• No results found

Accessibility to democracy through participation -A case study of how social vulnerability and marginalisation is taken into consideration by local governments in their participatory process

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Accessibility to democracy through participation -A case study of how social vulnerability and marginalisation is taken into consideration by local governments in their participatory process"

Copied!
62
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

Örebro University

Institution of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences

Master’s Course, Sociology with a Sustainable Development Focus, 30 Credits

Accessibility to democracy through participation

A case study of how social vulnerability and marginalisation is taken into consideration by

local governments in their participatory process.

Author: Anny Mattsson anny.mattsson@gmail.com Supervisor: Sverre Wide Examiner: Rolf Lidskog Spring semester 2020

(2)

Abstract

Participation as a way to ensure equal accessibility to democracy has gained importance alongside the concept of sustainability. At the same time, it has become clear that not everyone has equal opportunity to participate in these participatory events, creating power issues that leave out the voices of certain societal groups from the political context. The purpose of this study, therefore, is to research how this issue can be solved, by looking at how local governments are working to ensure that everyone is given equal opportunity to participate when it is of relevance to them. The purpose is also to specifically research how social vulnerability and marginalisation is taken into consideration in the participatory process. The researched questions used to fulfil this purpose is: 1) How do local municipalities work to ensure equal accessibility to participatory events? 2) How is social vulnerability or marginalisation taken into consideration in the participatory process? 3) Can the strategies used by the municipality be argued to increase citizens’ accessibility to democracy? To answer these questions this study uses a case study design and a combination of two methods: interviews and text analysis. The data material consists of interviews with public officials and politicians at Örebro municipality along with the guidelines and handbooks developed by the municipality about their work with participatory events. The study concludes that Örebro municipality uses a number of different strategies that arguably enables them to have a more inclusive participatory process. They for example uses target group analysis, adapts the event to the group it concerns, take language, place of event, method of announcement into consideration and adapts the language to make the event more accessible. The study could conclude that through these strategies, along with directed efforts towards socially vulnerable and marginalised groups, the municipality appears to take these aspects in to consideration and therefore enhance the possible for more citizens to participate. The questions whether the strategies used by the municipality could increase citizens accessibility to democracy through participatory events generated a more ambivalent discussion and could not be giving a clear answer. There were aspects that to a certain degree could indicate that it was made possible through the strategies used by the municipality. But other aspect such as the ambiguity related to the purpose and definition of the participatory events contradicted this and showed that there exists a tension between wanting to enforce decisions and including citizens perspectives and input.

Keywords: participation, social vulnerability, marginalisation, municipality, local

(3)

Table of contents

1. INTRODUCTION ... 5

1.1 The aim of the thesis ... 8

1.2 Research questions ... 8

1.3 Disposition of the study ... 8

2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND ... 9

2.1 Democracy and participation ... 9

2.2 Democracy and participation in a Swedish context ... 11

2.3 Socially vulnerable and marginalised societal groups ... 13

2.4 Socially vulnerable and marginalised groups in participatory events ... 13

2.5 Knowledge gap ... 17

3. METHOD AND MATERIAL ... 18

3.1 Methodology ... 18

3.2 Case study ... 19

3.3 Text analysis ... 20

3.4 Interviews ... 21

3.5 The performance of the analysis ... 25

4. RESULT AND ANALYSIS ... 26

4.1 Participation in the context of Örebro Municipality ... 26

4.1.1 The initiation of participatory events within Örebro municipality ... 28

4.1.2 The purpose of participatory events in Örebro municipality ... 30

4.2 The identification of socially vulnerable and marginalised groups ... 31

4.3 The strategies used to ensure equal accessibility ... 37

4.3.1 The language issue ... 37

4.3.2 A flexible process ... 39

4.3.2 Continuous efforts ... 44

4.3.3 Advocacy ... 45

(4)

4.4.1 The threshold to participation ... 47

4.4.2 Forgotten groups? ... 47

4.4.3 The ambiguous dialogue ... 49

5. CONCLUSIONS ... 52

5.1 Conclusion and discussion ... 52

5.2 Future studies ... 55

6. REFERENCES ... 56

7. APPENDICES ... 59

7.1 Appendix 1 - Interview guide ... 59

7.2 Appendix 2 - Target group analysis figure ... 61

7.3 Appendix 3 – The digital survey ... 62

List of tables and figures

Table 1: List of respondents

Figure 1: Diagram used for target group analysis (Örebro municipality, 2010:13).

List of abbreviations

SKL Sveriges Kommuner och Landsting = Sweden’s municipalities and Counties SKR Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner = Sweden’s municipalities and Regional

Councils

SOU Statens Offentliga Utredningar = Swedish White Papers SCB Statistiska centralbyrån = Statistics Sweden

(5)

1. INTRODUCTION

The concept of sustainable development has had a prominent position in both the general public debate as well as on the political agenda ever since the concept was coined in the Brundtland report (Anand & Kumar, 2016:4). The sustainability concept generally includes the notion of the three pillars concerning economic, environmental and social aspects. These also represent goals that should be attained to achieve sustainable development. It is a question about achieving economic growth, protecting the environment as well as enabling social justice (Campbell, 2016:214-216). These goals are in many cases in conflict with each other and make the achievement of all three rather difficult, which means that planners often end up working towards one goal instead of all three (Campbell, 201 6:215). It has been shown by scholars such as Murphy (2012:15) that aspects concerning the social pillar and the achievement of social justice often get neglected while the economy and the environment are given focus and constant efforts. This could be attributed to the fact that the conceptual description of the social pillar is rather complex and therefore difficult to capture (Murphy, 2012:15). This leads to the social pillar being rather difficult to measure and work with.

It has been made clear from international organisations working with sustainable development that in order to create any actual change toward the achievement of sustainable development enormous efforts from all individuals all over the world is needed.1 Most of the problems and

issues we are experiencing are human-made and the result of human desires, it is, therefore, human actions that are needed to change them (Meadowcroft, Langhelle & Ruud, 2012:6). At the same time resources are disturbed unequally to people around the world and different contexts are more exposed to the consequences of the current development. All individuals can’t therefore be expected to have the same capacity or opportunity to take action to the same degree as others (Murphy, 2012:20-23). It is therefore important that the social pillar is given more attention. That issues concerning inequality and inequity are continuously dealt with in order to give people an equal opportunity and resources, to not only make sustainable changes possible but to be able to benefit from them in terms of social equity as well.

