Evaluation and reporting Baseline review Target setting Political commitment Implementation and Monitoring Integrated management system Organisational setup Involvement and communication

Introduction to Involvement and Communication

There is no sustainable implementation without acceptance, understanding, will, interest, awareness and recognition of benefits and responsibilities among various actors. To achieve this, an effective communication and involvement strategy is needed. The relevant stakeholders are defined in terms of whether they

  • are affected by the issue or affect the issue
  • possess information, resources and expertise needed
  • control implementation instruments and tools

On the basis of this knowledge, the city can get a clear overall picture of what each player’s role is in the game and at what stage. This information is used to set rules on how to engage the relevant stakeholders in all steps of the integrated management system. By making the rules public, stakeholders are kept informed about when they are expected to be involved and how they can be part of shaping a sustainable city.

Once the stakeholders are involved, it needs to be clear how the communication both within the system and from the system outwards is handled. Communication and involvement are baseline steps that initiate and give the power to the implementation of the integrated management system, and are closely related to the organisational setup. The degree and therefore the success of exchange of ideas and approaches through cross-departmental working groups, including cooperation in cross-policy areas, is a result of involvement and communication.

Why involvement and communication?

The integrated management system seeks to include all dimensions of sustainable development in the management system of a local government, i.e., the environmental, social and economic dimensions. This requires involvement and communication to target all perspectives of a local authority, i.e., political, administrative, technical and community-based.

"If you want to know how the shoe fits, ask the person who is wearing it, not the one who made it."

Participatory processes represent a way to increase trust between the stakeholders and policymakers. A second argument for using participatory processes is to make the democratic process more transparent – to fill in the years between elections so that citizens can have impact on and understand decision-making also between elections. A third argument is that the outcome may be better with participatory processes: i.e., if stakeholders are involved, the amount of knowledge gathered is larger than if only a few planners or consultants are doing the job.

The legal basis for communication and involvement can be found in the Aarhus Convention signed by the European Community and its Member States in 1998.The Aarhus Convention is a new kind of environmental agreement which links environmental rights and human rights. It is based on the premise that greater public awareness of and involvement in environmental matters will improve environmental protection. The Arhus convention establishes a number of rights of the public with regard to the environment. The public is defined as both individuals and their associations. The parties to the convention are required to make the necessary provisions so that public authorities (on the national, regional or local level) will make these rights effective.

  1. the right of everyone to receive environmental information held by public authorities ("access to environmental information").
  2. the right to participate in environmental decision-making. ("public participation in environmental decision-making"); 
  3. the right to review procedures to challenge public decisions that have been made without respecting the two aforementioned rights or environmental law in general ("access to justice").

Work - Performing the tasks required to fulfill the mission

Governance - the interface with stakeholders, the source of strategic decisions that shape the organisation and its work, and ultimate accountability for the work and actions of the organisation

Management - The link between governance and work. The organisation of tasks, people, relationships and technology to get the job done

Furthermore, acknowledged principles for governance guide communication and involvement. Governance is about the more strategic aspects of steering, making the larger decisions about both direction and roles: i.e., governance is not only about where to go, but also about who should be involved in deciding, and in what capacity. Representation and accountability become core parts of the governance process, closely intertwined with decision-making.

Considerable experience is already available that cities can apply within the framework of the integrated management system. Participatory processes were the core of the Local Agenda 21 taken at the Rio conference in 1992. After that, many local authorities have had extensive stakeholder involvement in creating their Local Agenda 21 work. However, one of the pitfalls has been that participatory processes have been conducted parallel to – rather than part of – decision-making. This causes double negative impacts, as the public does not receive information and decision-makers do not receive public input in time to influence important components of decision-making. The integrated management system puts the participatory processes in the heart of strategic decision-making and put a strong emphasize on linking them to each step.

Possibilities of stakeholder involvement

Three classes of effects may result from stakeholder involvement processes:

  • Better and more acceptable choices from the environmental, economic, and technical points of view.
  • Better use of information; better conflict management; increased legitimacy of the decision-making process.
  • Better information to stakeholders and/or the public; improvement of strategic capacity of decision-makers; reinforcement of democratic practices; increased confidence in institutional players.

These potential positive effects of stakeholder participation may also be quoted as justifications for involving stakeholders in policy decisions. However, there are also voices against stakeholder involvement.

Only the strongest groups in the society are able to have a say in a participatory process.”

