Home
› Working with the Australian Community > Engaging with the community
» Next: Key chapter findings
Working with the Australian community
Engaging with the community
Both the OECD7 and Abramson8 recognise that citizen engagement occurs at a number of levels. Providing information to the Australian community about programmes and services, for example, is a well-established mode of working for APS agencies. The APS has also put an increasing focus on more active forms of consultation and engagement.
Consultation
There were many examples of consultative practices within the APS during 2006–07. ATO, for example, carried out its Community Perceptions study of citizens’ attitudes to paying tax. One of the key findings of this study was that there is a widespread belief in the community that everyone should pay their fair share of tax. DITR’s annual stakeholder survey is another example, as is the extensive work by a range of agencies to gauge the level of public satisfaction with the quality of their service delivery. There have also been examples of direct citizen consultation, including the Access Card public hearings which helped to inform a series of reports to government by a committee chaired by the former head of the ACCC, Professor Allan Fels.
The agency survey shows that consultation across a range of groups is common practice in APS agencies. Consulted groups include non-government organisations (NGOs), industry stakeholders, tertiary education and research centres, State and Territory Governments, local government, unions and members of the public. Around 63% of agencies reported carrying out some consultation with at least one of these groups on policy, with just under one-fifth (18%) consulting with all seven groups. Eighty-four per cent of agencies have consulted with at least one of these groups on programme delivery, while over one-quarter (26%) consulted with all groups. Consultation on government regulation was carried out by 57% of agencies with at least one group, while 14% consulted with all groups.
For policy consultation, the most consulted of the groups (usually or sometimes) are NGOs (56%) and industry stakeholders (57%). The same groups are the most consulted on programme delivery—NGOs (77%) and industry stakeholders (81%).
Results were similar for consultation on government regulation. As would be expected, industry stakeholders most subject to regulation were the most consulted at 57%, with NGOs (48%) and State and Territory Governments (47%) also being widely consulted.
Figure 11.5: Agency consultation on different government activities with external stakeholders (usually or sometimes), 2006–07
Figure 11.5 shows the extent of agency consultation with external stakeholders on matters related to the development of government policy, programme delivery and government regulation in 2006-07. Agencies were most likely to consult on programme matters and least likely to consult on regulation matters. The external stakeholder that agencies were most likely to consult with was industry.
Source: Agency survey
The rates of consultation with NGOs (56% on policy, 77% on programme delivery and 48% on government regulation) and with the general public (48% on policy, 68% on programme delivery and 41% on government regulation) suggest that APS agencies garner significant input to government administration from the broader community. There may be room, however, to increase the extent of this consultation by APS agencies, particularly in the development of policy.
The emphasis on consultation reported by agencies is supported by results from the employee survey. A high proportion of SES employees (83%) reported that their agency head has communicated the need for consultation to them during the past 12 months.
Active participation
The third part of the OECD’s model—the active participation of citizens in the business of government—is a much more difficult challenge. This has the potential to address some of the more complex, intractable issues—sometimes referred to as ‘wicked’ problems—facing Australia, for example, in the areas of public health, or natural resource management. In adopting more active approaches to community participation, however, it is important to ensure that all stakeholders’ concerns are adequately represented so that the special needs of different groups are identified, and that no one voice dominates the agenda.
There are a number of areas of government activity which rely on the active participation of citizens. In the Indigenous affairs area, for example, the Government has promoted Shared Responsibility Agreements (SRAs) between governments and Indigenous communities as an important part of its approach to addressing Indigenous disadvantage. SRAs are entirely voluntary and are developed where Indigenous people and communities decide they want to address specific priorities. In return for discretionary benefits from government, Indigenous individuals, families and communities make some specific commitments in order to achieve their identified goals. The people decide the issues or priorities they want to address, how they want to address them and what they will do in return for government investment. SRAs are now common, with over 267 community and 63 individual and family agreements in place across the country.
Another example is the National Landcare Programme (NLP), a long-standing Australian Government programme which aims to support the community Landcare movement and promote sustainable agriculture and natural resource management. This programme is discussed further below.
ICT has the potential to support more active participation by the community in government. The Special Minister of State has highlighted the potential for new technologies to enhance consultation and engagement between citizens and government,9 and AGIMO has developed principles to assist agencies across the different spheres of government who are considering engagement using ICT as a means of interacting with citizens.10
There are risks involved in new approaches in this area, including how technology can be used to facilitate serious consideration of issues rather than create additional layers of process. On the positive side, used strategically where it would add value, ICT has the potential to speed up and widen consultation and enable government and citizens to analyse and debate issues from a range of perspectives.
Citizen engagement—US research
In the USA, a report by Marc Holzer and et al11 examines the potential for digital-age citizen ‘participation beyond the ballot box’. The report concludes that a range of new information and communications technologies has the potential to make citizen participation an even more dynamic element in the policy making process. The study highlights three cases where different models are used to engage citizens, ranging from static information dissemination to a dynamic model with extensive interactions between government and citizens.
- Static citizen participation includes online polls without direct public deliberation, a bulletin board for complaints and recommendations, or citizen participation by mail, fax, or email.