Whilst extensive efforts are needed to make sustainable development possible, this process is also problematised by the fact that modern society and its issues are becoming increasingly

1 Se for example statements from representatives of OECD (2017):

https://www.oecd.org/about/secretary-general/working-together-to-achieve-the-sdgs-oecd-global-forum-development-2017-welcoming-address.htm

(6)

complex and characterised by uncertainty (Francart et al, 2017:1). This has highlighted the need for different forms of knowledge to be included in a decision-making process (Mullally, 2012:149). This has at the same time created a debate about how this knowledge should be acquired and whom should be the provider of it. Political participation, where citizens are able to take part in a decision-making process, has been presented as a great way to acquire different forms of knowledge, perspectives and context-specific knowledge (Karlsson, 2011:117) which might be of importance when making sustainable changes. At the same time there exist a historic conception that expert knowledge is preferable over lay people’s knowledge (Farthing, 2016:21). It has been argued that the public might lack the necessary knowledge about political and economic realities and furthermore an understating of technical information needed to make good decisions (Innes and Booher, 2004:421).

This would suggest that decisions preferably should be made without the involvement of the public, a conclusion which, however, has been questioned. Sustainable development often entails rather large-scale changes to the way we are living and is a concern to all inhabitants of the earth. Hence, it can be argued that people affected by these decisions should be allowed to take part in the decision-making process, especially from the understanding that people will be affected in different ways depending on their pre-existing conditions. Participation in this context could in other words not only have the possibility to provide useful information that could make a change towards sustainable development more efficient and equal, but it could also have the opportunity to legitimate political decisions (Misztal, 2016:53). Participation can, therefore, be seen as a useful way to ensure that the citizens understand the reasoning behind certain decisions and therefore to a greater extend might live by them.

Participation has several different definitions, but they all have in common that they compose some sort of an event which compose an opportunity for citizens to affect the political agenda and make their voices heard (van Deth, 2016:1). Participatory events are in other words the occasion where the meeting and exchange of perspectives between the citizens and the politicians are made possible.

The uncertainty of modern society previously mentioned has also led to people demanding more inclusion and representation in the decision-making process (Mullally, 2012:149). It has however been found that even though a democratic government should entail political equality, that all people should be allowed to take part in participatory events, this doesn’t transpire in

(7)

reality. Certain socially vulnerable or marginalised societal groups are not participating to the same extent as other citizens do (Karlsson, 2011:119; Meyer & Fine, 2017:323; Wide, 2017:522). At the same time, this group of individuals are generally also those most affected by environmental issues (Lundgren & Jonsson, 2012:2), meaning that it is of great importance to include their voices in the decision-making process. This inclusion could be seen as a necessity to truly enable a sustainable future which includes social equity and not only environmental and economic concerns.

Equality and participation have a special stronghold in Sweden and is something that has been discussed on the political agenda for many years. The question of including citizens in the decision-making processes was brought to the political agenda back in the 1960s in Sweden and the use of participatory event has since then increased and continues to be an important part of the local decision-making processes (SOU, 2016:389). About 83% of Sweden’s municipalities and counties have to some extent carried out some type of a participatory event (SOU, 2016:394). Municipalities are especially important for the implementation of participatory events since they constitute the closes level of the state to the citizens in Sweden (Dehlin, 2017:1). They also have a great opportunity to obtain the context-specific knowledge that might be necessary to implement certain decisions in line with the aim of sustainable development. This is because they are closer to the people living in those contexts than the national level of government.

Swedish municipalities, therefore, are well prepared and fitting to execute participatory events and to enable social equity in the process since most municipalities have declared that they actively work with encouraging participation of all citizens (SOU, 2016:404). It is, however, interesting to find out if and how this is carried out in a practical setting. What is it that municipalities actually do to enable equal accessibility to democracy through these participatory events and in what way is social vulnerability and marginalisation taken into consideration? It is especially interesting to study this from the perspective of sustainable development, since it’s a question of the social pillar which, as mentioned before often gets neglected. It is therefore interesting to study this issue as a way to identify how municipalities work with the social pillar and by extension sustainable development.

(8)

1.1 The aim of the thesis

The purpose of this study is to identify how local governments in Sweden work with participatory events and how social vulnerability and marginalisation is taken into consideration in this process. This purpose is empirical, as it aims to research the question of political inclusion, but it also has a practical purpose in so far as this study might provide practical guidance on how to work with this issue in other municipalities. Which furthermore hopefully will give the social pillar a higher priority within local municipalities as well as provide an overview of a method which could prove useful in attempts to achieve a more sustainable future.

1.2 Research questions

The purpose of the study will be fulfilled by researching and answering the following research questions:

• How do local municipalities work to ensure equal accessibility to participatory events? • How is social vulnerability and marginalisation taken into consideration in the

participatory process?

• Can the strategies used by the municipality be argued to increase citizens’ accessibility to democracy?

1.3 Disposition of the study

Chapter one has covered the introduction of the study and following this, chapter two will present the theoretical background, focusing on previous research and theoretical concepts. This provides a context relevant to understand the issue of interest. Chapter three will then present and discuss questions of methodology, research design and methods. Following this, chapter four will present the result of the study as well as an analysis of it. In chapter five the research questions will be answered, and the results will be discussed. Lastly, at the end of the study, a complete reference list will be presented as well as a number of appendices containing the interview guide as well as two figures.

(9)

2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

This chapter will cover theoretical perspectives and concepts, as well as previous research relevant to understand the phenomenon and issues this study is concerned with. Concepts such as participation will be discussed in relation to democracy and political equality. These concepts will also be framed in a Swedish context. Furthermore, the concept of ‘social vulnerability’ and ‘marginalisation’ will also be defined, discussed and related to participation and previous research.

2.1 Democracy and participation

The foundation of a contemporary democratic government is political equality, meaning that people’s equal opportunity to participate and influence the political agenda, as well as all people being represented, are central issues that demand constant efforts to be realised (Železnik, 2017:112; Fishkin & Luskin, 2005:285). Participation is a concept which has many different definitions associated with it. One rather loose way to define it is “citizens’ activities affecting politics” (van Deth, 2016:1). This definition, although not very specific, covers the main idea of participation; that ordinary citizen should have the opportunity to influence the political agenda and the decisions that are made which inevitably will affect their lives. van Deth (2016:1) even go as far as to argue that the extent to which citizens are able to participate is an important “criteria for assessing the quality of democracy”.

Participation and democracy can, therefore, be seen as closely tied together, especially when related to the development of participation from a historic perspective. The traditional forms of political participation, such as voting in political elections as well as memberships in unions and political parties are experiencing a declining development (Faucher, 2014:1; Železnik, 2017:113). Electoral turnouts are decreasing and fewer citizens are engaging as members in both political parties and unions. This phenomenon appears to have reach a global level and scholars such as Misztal (2016:53), who describes this development throughout the EU calls it a crisis.