This argument compares a participatory process with elections where every citizen has one vote, which is something to be kept in mind when planning for the process. There are also methods that put special focus on weaker groups.

How can a taxi driver know more about urban planning than me after 5 years of education?”

A taxi driver acting alone does not, of course, know more about urban planning than a trained expert. A participatory process always means cooperation and a dialogue based on various skills. A taxi driver probably has valuable input to give on how the urban plan works in reality, whilst an urban planner has an overall view of the city, legislation and so on. Often people are surprised to see how citizens and stakeholders take on the responsibility given to them in a participatory process and do actually try to represent the voice of citizens or businesses, acting in line with the benefit for society as a whole.

Analysing the needs for communication and involvement

In order to get the knowledge of who, when and why to involve stakeholders, the local authority needs to do a stakeholder analysis matched to the scope and content of the integrated management system. However, the integrated management system may also be expanded in scope and content with time. Furthermore, stakeholders are not constant and fixed but can also change. Therefore, the stakeholder analysis is not a one-time exercise: its revision occurs as part of a regular process, i.e., the cycles of the IMS.

The first steps of the analysis of the needs for communication and involvement can be done at the stage of the baseline review. As there is a need to involve stakeholders (both internal and external) while compiling the baseline review, the first step is to analyse who should be involved in preparing the baseline review. As part of the baseline review, the full stakeholder analysis should be carried out, analyzing when and how the stakeholders should be involved in each step of the integrated management system.

Responsibilities for elaborating the document (hereafter referred to as “Communication & Involvement Plan”) are best dealt with in the Coordination Team or Coordination Board.

By gathering the results of the analysis in a “Communication & Involvement Plan” which sets out the overall rules for stakeholder involvement of the local authority, transparency is enhanced. However, though the overall rules of stakeholder involvement are made public, there may still be a need to have an internal communication strategy available for showing the staff the outputs of the stakeholder analysis and in which steps of the integrated management system the relevant stakeholders should be involved, including the appropriate method and message.

Who is a ‘stakeholder’?

The word ‘stakeholder’ has no meaning unless there is common agreement on who the term refers to. The UN/Habitat defines stakeholders as

  • those whose interests are affected by the issue or those whose activities strongly affect the issue;
  • those who possess information, resources and expertise needed for strategy formulation and implementation, and
  • those who control relevant implementation, instruments/tools

One can make a distinction between external and internal stakeholders. The external stakeholders of a local authority can include citizens, private land owners and developers, community and other interest groups, non-government organisations, government agencies, neighboring municipalities, regional authorities, businesses, etc.

Even within a city administration one have stakeholders – i.e., politicians and the people working in the administration that need to be involved or informed at all steps of the integrated management system. Internally, you need to “sell” the idea of the integrated management system to politicians, the heads of administration and the people working within the administration. These must be regarded in each step of the model as well and a strategy for communicating to them and involving them should be part of the stakeholder analysis.

The process of a stakeholder analysis

Identifying stakeholders is a process which can take place in a brainstorm session. The setup of the group cross-sectorally may also influence who is identified as a stakeholder and how this stakeholder is analysed. Some cities have included a stakeholder analysis in their baseline review, i.e., for each field of the Aalborg Commitments. The contributors to the baseline review are also asked for their input on relevant stakeholders to include in the various IMS steps. The elements of the stakeholder analysis can be found below:

Image 1

How to find the stakeholders?

In involving and communicating with stakeholders, one also needs to have an idea of where to get hold of them. As mentioned previously, inclusiveness is one of the overarching principles for the integrated management system, i.e., the system shall allow for the appropriate involvement of relevant stakeholders and provide for transparency and communication in decision-making and evaluation.

Involving those who want to join or those we want to join?
There is a tendency in stakeholder involvement to select the people who ask to participate. This may shut the door to groups that should be involved but are reluctant to join. With a stakeholder analysis, some non-traditional audiences may be found such as church organisations, the local youth club, or university professors who have a strong role in the community.

Inclusion of all relevant stakeholders is crucial for successful participatory decision-making but also essential for promoting equity and social justice in urban governance. The principle of inclusiveness makes the identification of stakeholders important: excluding an important stakeholder can undermine the process and the success of the integrated management system.

For example, when priorities and targets are set and actions planned without involving the relevant stakeholders, the result is usually misguided strategies and inappropriate action plans which are badly (if ever) implemented. The actions taken may even have negative effects on the fulfillment of targets. In conclusion, approaches that are not inclusive are unsustainable.

