Evaluation of two methods of deliberative participation of older people in food-policy development
Evaluation of two methods of deliberative participation of older people in food-policy development
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.healthpol.2006.09.010
复制
发表时间：
2007-08-01
期刊：
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Raats, Monique Maria
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Timotijevic, Lada;Raats, Monique Maria
本文对食品政策制定中“难以触及”的公众参与的两种协商方式——公民研讨会和公民陪审团进行了评价研究。参与是在一个实时食品政策主题（食品零售）上进行的，并且招募了特定的难以接触的老年人群体。对这两种方法的评估是基于对参与者和观察者对方法的过程和结果的看法的评估，反对一套评估标准，跨越个人和群体的分析水平。评估采用准实验、组间、参与前后设计。研究表明，方法本身的特性，如额外信息的可用性，对过程满意度和实际任务结果的影响很小。它进一步强调了小组辩论对过程的感知满意度和事件的主观结果的重要性。研究表明，高水平的过程满意度与参与的感知影响（如其对政策决策的感知影响）并不同步，这表明参与结果（即参与的影响）与过程之间的关系是复杂的。本文认为，这种关系应该在身份过程和公众参与的背景下加以考虑。2006爱思唯尔爱尔兰有限公司版权所有。
This paper reports on an evaluation study of two deliberative methods of public participation of the "hard-to-reach" in food-policy development-the citizens' workshop and the citizens' jury. The participation was conducted on a live food-policy topic (food retailing) and the specific hard-to-reach group of older people was recruited. The evaluation of the two methods was based on an assessment of the participants' and observers' perceptions of the processes and outcomes of the methods, against a set of evaluation criteria, spanning both the individual and group level of analysis. The evaluation used a quasi-experimental, between groups, pre- and post-participation design. The study showed that the properties of the methods alone, such as availability of extra information, had little impact on both satisfaction with the process and the actual task outcomes. It further emphasised the importance of group debate for the perceived satisfaction with the process and the subjective outcomes of the event. The study illustrated that the high level of process satisfaction was not contemporaneous with the perceived impact of participation, such as its perceived influence of policy decision-making, suggesting that the relationship between participation outcomes (i.e. impact of participation) and processes was a complex one. It is argued here that this relationship should be considered in the light of identity processes and the context of public participation. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.