is it increasing the capacity of influence of the citizens on the public issues? To what extent is it bringing changes at institutional, organizational and personal level? Is it generating a change of values and democratic attitudes of citizens, policies and technicians?