An open hearing that has been announced publically may not actually make those required stakeholders to come. Other methods may be needed to reach the ones actually required. Each choice has implications for whom is actually reached.

Random selection – Randomly choose organisations, businesses, citizens and other stakeholders.

Network method – through business organisations, workplace organisations, parent/teacher networks, gardening networks, sports organisations, accessibility organisations, allergy associations, youth organisations.

Closeness – choose “islands” in areas where the work should be done: for example, certain streets or houses, and invite all inhabitants, businesses and organisations. Try to get as may as possible from the islands to take part.

Snowball method – to ask some key persons to suggest other persons to invite

Community key activities as a communication platform!

What are the key activities that take place in your community? Where do they occur (for example, football games, fairs and concerts, etc.)? Make use of them for your communication and involvement purposes!

Designing participatory processes

The various phases of a specific participatory process

Having defined the needs for communication and involvement also means that a holistic view of what participatory processes are needed has been established. Each of these processes of involvement needs to be clearly planned, carried out and followed up.


The preparation phase of a participatory process is very important and affects its successful outcome. It is important to go through and answer the following questions before carrying the process through:

  • What is the purpose/objective of the participatory process?
  • What is the mandate given for carrying out the participatory process? Do politicians support it as well as the administration?
  • What is the expected outcome of the participatory process? Should it be taken in as input for formulating the indicators/targets/measures, etc., or is the mandate given for cooperating with the stakeholders and giving them some power of influence on political decision-making. etc.?
  • What are the resources allocated for the process? A limited budget affects what method can be chosen and whether or not an external, experienced consultant can be utilised.
  • Who will carry through the process? Has/have this/these persons the knowledge required? Is there a need for the further capacity building of this/those persons?
  • What are the time frames given for the process? If the results are to be presented within 6 months, keep this in mind when choosing the method/s.


  • Mix of mechanism. In designing the participatory process, it is crucial to choose the right "mix" of mechanisms. It is important to go back to the questions answered during the preparation phase and relate them to the actual design. When entering into a participatory process, it is important that the local authority is aware that there are various levels of involvement. Furthermore, it is important to recognize that by using a method placed at a certain level on the involvement scale, the city also gives a promise to the participants on what power of influence their involvement has on political decision-making.
  • Coordination. Clarify the coordination of the process. In some cases an external consultant may be utilised to carry out the process: however, the coordination still needs to be in the hands of the administration. The local authority may have a need to impose central coordination or at least support for the departments responsible for the respective participatory process. There may be the need for a similar cross-sectoral coordination to that of the whole integrated management system. Consult other parts of the local authority to coordinate involvement efforts with other parts of the authority and avoid overburdening participants.
  • Risk assessment. Whatever design chosen, carry out a risk assessment of the participatory process. What are the potential costs (e.g., social, fiscal, political, integrity of institutions) associated with implementing the public involvement initiative? Analysing risks also requires analyzing the potential solutions and answers.
  • Relevant information early. Giving relevant information to the participants and the stakeholders about the upcoming participatory process at an early stage is also crucial for the success of the participatory process.


When starting the process, ensure that the participants understand the policy development process. In this respect, clarify the roles of the participants as well as whether or how participants’ views will be considered in the decision-making process. Facilitators should be flexible enough to consider realistic and reasonable requests from participants on the process design. It is important to find the right time of the participatory process in order to make sure that there are opportunities to actually influence the political and policy decision-making process.


Monitor and adjust the results of the process accordingly. Analyse the input from participants and draft the first results.

Feedback and follow-up

It is important to maintain a dialogue with the participants and to inform them of the findings. It is equally important to inform them of the next steps and the impact their input had on proposed indicators/targets/measures, etc.


Finally, it is crucial to evaluation to report on the participants’ involvement. Those having carried out a participatory process can also be used to further carry out training of others on designing, planning, implementing and evaluating participatory processes. The best practices, methods and tools could be disseminated across the local authority in order to learn from each other and to strengthen the capacity of the local authority to carry out participatory processes.

Levels and methods

Participatory processes can be placed on a specific level of involvement. Furthermore, it is important to recognize that by using a method placed on a certain level on the involvement level, this also delivers a promise to the participants regarding what power of influence their involvement can have on political decision-making. For instance, consulting the public when the legal scope for them to influence the decision is small can cause anger. To ensure success, make certain that the right level of involvement is chosen at the right step of the IMS.