This development has increased the need for alternative ways for the citizens to influence the political agenda and to feel represented, which has led to an expansion of different forms of participatory events (van Deth, 2016:3). The expansion from the traditional forms of participation could be derived from the growing importance of community-based politics (van

(10)

Deth, 2016:4). This inspired the incorporation of participatory events where direct contact between citizens, public officials and politicians were made possible. The expansion has continued, and it could be argued that actions such as protests, and activism are also a form of political participation as well as phenomenon such as political consumerism. This study, however, as will be discussed later, will mainly focus on participatory events that enable direct contact between the public and the government.

The need for participation from the perspective of political equality has however not been the only catalyst for the use of participatory events. Scholars have conducted substantive research on the benefits of participation and found many areas where it is a functional and useful tool and therefore a preferable method to incorporate in the decision-making process. It is in other words not only a question about a need for participation but also a question about its benefits. A lot of the discussion on participation has focused on displaying the usefulness of participation and how it can be beneficial when managing different matters and issues. Participation has for example been linked to constitution-building by Saati (2017:15), as a method to ensure increased levels of democracy in the new rule. In this particular example, there has also been a shift in the participants, that can be observed in participatory events in general. Saati (2017:15) argues that historically constitution-making has preferably been a process conducted by elites, but that since the end of the 21st century it has started to involve a larger part of the public. The research on participation is however not only discussing its benefits. Some scholars have questioned the use of the method in relation to the complexity of modern political issues. Innes and Booher (2004:421) have for example discussed the potential issue of participation resulting in delayed or even bad decisions. They mean that citizens might lack knowledge on political and economic realities and an ability to consider long-term consequences of certain decisions and actions. Similarly, Teske (2000:664-665) stresses that contemporary issues are often complex and that the greatest hindrance for citizens to participate is their “lack of access to and understanding of technical information”. At the same time, other scholars have argued that since contemporary issues are complex, varying perspectives and context-specific knowledge is needed. Whereas participation could provide perspectives that otherwise would have risked being missed out (Karlsson, 2011:117; SKL, 2019:6, 8). Other scholars have a similar idea and bring up the inclusion of minority and disadvantaged social groups to enhance the possibility of including varying knowledge bases to make good decisions (Lehoux, Miller & Williams-Jones, 2020:3).

(11)

As stated above, participation is closely tied to democracy and the notion of political equality, and it is also seen as a way to siphon useful knowledge from the citizens. But participation has an additional advantageous aspect of importance. Misztal (2016:53) argues that participatory events give legitimacy to political decision. Participation, in other words, works as a way to inform the public of the reasoning behind certain decisions and might, therefore, lead to citizens being more likely to oblige to these decisions. This is of especial importance when working with sustainable development since decisions that have to be made generally will force people to change their habits and way of living.

2.2 Democracy and participation in a Swedish context

When discussing democracy and participation a contextualisation is important, since certain context-specific aspects and conditions affect the way issues occur and therefore also how they can be framed. The following will therefore provide a description of democracy and participation in a Swedish context, mainly on the local level as this is the focus of the study.

Sweden is a parliamentary democracy, with three political levels: the national, regional and local. These three levels have different responsibilities, whereas the local level consist of 290 municipalities and have responsibility for political matters relating to the citizens and the associated geographically limited environment (Dehlin, 2017:1). Municipalities are to a large extent a service provider as they for example handle childcare, primary and secondary education, care of the elderly, water supply and waste management. They are however not only service providers but also developers, as they work with community development in general terms. This means that a municipality work with a lot of different people in a lot of different life stages and situations (Dehlin, 2017:3).

In Sweden political elections are held at all three political levels at the same time every fourth year (Regeringskansliet, 2014). According to SOU (2016:19) this length of time between elections makes other forms of political participation important, especially in a time where “the political parties have changed, weakened and don’t have the same stronghold as before” [author’s translation]. Similarly, Wide (2017:521) has argued that participatory events are a much-needed tool to enhance the publics possibility to influence the political agenda in addition to elections.

(12)

As has been stated before, political equality is the foundation of modern democracy. This is something of great importance in a Swedish context, since Sweden’s constitutional base enforces this democratic foundation (SOU, 2016:73-74). Political participation has been viewed as a central aspect of democracy and political equality, from the perspective of legitimating decisions and giving the citizens a possibility to influence the political agenda (SOU, 2016:79).

The complexity of contemporary societal phenomenon and issues previously discussed has been acknowledged in a Swedish context as well. SKL (2019:7) highlights that there is a lack of proven methods in handling these issues. Furthermore, they argue that since several of them are rather local and context-specific, a framing and a management of the problem is only possible through participation of the citizens. SKL (2019:7) speaks of a need for participation from a top-down perspective, but also a need for participation from a bottom-up perspective. Meaning that the government is in need of the citizens to frame and solve certain issues, at the same time as the public request increased participation.

Previous research conducted in a Swedish context show that several new participatory events have been developed. The aim has been to create a dialogue between the citizens and the decision makers and to increase the possibility for the citizens to have influence on the political agenda (Bergström, 2017:503). Bergström (2017:514), as well as Karlsson (2011:113) argues that a broad participation is the new norm in local political governments in Sweden and is seen as something to strive towards by continuously working with new ways to conduct these events.

A common method of local participation used in Sweden is ‘citizen dialogue’ [medborgardialog]. These are dialogues conducted between the citizens and local politicians (Karlsson, 2011:113-114). According to Karlsson (2010:116) these dialogues can be used to “handle complex political issues, strengthening the citizens trust in politicians, encourage citizens to participate, incorporate marginalised societal groups and to promote the municipality” [author’s translation]. This type of participatory method has in other words a number of different uses in a municipal context. SKL (2019:25) states that the method should be used for questions which the public can affect the outcome of. They also emphasise that the target group as well as the possible level of impact should be made clear and defined beforehand.

(13)

2.3 Socially vulnerable and marginalised societal groups

The concept of social vulnerability, as is sustainable development, a contested one. In fact, it has no clear definition (Lundgren & Jonsson, 2012:2). Vulnerability is a multifaceted concept and concerns a number of different susceptibilities (Kosko, 2013:294). On a general level, vulnerability is an incapacity to anticipate and handle certain disastrous events which are unequally distributed amongst the citizens (Lundgren & Jonsson, 2012:2). The concept of social vulnerability is closely tied to marginalisation and marginalised groups, whom are examples of societal groups often neglected or excluded from the political sphere (Pannilage, 2015:86). Social vulnerability relates to societal groups’ susceptibility to risks or disasters, whilst marginalisation is a more general term for the process of social exclusion (Pannilage, 2015:89). The two concepts relate to each other in the sense that they both concern life situations of individuals and societal groups based on unequal distribution of recourse, rights and services (Pannilage 2015:89).