The methods available for participatory processes are numerous but they all have their pros and cons. A method may also be more appropriate for some parts of the integrated management system than for others. In all cases, it is important to define the purpose and objective of the participatory process before deciding on the method, keeping in mind what level of involvement is appropriate.

Level Inform Consult Involve Collaborate Partner Empower
Public participation goal One-way information dissemination Informing is not actually a method of involving: rather, it is communicating. Two-way communication involvement. Interactive discussion and dialogue that serves as a supplement to an existing city decision-making process. Places the stakeholder representatives at the same table with the planners acting as active team members in formulating and recommending alternatives. The final decision is made by the city representatives. A form of joint decision-making by shared agreement. Partnership represents cooperation where both sides hold veto power over decisions. Decisions are made by a group or organisation with specific delegation of power from the authorities: for example, youth parliaments and local boards.
Use when: Factual information is needed to describe a policy, programme or process; a decision has already been made or no decision is required; the public needs to know the results of a process; there is no opportunity to influence the final outcome; there is a need for acceptance of a proposal before a decision may be made; the issue is relatively simple. Receiving input, listening and exchanging views with regard to what are usually already drafted suggestions. Two-way information exchange is needed; individuals and groups have an interest in the issue and will likely be affected by the outcome; there is an opportunity to influence the final outcome; organisers wish to encourage discussion among/with stakeholders; input may shape policy directions and programme delivery. It is necessary for stakeholders to talk to each other regarding complex, value-laden decisions; there is a capacity for stakeholders to shape policies that affect them; there is opportunity for a shared agenda setting and open time frames for deliberation on issues; options generated together will be respected For the most part, cooperating with equal partners such as NGOs and private enterprises. Stakeholders have accepted the challenge of developing solutions themselves; institutions are ready to assume the role of enabler; there is an agreement to implement solutions generated by stakeholders.
Examples of methods Websites
Open houses
Public comment
Focus groups
Public meetings
Deliberate polling
Participatory decision-making
Citizens’ advisory committees
Public-Private partnerships
Citizens’ juries
Delegated power
Promise to the stakeholders We will keep you informed We will keep you informed, listen to and acknowledge concerns and
aspirations and provide feedback on how public input influenced the decision.
We will work with you to ensure that your concerns and aspirations are directly reflected in the alternatives developed and provide feedback on how your input influenced the decision. We will look to you for direct advice and innovation in formulating solutions and incorporate your advice and recommendations into the decisions to the maximum extent possible. We will together formulate ideas, targets and measures to be implemented. We will implement what you decide.

Messages and formats

Do not send messages in bottles!
Make sure the message you send is targeted at the particular stakeholder and reaches its destination!

At some points, the city may have decided that it is enough to communicate the outputs to some specific stakeholder groups. However, communication can also be used to convince stakeholder groups to get involved. In these circumstances, the message conveyed is important. What is this information that first makes people want something and then makes people do something to get it? How is this message formulated, how is it communicated, and by whom? Is it a concrete fact only that is attractive, or are these the benefits stemming from its usage that sound tempting? Some messages communicated via different kinds of channels (e.g., through TV, in newspapers, on the radio or on billboards) make people think about the initiatives/products/services they advertise. They may be inspiring and make people dream about a better place to live. People start to think “what can I do to get there in my life?” Other messages/advertisements/news items are no more than annoying, some funny, while others simply remain unnoticed. How to avoid the latter?

The message itself is the key tool for successful implementation of the IMS. Without an attractive, clear, easy and understandable message communicated in an effective way, an IMS will remain merely a dream. Messages – when shaped in accordance with specific target groups’ needs – are the key to open the doors to sustainable urban development.

The power of well-tailored messages, combined with effective communication – i.e., targeting a particular audience – is enormous. The message can either help to sell the integrated management system and win stakeholders or bury the concept for many years.

Adapting the messages to stakeholder groups

Communication has to be clear, attractive (i.e., drawing attention) and definitely cannot be too generalized – the message has to be well-adapted to particular stakeholders, set in particular local contexts and demands.

First of all, it is crucial to recognize the “common story” – the overarching main message that is being communicated. It is most important that it is clear for the coordination team what the IMS is all about as well as why it is so important and beneficial for the city to implement.

There is “one truth behind the integrated management system”: i.e., one “mother message” that the coordination team has to identify, and then this truth has to be presented from different angles towards different stakeholders. In a sense, you have to show the right road to the right stakeholder, since eventually “all roads lead to Rome”.

The messages have to be shaped to be distinctive, memorable and appealing, but most importantly - the anticipated role of the message is its call for action, resulting in the involvement leading to the effective implementation of the IMS in the city.

How to convince the mayor that it is worth to support the idea, when given just 3 minutes? What is the argument that will make your city top management support the implementation of the integrated management system?

An important milestone to be achieved at the very beginning of the whole process of implementing the IMS is to have a political decision/agreement on the implementation of the IMS. This decision will back up all steps of system implementation and will be an important basis for the approval of the strategic programme by the Council.

In order to get a Council decision to implement the IMS at the very beginning, and consequently succeed further with Council involvement throughout the whole cycle, the coordination team will most often face the challenging task of winning over the politicians.

The overall rule of thumb to get to that point is that the arguments are always city-sensitive, and one Image 2needs to adjust them to the local context – it is a must to meet local needs.

Image 3

The fundamental starting point for communicating is identifying what the stakeholders are interested in hearing.

The messages need to fit to the needs. One of the methods is to construct a “pyramid of needs” of the targeted stakeholder.

Suppose that the strategic programme has four priority areas – let’s say waste management, health services, energy efficiency in buildings and better transport - less pollution.

Fig. Example of “pyramid of needs” of citizens in an “Imaginary City”.If it is recognized in the city that the prime needs of the citizens are in the area of public transport, communication should not be focusing on energy efficiency, decreasing the amount of CO~2~ emitted to the atmosphere thanks to renewable energy sources and the impacts this has on climate change, etc. Instead, if you are given just three minutes on local radio, talk about the planned changes in the transport system, as the audience will not be receptive to any “comparatively unimportant” piece of information.

In fact, energy efficiency in public buildings (schools, hospitals and city offices, etc.) can be influenced without citizens’ involvement, but the transport patterns will not change without citizens’ acceptance, interest and involvement.

What’s in a name?

A lot! Give the system a name: one which will clearly identify its overall goals and thereby exhibit its vision for the future. In any case, it will be the model of the integrated management system, which will facilitate the sustainable development of the urban areas. However, depending on the city, different kinds of commitments are the main priorities. Therefore, giving the system a local name can help to create understanding, acceptance, involvement and ownership.

Instead of “We are doing the Integrated Management System!”, try: “Time for Eco-efficiency”, ““LUNDAMaTS” (the name of the masterplan in the City of Lund, Sweden) and the like. Another method may be to make the vision of the city into a unique slogan that will help to sell the concept and celebrate your successes. Adapt it locally:, make it appealing and understood! For example: “Fossil fuel-free Växjö”!

Furthermore, it is important to build a bridge between the present initiative and the anticipated future. The only way to get anyone to do anything – i.e., the only way to involve various stakeholders – is to make them want to do it, because of certain benefits they clearly recognize. Therefore, it is crucial to define the USP (Unique Selling Point) of the integrated management system, in order to “sell the idea” of an integrated management system in the city.

Choosing the communicator

It is worth considering how to approach certain stakeholders. Who to choose as a communicator? Who will be regarded as trustworthy for a particular target group? A carefully chosen communicator can be a good reason to “legitimize” the message – to make it important, trustworthy and meaningful. If it is a mayor communicating a new management approach in the city, the initiative is meaningful. If it is an officer from the environmental office, the message may disappear in the jungle of other news.

Things to consider for successful communication:

  1. What are the adjusted benefits you can show to particular stakeholders?
  2. How do you legitimize your message?
  3. What change/difference will result from the benefits you give?
  4. Do you work back from your target audiences when you communicate or do you just tell them what you want to tell?
  5. How many “call to action” tools do you use in your communications?
  6. Do you capitalize on the emotional dimension to your message?
  7. Do you pay attention to using appealing metaphors?

Source: Adapted from: “Effective Personal Communication Skills for Public Relations”, PR in practice series, Chartered Institute of Public Relations, by Andy Green, 2006

The visits of politicians from other cities, where the integrated management approaches are already actively used, can be a powerful way for politicians to learn about the process and recognize its benefits. The peer review method could be one way of receiving this feedback from a peer city. Otherwise, it can also be beneficial to present a collection of examples of good practices from other cities to “legitimize” the benefits.