Since the two concepts are so closely connected to each other, certain aspects are often discussed as sources or indicators of both social vulnerability or marginalisation, such as age, race/ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic background and different disabilities (Lundgren & Jonsson, 2012:3-4; Pannilage, 2015:90). Certain forms of these aspects leave groups more vulnerable to harmful events or excluded from the majority society, for example ethnic minorities, the poor, women and children. Pannilage (2015:90) argues that it is important to acknowledge that these groups are “not always marginalised”. They are, however, as have been documented, often vulnerable in the mainstream society due to certain power structures and lack of resources.

The societal groups which experience social vulnerability and/or marginalisation are very important to include in participatory events, since they are more susceptible to harm and have less resources. They will in other words most likely be more affected by the issues characterising the modern society and by those large-scale societal changes that are needed to enable sustainable development (Lundgren & Jonsson, 2012:2).

2.4 Socially vulnerable and marginalised groups in participatory events

Participatory events could be viewed as a necessary method to ensure political equality, in other words to ensure that all citizens are truly being represented in the political context. At the same

(14)

time Železnik (2017:112) argue that “for representation to be truly fair, it would have to include every interest affected by the collective decision-making”. On paper this sounds great, of course all citizens should be represented and involved in the political decisions that are being made about their life and living conditions. However, in reality, it is a rather difficult and complex task to achieve. It not only requires that the government in questions actively works with it as a goal, but also that they find a way to locate and reach all relevant participants (Železnik (2017: 114).

There exists a consensus amongst most scholars concerning social vulnerability as well as marginalisation and participation, that not all people have the same opportunity to participate and that some societal groups are underrepresented in both the political professional sphere and in political participatory events (SKR, 2004:8; Karlsson, 2011:119; Meyer & Fine, 2017:323; Wide, 2017:522). Those individuals more advantaged generally engage in participatory events to a greater extent than those less fortunate (Meyer & Fine, 2017:327-328), which creates a representational gap (Železnik, 2017:112).

The methods that are being used for both locating and recruiting participants has been shown to be of great importance, not only when working with socially vulnerable or marginalised groups, but also in order to enable equal participation on a general level. By using certain types of selection mechanisms, it is possible to include a magnitude of different opinions, interests and needs (Železnik, 2017:116). Železnik (2017:122) identified two commonly used recruitment methods and processes which both have implications for socially vulnerable and marginalised societal groups. The first one, random selection, indicates that participants are randomly selected by those working with these events. This method doesn’t guarantee inclusion of all those who might want to participate and have a tendency to exclude less powerful voices. The reason for this is because a randomised selection often becomes a question of availability and convenience, where those people being active in society is more available. And therefore, more likely to be chosen than marginalised groups which often are less visible. To reach these groups a more strategic selection method is often needed (Železnik, 2017:123).

The usage of random selection has however been tied to political equality by some. Fishkin and Luskin (2005:28) for example argue that “political equality stems from random sampling”, meaning that when a random selection of a population is repeated it sooner or later will start to

(15)

resemble the entire population. It, in other words, would sooner or later become an equal representation of the citizens.

The second method Železnik (2017:122) identified, which is commonly used, is self-selection. This method indicates just what it sounds like: people self-volunteering to participate. As will be discussed below, this tends to “over-represent those with more resources and power”. In a discussion of socially vulnerable and marginalised groups and their possibility to access participatory events the question of advocacy is often brought up. This concept was first presented by Davidoff (1965) in the 1960s and is closely tied to the planner’s role and how the planner positions themselves in relation to participation. The main idea of advocacy is about planners assisting those not being able to participate and thus representing their views and opinions (Davidoff, 1965:425). This concept is in that way relevant when discussing social vulnerability and marginalisation, in the sense that an advocator could speak up for the case of disadvantageous groups or individuals when they are not able to do so themselves.

Connecting social vulnerability to participation is not a new phenomenon: it has been studied in many different contexts. Hamideh & Rongerude (2018:1629) has for example researched participation in post-disaster decision making and found that social vulnerability limits citizens to participate in this process. They have found that “pre-existing social and special relations” (Hamideh & Rongerude, 2018:1630) are magnified by disasters and without an intentional attempt to include these citizens they will most likely be excluded from the post-disaster decision-making process.

Kosko (2013:293-294) on the other hand have combined a number of different studies researching different groups of indigenous people and found that they as a minority group are an especially marginalised group when it comes to development and not being a part of the decision-making processes that affect them and their life. The marginalisation of this group relates to a “historic loss of sovereignty and […] territory” (Kosko, 2013:299) which has excluded them from the decision-making processes that will affect their life.

In a Swedish context, SKR (2004:9,34) have concluded that a strong political engagement and participation is greatly dependent on educational level and socioeconomic background. They also found that people born outside of Sweden generally are less politically active than people

(16)

born within the country. In other words, they identified two factors affecting people’s accessibility to participatory events: cultural capital in form of education and language knowledge as well as belonging to an often-marginalised societal group in terms of immigrants. Similar results were found in a study conducted by Bergström (2017) in the Swedish city Malmö. Bergström (2017:509) found that the citizens and their ability to participate were determined by educational level and language knowledge. In the study, it was established that those who needed the service provided by the local government most were also the ones having the hardest time making their voices heard. Bergström (2017:511) found that even though new participatory events had been introduced the citizens still had a hard time knowing when and where they could participate. It seems that in this case, participatory events were open for all, but by not actively reaching out to socially vulnerable and marginalised groups, they did not change the power gap and the representational issue.

In an SOU it was concluded that the citizens’ ability and opportunity to participate and have influence was affected by income, education, social and cultural capital as well as connections to influential networks (SOU, 2016:76). From the perspective of political equality, it was stressed in the investigation that it’s important to seek out those citizens who are rarely heard (SOU, 2016:81). This notion has been recognized by SKL (2019:31-32) as well. Through their extensive research and collaboration with Sweden’s municipalities, SKL has identified that deliberate efforts to seek out relevant participants are necessary for participatory events to be both representable and useful. They found that most resources and efforts need to be directed towards the citizens who most rarely participates (SKL, 2019:32).

Although most previous research indicates that marginalised and socially vulnerable groups generally tend to have a harder time to participate in a political context, there are those who have identified a change in this trend. Elgenius and Wennerhag (2019:140) for example argued that in recent years new political actors have made their appearance. Actors such as social movements, think tanks and other civil societal actors. They claim that through this trend traditionally marginalised groups are represented to a greater extent than before. This could perhaps be understood in relation to the concepts of advocacy mentioned before. These new political actors can advocate and represent the socially vulnerable and marginalised societal groups. At the same time if new powerful political actors with resources appear it might make

(17)

the participation of marginalised groups even harder since these new actors might be louder and drown out the voices of those less powerful and with fewer resources.

Something to have in mind though when discussing the participation of different societal groups is that not all participatory events or decision-making processes are relevant to all citizens. Sometimes not all societal groups need to participate, because the decisions that are being made does not relate to them. However, when focusing on this issue on a general level, patterns of exclusion appear, and this is a societal issue that needs to be discussed more.

2.5 Knowledge gap

What has become clear from this review of previous research and theoretical concepts is that there has been a lot of research conducted on participation on a general level, as well as research connecting participation to social vulnerability and marginalisation. Participation is of great importance for socially vulnerable and marginalised groups, as a way to enable their accessibility to democracy and ensure that their voices, opinions and life situations are taken into consideration in decision-making processes.

This review of previous research, however, shows that citizens that are socially vulnerable or marginalised, for a number of different reasons, tend to be excluded from participation. It can be a question of educational level, language knowledge, socio-economic background, but also a question of being socially vulnerable or belonging to a minority or marginalised group. In the previous research, the focus has been put on identifying groups that tend to be excluded from political participation. This has raised the question of how one can work towards the inclusion of these groups? And how do local municipalities work to tackle this issue?

In a Swedish context, it is clearly stated that all citizens should have an equal opportunity to participate when it is a question or issue that affects them. Meaning that people regardless of their resources should be able to participate in events that relate to them. It has been shown that without a strategic approach to this issue socially vulnerable or marginalised groups might not be given the chance to participate, even though they might have opinions on the matter. This study will, therefore, try to uncover the strategies used to enable equal accessibility to democracy through participatory events with a focus on socially vulnerable and marginalised societal groups.

(18)

3. METHOD AND MATERIAL

This study is an empirical case study, in which the data material is generated through a text analysis and qualitative, semi-structured interviews. In this chapter, the research design, methods, data material and their potential implications will be presented and critically discussed. The chapter will also present a description of how the analysis was conducted.

3.1 Methodology

The field of research this study is concerned with is to a large extent unexplored. Most previous research has focused on who is excluded from participation and why this is problematic rather than on how to work with and solve this issue. This study will therefore mostly be explorative, navigating a rather unexplored field. The purpose of this study is to identify strategies used to include socially vulnerable or marginalised societal groups in participatory events, meaning that the study will also mostly be descriptive in nature. The first two research questions of this study are therefore descriptive rather than explanatory (Farthing, 2016:57). While the last research question might entail descriptive claims, it is also characterized by an explanatory underlining, seeking to understand the impact of the strategies used by relating the information to the previous research and theoretical background which mostly, as has been shown, focuses on why the inclusion of these societal groups are of importance.

When choosing the appropriate research design and method to collect the data for the study, the research questions where used as the starting point. This has been argued by many to be a useful way to ensure that adequate and correct data that can be collected (Flyvbjerg, 2006:226; Farthing, 2016:4). Farthing (2016:4) further argues that the selection of research design and method should be influenced and determined by the available data sources. For this study it meant that the available data sources which, given the constraints of this study, could provide relevant data to answer the research questions greatly affected the choice of method. More specifically the first choice of method was a text analysis, since it was expected that a municipality’s efforts concerning participation should be regulated and guided by a number of documents. It therefore was considered a logic choice from the perspective of being able to answer the research questions. It was however determined that this material would not be enough to provide an in-depth perspective of this issue. The choice to complement this data with interviews were therefore made. This meant that the constraints of the first method could be avoided to a certain degree.

(19)

3.2 Case study

This study was conducted as a case study, which is a type of research design (Farthing, 2016:116). Case studies are a design where in-depth investigation of a phenomenon is performed. It does not necessary limit the available method to use, but rather is a design which quest is to dig deep to understand complex phenomenon (Flyvbjerg, 2006:220).

This design was both an active choice but also suggested by the research questions, since they entailed an in-depth investigation of a municipality, due to the rather complex characteristics of the issue in question. This meant that a case study design was a suitable choice and useful since it’s been argued by Flyvbjerg (2006:219) that one of its most prominent benefits is being able to provide in-depth knowledge on a specific issue.

The case used in this study was Örebro municipality and a case study design was used to show how the municipality work with participatory events. The choice to use Örebro municipality as the data source and case of interest in this study was mostly based on its accessibility and it being a strategic choice that could provide the information needed to answer the research questions. The time frame limited the possibility to conduct case studies on several municipalities. This choice, to use a case study design which focused on a single case rather than comparing several different cases can also be explained further by the fact that no municipality can be expected to be the same. They are political organisations and therefore have their specific composition of political power, meaning that it can be expected that they don’t work with participatory events the same way. Each municipality must in that sense probably be understood as separate cases, since this study is concerned with the entire usage of the participatory events and not just in specific issues or departments within the municipality.

Comparing different municipalities and how they work with participatory events in order to provide generalisable results would certainly be valuable. However, as has been previously stated this issue is rather complex and an in-depth investigation is needed to truly understand it, leading to it being a rather time-consuming process. This means that it’s not being possible to conduct several case studies within the given time frame. The goal of this study was also not to necessarily provide generalisable knowledge, but rather to provide an in-depth understanding

(20)

of a single complex case, meaning that a case study was a useful way to enable this understanding.

3.3 Text analysis

The first method used to collect the data for this study was a text analysis. It was conducted on two official municipal documents from Örebro municipality;

• Citizen dialogue: a manual for public officials in Örebro municipality (Medborgardialog. En handbok för tjänstemän i Örebro kommun)

• Guidelines for citizen dialogue in Örebro municipality – Manual for elected representatives

(Riktlinjer för Medborgardialog i Örebro kommun - Handbok för förtroendevalda)

These two documents compose the framework which determines how Örebro municipality conduct their participatory events. One is aimed at the public officials and the other one at the elected politicians working within the municipality.

An important aspect of this text analysis was to have an open mind and also to have a certain degree of a critical perspective in mind. As Bryman (2012:555) puts it “[texts] are written in order to convey an impression, one that will be favourable to the authors and those whom they represent”. Meaning that to truly understand what a text is trying to say and convey its necessary to ‘look underneath the surface’ and therefore to have a critical perspective in mind to not miss subliminal messages or hidden meanings. This is especially important for this case since it covers political documents, which can be expected to have a goal of trying to “convince those reading it and examining its content that the policies that are being proposed are appropriate for the situation it deals with” (Farthing, 2016:39).