Tools for supporting staff communication

To reach out to the internal staff or encourage the internal staff to communicate about the work, the local authority doing a toolkit prepared centrally can be a supportive measure.

  • Exhibition material which can be borrowed.
  • A post card providing a reminder of the programme.
  • A brochure of the strategic programme, its objectives and targets, also containing information about how to implement the process.
  • Newsletters for internal and external use
  • Web presentation
  • Send messages to employees with notification of the salary: a so-called “free rider”! This could be a good way to report progress.
  • A Powerpoint presentation prepared for those who will present the strategic programme together with the processes to implement it.
  • A manual that supports implementation of the programme.
  • A manual about good methods to be used for stakeholder involvement with examples of good practices
  • Articles in the internal and external media of persons having a good environmental profile in the local authority.

Source: Based on ideas from the Region of Skåne, Sweden

If something is widely manifested and visible, it is more likely to be perceived as a credible initiative among citizens. It is the visibility, which can provide a legitimizing credibility to the message. A conference or campaign organised with appealing brochures, posters with attractive logos distributed widely in the city, etc., will reach a wider audience and gain more importance and credibility than a mere statement, font Arial 9, placed on the last page of the local newspaper.


Collectively called communication and involvement, messages, methods and formats are interdependent ingredients in the cake,. There are numerous formats which can be used (brochures, newsletters, posters, reports on the website, printed reports, CD ROMs, etc.) and the decision to apply will depend on the target group, message to be delivered, method and budget. All this has to be considered and a decision has to be taken based on the local context.

Internal communication and involvement

Communication and involvement also need to take the internal staff of the municipality into consideration. Planning the organisational setup also requires analyzing what information and communication structures are already in place in the municipality and adapt the internal communication and involvement to the same. Internal communication and involvement should aim to make the municipality feel that they are devoted to and own the system. It requires feeling as if the work done is something one can be proud of and that it makes a difference. In addition to the external stakeholders, there are various groups within a local authority. A politician needs to be informed and communicated about different things than an expert on air quality. Again, it requires thinking about what message and format to use. For instance, these have implications on how the baseline review is presented as well as the strategic programme and evaluation of the system.


The time frames and responsibilities in terms of the internal and external communication need to be documented. A RACI graph is a good way of doing this documentation, and the RACI graph can be made as part of the document describing the overall rules. RACI or responsibility charting represents a technique to identify key activities and decision points where uncertainties may exist. It assists in defining roles and responsibilities in a consistent way between individuals/departments. It identifies accountabilities and eliminates misunderstandings, encouraging teamwork.

R Responsible Position working on the activity and is responsible for action/implementation. Responsibility can be shared and the degree of responsibility is determined by A
A Accountable Position with yes/no authority and veto power. Only one A can be assigned to a function
C Consult Position involved prior to final decision or action Can be several
I Inform Position that needs to know of the decision or action. A one-way communication. Can be several


Communication and involvement are part of the five steps of the integrated management system. However, there is a need for a holistic idea and rules that go beyond each of the steps that clarify the specific role that the communication and involvement has in supporting the integrated management system. The communication and involvement is very much related also with the organisational setup of the system.

The communication and involvement has been described as a crosscutting element in this section. However, each section description of steps in the IMS provides some specific advice on what is recommended or advisable to think about with regard to communication and involvement.

Checklist for Communication and Involvement

Download: Communication



  • The Rio Declaration


  • Agenda 21


  • Good News & Bad, The Media, Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainable Development
  • Opportunity Space is a global guide for communications agencies on how to promote sustainable development. Subtitled how communications agencies can turn corporate social responsibility, industry’s newest challenge, into business, it recommends the use of the 10 Rules to achieve this. The guide is published by the EACA (European Association of Communications Agencies), SustainAbility and UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme).
  • In March 2005, Futerra launched ‘The Rules of the Game’
  • http://www.partnerships.org.uk/guide/howto.htm
  • PARTICIPATORY METHODS TOOLKIT; A practitioner’s manual, a joint publication of the King Baudouin Foundation and the Flemish Institute for Science and Technology Assessment (viWTA), available from www.kbs-frb.be/
  • http://www.communityplanning.net useful website with principles, methods, scenarios and case studies, templates, resources, films, etc.


Annex 1: Spectrum Chart from International Association for Public Participation (IAP2)

Image 4