To conduct and give direction to the analysis as well as to better understand the texts, questions were asked to the two documents. The questions were asked to try and uncover how the municipality firstly works with participatory events and secondly how social vulnerability or marginalisation is taken into consideration. The questions asked to the texts were the following:

• What type of participatory events are conducted? • How is this type of participatory events conducted?

(21)

o If yes, in what way?

• Are any strategies to enhance the possibility for a variety of people to participate mentioned?

o If yes, what are these?

These two texts were expected to express Örebro municipality’s perception of their participatory process and social vulnerability and marginalisation.

3.4 Interviews

Interviews were also used in this study to complement the data that the text analysis provided. More specifically four semi-structured interviews with five employees at Örebro municipality was conducted. One of the interviews were conducted with two respondents present because they held the same position and one of them was new at their position and wanted the other person to contribute with information about the work in earlier years.

To conduct the interviews an interview guide was created and used, this guide, which can be accessed in Appendix 1, was truly used only as a guide. All questions were not asked in each interview, due to varying reasons, sometimes certain questions were already answered in connection to questions asked earlier and sometimes certain questions had to be left out due to time constraints. In some interviews, some follow up questions were added depending on the content mentioned in that specific interview. This flexible interview process was necessary to gather the information needed to answer the research questions and has been argued by Harvey (2011:434) to be an important aspect of any type of interview process. By adapting to each respondent, better answers and information could be retrieved. A flexible interview process was also important since the issue of interest in this thesis demanded some coaxing and caution when it came to the questions since there is a risk that when asking a straight-to-the-point type of question, it would result in a well-prepared response and not provide an answer covering the reality of the situation.

This is a common concern to have in mind when conducting interviews with so-called ‘elites’ since they are often more prepared to answer questions about their work. ‘Elites’ are ambiguous concept with a multitude of definitions, but often relates to individuals who are skilled in their profession and competent, it can sometimes also relate to people in a position where they have

(22)

the power to make decisions (Harvey, 2011:432-433). The respondents to the interviews might not relate completely to this definition, but they are professionals who based on their positions should have a certain level of competence and knowledge about both their work and the municipality’s standpoint.

An important step in the interviewing process was therefore to balance out the power gap. This was made possible through reading the documents used in the text analysis before the interviews to attain a certain level of background knowledge, which has been argued for by Berry (2002:681) as a good way to be prepared. This meant that not only was it possible to get a better understanding of what type of questions were appropriate to ask in the interviews, it also meant that it was easier to assess what was said in the interview. The risk of not being prepared is that the ‘elites’ might “consciously or sub-consciously challenge them on their subject and its relevance” (Harvey, 2011:434).

Due to the covid-19 epidemic during the data collection period, certain decisions concerning the interviews had to be made. There was no possibility to conduct the interviews face to face, which led to three of the interviews being conducted using video-call and one through a regular phone call. There is a risk that telephone interviews lead to less detailed answers than a face-to-face one would do (Harvey, 2011:435). Telephone interviews might also make it harder to understand each other because one can’t observe each other’s non-verbal behavioural signs (Sands et al, 2007:366). This, however, was to some extent enabled by the use of video-call in three of the interviews, rather than using a regular phone call.

The epidemic also had a great effect on being able to not only reach potential respondents but also to find individuals who had time to participate in the interviews considering the major change the epidemic has had on their working situation. This meant that the plan to select interviewees who worked in different departments in the municipality to obtain a spread in their vantage point on participatory events was not possible to follow through completely. In the end, the interviewees came from three different departments, four of them were public officials and one was a politician.

The selection of respondents could be perceived as a snowball selection method, where initial contact was made through a personal contact at the municipality as well as through Örebro municipality’s service centre. These contacts were chosen as channels to reach potential

(23)

respondents. This meant that the service centre and the contact at the municipality gave recommendation of individuals who worked with participation within the municipality. These individuals were contacted and they then later on recommended additional respondents that could be of interest. The initial individuals were in other words used to reach additional ones, in accordance with how Bryman (2012:202) describes the method.

As Bryman (2012:202) puts it the risk with a snowball sampling is that “it is very unlikely that the sample will be representative of the population”. This could be said to be the case of the current study, since three respondents come from the same department (the Rural Department and the Rural Board). This could mean that certain aspects brought up in the results and analysis would not have been mentioned by the respondents if they came from other departments. This could have been solved by using a bigger sample of respondents from more varying departments, but was not possible, as was stated above. It is therefore an aspect of importance to keep in mind when reading the following chapters.

As a way to meet the demands of ethical principles concerning confidentially of the participants in the study, all respondents are anonymous in the study and their names were transformed into codes and the only information provided in the study are their function within the municipality, which is presented in the table below. The respondents were asked about whether they wanted to be anonymous or not and although all of them gave their permission to not be anonymous the choice was made to use codes for the respondents since their names would not add anything to the study. The document where the names were transformed into codes are kept in a confidential way and will be deleted once the study is completed.

Respondents function in the municipality Respondents

number Public official with knowledge about planning and community development,

works at The Department of Community Development

1

Comprehensive planner, works at The Department of Comprehensive Planning

2

Rural strategist, works at The Rural Department 3

Rural strategist, works at The Rural Department 4

Politician from Centerpartiet (the Centre Party), knowledgeable about development of rural areas.

5

(24)

This is however not the only research ethical principle that was taken into consideration during the creation of the essay and the data collection. Due to the fact that the data used in this study was generated from individuals and not from documents only, certain aspects were considered. For example, before each interview was conducted the respondents were given information about the study as well as was given an explanation of the intention with performing the interviews. They were also asked to give their consent to participating as well as giving their consent to be recorded, as each of the interviews were planned to be recorded. Consent to these aspects was first asked of the record, then again while recording to be documented. They were also informed of the fact that the study only had a scientific purpose.

The choice to record the interviews were based on the recommendation of several theorist, such as Harvey (2011:436) for example, who argue that by recording an interview its easier for the interviewer to focus on interview and keeping up the contact with the respondent. This was of especial importance when conducting the interviews over video call and phone since they entail a physical distance from the respondents. By not taking notes it was still possible to uphold somewhat of a contact with the respondents. There is a risk that a recording might be of hindrance to obtaining good data, since it might make certain individuals uncomfortable or more cautious of the answers they are giving (Harvey, 2011:436). But when asked about giving their consent to being recorded, none of the respondents appeared to distressed or uncomfortable, so the decision was made that the benefits of recording the interviews were greater than the potential disadvantageous.

All of the interviews were performed in Swedish while the presentation of the data was conducted in English. This meant that all quotes from the interviews needed to be translated to English and they might therefore not completely reflect the respondent’s choice of words. The translations were however done in a careful manner and aimed to be as true to the original quote as possible, but there is a risk that certain aspects were lost in translation, in other words, a risk that a certain degree of nuance was lost. This might, therefore, have an impact on the credibility of the data material and by extension the study. To lower the risks involved in the translation process the recordings of the interviews were of great importance. By continuously going back to the original source, in this case, the recordings of the interviews it was possible to ensure a more correct interpretation of what the respondents said. Simply by being aware of this risk also meant that this translation process was conducted with more caution to avoid mistakes. At

(25)

the same time, this is a part of conducting research, reality can never be completely explored and described objectively, all we observe, hear and interpreted will always be affected by one’s perception of the world (Farthing, 2016:33).

Similarly, to the text analysis, the interviews were expected to provide information about how Örebro municipality perceives participation and social vulnerability and marginalisation. The difference between the two data materials is that the interviews were expected to provide a description of a more practical perspective of these events. In combination, the data material collected form the two methods constituted the base for the analysis and were expected to express Örebro municipality’s views and opinions on the issue of interest.

3.5 The performance of the analysis

The analysis conducted in this study was based on a thematization of the data material gathered from both the text analysis and the interviews. The text analysis was performed as described earlier by asking specific questions to the text. Different paragraphs in the documents were highlighted based on their relevance to the research questions. These paragraphs were moved to a separate document. Similarly, once the interviews where performed they were transcribed, and all the quotes from each interview that was considered to be relevant to the study were marked and moved to the same document. Once all the material was gathered in the same place, they were sorted under different headlines based on a thematization of the issues and aspects brought up. These themes, later on, became the different headlines in the analysis

(26)

4. RESULT AND ANALYSIS

This chapter will cover a presentation of the result of this study as well as an analysis of this material. The chapter will present both results from the text analysis as well as the interviews in an interrelated manner to give balance to the material and to show how the framework is used in a practical setting within the municipality. As was stated in the theoretical background, a contextual framing of an issue is important since certain aspects might vary depending on context-specific aspects, this chapter will, therefore, begin with a description of participation in the context of Örebro municipality. After that Örebro municipality’s work with participation with a focus on the perspective of socially vulnerable and marginalised societal groups will be presented and analysed.

4.1 Participation in the context of Örebro Municipality

In the context of Örebro municipality participation is a question of communication between citizens and elected representative politicians. Participation is in that sense a highly political concept:

The concept of citizen dialogue in itself is rather political […] it is citizens and politicians that are supposed to meet in this dialogue (Respondent 2).

Participation is also closely tied to the concept of democracy and is viewed as a complement to the representative democracy. It is seen as a way for these two groups to “communicate about directions and prioritisations of the municipal operation” (Örebro municipality, 2010:3). This statement makes it clear that decisions made within Örebro municipality should not be based on facts and politicians’ opinions alone, but also incorporate citizen’s perspectives and values (Örebro municipality, 2016:4).

I would say that the general purpose [with citizen dialogue] is to ensure that the citizen’s perspective permeate everything we do and if we don’t communicate with the citizens it’s hard to know (Respondent 1).

It’s partly about informing but also to give the citizens an opportunity to share their opinions and to be involved (Respondent 2).

(27)

These statements by the two respondents show how strong of a foothold the idea that citizens’ opinions expressed through participatory events have in Örebro municipality, that they are regarded as a natural occurrence and an important part of the planning process. This coincides with what is stated in the guidelines for the elected representatives: “all planning and all decision that affects the citizens must be able to be preceded by citizen dialogues” (Örebro municipality, 2010:4). Participatory events are in that sense viewed by Örebro municipality as a tool to strengthen the democracy and increase the efficiency of the operations (Örebro municipality, 2010:3)

Participation in the context of Örebro municipality is mainly a question of different forms of citizen dialogue. There are five levels of participation used: information, dialogue, consultation, involvement and co-decision [information, dialog, konsultation, delaktighet och medbestämmande] (Örebro municipality, 2010:5), which are used separately or in combination. These entail different levels of participation and opportunity to influence the current question or issue. The first level, information is a question of informing the citizens of the background to certain issues and not necessarily about the citizens being able to share their views. The municipality, however, argues that although this method is only used for certain issues where there is no room for dialogue, the aspect of informing the public of necessary information is an important aspect that is meant to transpire throughout the entirety of a participatory process:

To be able to participate, one must be well informed and have the ability to absorb knowledge about the issue in question (Örebro municipality, 2010:5). Make sure that the citizens are given enough knowledge to be able to contribute in a meaningful and successful way (Örebro municipality, 2016:14).

Citizens limited accessibility to the required knowledge has been a common aspect used as an argument against participation (Innes and Booher, 2004:421; Teske, 2000:664-665). Örebro municipality in that sense avoid this issue by providing the citizens with what they perceive as the necessary information and knowledge to participate in a meaningful way. It could be seen as a way to make participatory events more accessible since individuals who might not perceive themselves as knowledgeable enough are being given the resources needed to change that view and feel comfortable participating and voicing their opinion. At the same time a question about

(28)

whether this information and knowledge can be seen as sufficient enough arises. From the perspective of social vulnerability and marginalisation, it could be expected that different citizens have different levels of need for information and knowledge to make their experience more meaningful. This action would in other words need to be a process which is differentiated depending on the different societal groups that are participating.

The second method, dialogue is a way for the citizens to be “innovators and advisors” (Örebro municipality, 2010:5) and entails a larger impact by the participants than the first method. The third method: consultation relates to “citizens being able to comment on proposals which are more or less completed” (Örebro municipality, 2010:5). This method of citizen dialogue composes an opportunity for citizens to consider which alternative they prefer and therefore gives the municipality an opportunity to determine which alternative would be most accepted by the public. The fourth method: involvement, gives the citizens an opportunity to be a part of an entire planning process: “from raising a question to presenting a suggested decision” (Örebro municipality, 2010:5). Lastly, the fifth method: co-decision builds on the fourth method to also include the fact that the decision is delegated to a certain societal group, it can be delegated over a longer period of time concerning a certain issue, or a specific question (Örebro municipality, 2010:6). This last method could have the potential to be quite a useful method when it comes to the perspective of socially vulnerable and marginalised groups since they could be this societal group given delegated decisional power. It could in other words be a way to give these types of groups acknowledgement and an opportunity to raise awareness about their life situations. Whether this opportunity is utilized or not by Örebro municipality is however unclear.

4.1.1 The initiation of participatory events within Örebro municipality

Participatory events within Örebro municipality is carried out in three phases: a planning phase, an implementation phase and lastly a phase consisting of evaluation and reporting the results back to the participants (Örebro municipality, 2016:9). These three phases require certain resources and effective communication to enable an efficient and useful participatory process. This analysis will focus mainly on the planning process and to some extent, the implementation phase since the purpose of the study is to identify how social vulnerability and marginalisation is taken into considering in participatory events, which can be expected to take part mainly in the planning phase.

(29)

The participatory process starts once it’s initiated by someone. This can be done by varying actors, but as Respondent 1 puts it: “somewhere a need emerges […] often from the board one supports or as a part of one’s general assignment”. The common factor for all initiated participatory event is that they are derived from someone identifying a need. This need relates to the citizens and sometimes the participatory event is requested by the public in a more direct manner, but in those cases Respondent 1 argues that its generally a question of: “[…] issues that provoke engagement, where for example our elected political representatives are contacted by the public, it might indicate that this is something we need to look at more closely”.

I think there is a great attentiveness amongst us towards what is of interest (Respondent 1).

As Respondent 1 describes, the politicians and public officials need to be attentive towards what the citizens are interested in and what their needs are. She continues by describing that once a question of importance or a need has been identified “we need to take responsibility and invite to a dialogue” (Respondent 1). This attentiveness towards the citizens are almost described as an obligation:

Our operation, speaking from the perspective of the entirety of Örebro municipality […] it’s our […] we have tax revenue to manage, if we’re not extremely attentive to the needs of the citizens, then I think we will […] we won’t make the right and most sensible decisions (Respondent 1).

What is becoming clear from this is that the initiation of participatory events is largely based on politicians and public officials being able to identify the citizens’ needs, which is reasonable since it’s a part of their work description. This, however, can be assumed to lead to certain aspects and needs important to some citizens being overlooked, especially in a rather large municipality, which Örebro is since it’s Sweden’s 6th larges municipality with over 150 000

citizens (SCB, 2019). Örebro municipality might in that way be lacking a more direct way for the citizens to request participatory events.

(30)

Some [municipalities] have ‘digital suggestions or petitions’ [e-förslag/e-petitioner], which we don’t have here at Örebro municipality (Respondent 1).

By providing the possibility to initiate participatory events from both the municipality and the citizens it might be less likely that certain needs are overlooked, it, however, assumes that all individuals who have a need they want to be recognized have the possibility and ability to voice this in, for example, a ‘digital suggestion’.

4.1.2 The purpose of participatory events in Örebro municipality

Örebro municipality appears to have a multitude of purposes with performing participatory events. The most prominent one, which has been mentioned before, appears to be to create a communication link between the citizens and the politicians within the municipality (Örebro municipality, 2010:3). As a way for citizens to voice their opinions and for the municipality to obtain context-specific knowledge from the citizens. Closely relating to this is the fact that Örebro municipality seems to be using participatory events as a way to gain an understanding for different perspectives represented by different citizens and how this can be incorporated in the decisions made.

I think that we can obtain more important perspectives in our work if we ask before we do something […] I’m thinking that we have a higher probability to do it more correct but also that we should have an operation that is permeated by the ones we exist for (Respondent 1).

The citizens varying backgrounds, needs and opportunities are recognized by the municipality along with an acknowledgement that these can be a useful tool in the planning process to help make the right choices based on a specific context or the needs of the individuals living there.

This is however not the only purpose Örebro municipality has with conducting participatory events. Another purpose was brought up by several of the respondents, which is also strongly connected to the decision-making process. They expressed in varying ways that one of the main purposes with participatory events is to build trust between the citizens and the municipality:

(31)

Regular citizen dialogues about current topics […], can create trust and faith in us politicians and public officials (Respondent 5).

Similarly, Respondent 1 expressed that this trust can also be revoked, if the participatory events are not conducted in a satisfactory way:

There might exist disadvantages [with citizen dialogues] if they are not good […] bad citizen dialogues might lead to citizen losing confidence in the municipality (Respondent 1).

The trust-building is made possible by the participatory events, through politicians and public officials being out in society meeting the citizens. This is not the entire purpose but it’s a condition that needs to be met to be able to fulfil the more comprehensive purpose, which is to ensure that decisions that are being made are obliged to by the citizens. This is made possible by participatory events since they allow the municipality to meet the citizens and explain why certain decisions and plans are chosen over others:

If we are out there explaining, more people will understand the reasoning behind certain decisions […] The more we are out meeting the citizens the more the gap can be closed and an understanding for decisions can be created (Respondent 5).

This has been argued for by both Misztal (2016:53) and Læssøe (2007:231) as an especially important aspect when making substantial societal changes, as is often the case when it comes to creating a more sustainable development. By explaining the reasoning behind their decisions in participatory events the municipality in that sense has a greater opportunity to legitimate their decisions and therefore also lead to successful sustainable changes to a greater extent.

4.2 The identification of socially vulnerable and marginalised groups

From the above-mentioned contextualisation of participatory events to the context of Örebro municipality, it’s clear that participation appears to be used more frequently and given a more prominent position in the general routine of a decision-making process. It also displays that Örebro municipality has an awareness for the fact that the citizens living within the municipality have varying backgrounds, needs and opinions. Within the participatory process, Örebro

References

Related documents

46 Konkreta exempel skulle kunna vara främjandeinsatser för affärsänglar/affärsängelnätverk, skapa arenor där aktörer från utbuds- och efterfrågesidan kan mötas eller

The increasing availability of data and attention to services has increased the understanding of the contribution of services to innovation and productivity in

Av tabellen framgår att det behövs utförlig information om de projekt som genomförs vid instituten. Då Tillväxtanalys ska föreslå en metod som kan visa hur institutens verksamhet

document from the Commission / the Secretariat General (SG) and the High Representative (HR) for the European Council with the purpose of presenting what guiding principles the

 How does the case study school work to provide an inclusive education for children in basic education with intellectual or cognitive disabilities..  What are the

Total CO 2 emission for electric devices: At electricity part, according to information that user have entered, energy consumption for each device was calculated and saved on

Participation features in all four approaches, as the community that is being served through the facilitation of its participation, as the provision of a maximalist

The focus of this study is the peace process in Burundi from the beginning of the Arusha negotiations in 1998 and onwards, as it can be considered a country with a positive outcome