- Dynamic citizen participation includes digital town hall meetings, digital policy forums, and online voting.
Employees are generally supportive of their agency’s commitment to the more active participation of the community in its activities. Almost half of respondents (49%) to the employee survey felt that their agencies encouraged the public to participate in shaping and administering policy and only 14% disagreed.
Engaging more directly with the public requires a significant level of trust on both sides. APS employees are generally positive about whether their agencies had earned a high level of public trust—48% agreed and only 17% disagreed. Although this result indicates room for improvement, it is a significant increase on the 2005–06 results, where the equivalent figures were 44% and 21%.
Changing behaviour
Engaging more actively with the community is particularly important when the Government’s policy objectives require behavioural change on the part of communities or individuals. Governments have to influence or change behaviour for a number of reasons, including to deliver economic, social and community benefits, prevent undesirable behaviours, and address cases where individuals do not behave in their own or the community’s best interests. There are many examples of this in the areas of public health, for example, obesity and tobacco use, and in the environmental area, for instance, recycling and water use. Changing behaviour is particularly important in tackling some of the complex wicked problems that face Australia, from climate change to the well-being of Indigenous Australians.
Changing behaviour has been a long-standing aim of a range of government programmes. Traditional policy tools aimed at influencing behaviour, such as incentives (e.g. the Superannuation Co-contribution, the Liquid Petroleum Gas Grant for motor vehicle conversions, the Lifetime Private Health Cover scheme), sanctions (e.g. fines and additional interest for failing to declare income to ATO, the removal of Air Operators’ licences for companies failing to comply with Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) regulations, driving a car while using a mobile phone), taxes (e.g. on alcohol and cigarettes), and information campaigns (e.g. Support the System that Supports You; Be Alert but not Alarmed) have all worked well in particular circumstances.
However, for some of the ‘wicked’ and socially complex problems currently facing Australia, influencing behaviour is more difficult. In these circumstances, it has become clear that governments cannot simply deliver key policy outcomes to a disengaged public. Instead, such problems require a holistic approach that engages both stakeholders and citizens in partnerships that give them a sense of ownership of programmes. The sorts of problems where such strategies could prove effective include environmental degradation, health issues such as obesity and drug and alcohol abuse, Indigenous disadvantage, climate change and long-term welfare dependency.
Detailed cost-benefit analysis in a number of key areas of public policy has shown that sophisticated behaviour-based interventions can be much more cost-effective in certain areas over the longer-term than traditional approaches to policy and service delivery. Limited agency budgets may be spent more effectively engaging citizens and in changing behaviour than on the traditional tools used to achieve policy outcomes.
Achieving culture change—Ideas from the UK
The UK Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit recently released a draft issue paper, Achieving Culture Change: A Policy Framework. The paper identifies the interdependent links between culture, values, attitudes and behaviour, and sets out a step-by-step approach to implementing suitable, effective programmes.
There are three main steps to this. The first is to identify and segment target populations; second, to assess the drivers of attitudes and behaviours for each of these target populations to see whether they are broadly aligned or counter to desired outcomes; and third, to map policy interventions on to this assessment of the relationship between attitudes and behaviour.
The paper suggests that engaging the public through measures such as the use of social pressure, social marketing techniques, supporting the development of community action groups and citizen-generated partnering are better strategies to bring about cultural and behavioural change than the more traditional policy tools.
To be most effective, strategies aimed at influencing behaviour need to be informed by the growing body of evidence-based behavioural theory and have a strong focus on evaluation to ensure that the outcomes expected are being achieved. This evidence can be shared among stakeholders to ensure that a common understanding of the problem exists and sufficient, effective strategies are developed to overcome the range of issues involved. The various components of the programme—including legislation, communication activities, sanctions, incentives and grants—should also form a cohesive set of parameters that focus on bringing about the changes required.
The Commission’s research and evaluation work in this area suggests that there are some practical steps that APS agencies can take to assist employees to design policy and implement programmes that address behavioural change. In particular, agencies can:
- focus on recruitment and investment in training and experiential learning to ensure that the necessary skills for policy makers and programme designers are available within teams tackling policy issues that require behavioural change
- encourage a style of management that encourages policy makers to consider the usefulness of explicit behavioural change approaches, informed by behavioural theory and evidence, when tackling a broad range of policy issues
- have a strong focus on the evaluation of behavioural change initiatives and draw on the resulting information and evidence base to plan the evolution of a comprehensive strategy over time
- support the development of a learning culture which is willing to think and work in new and innovative ways and focus on ‘systems thinking’, with an emphasis on making connections between the multiple causes and interdependencies influencing behaviour.
Changing behaviour—The National Tobacco Strategy
A case study undertaken by the Commission of the National Tobacco Strategy provides evidence of the importance of using a comprehensive approach in order to influence behaviour.
Australia is internationally renowned for its efforts to control the use of tobacco products. Initiatives have moved from one-off measures in the 1970s to a comprehensive approach to tobacco control under a series of national strategies.
The components of the comprehensive approach to tobacco control include:
- the regulation of the promotion, sale, price, place of use and packaging of tobacco products by the Australian and State and Territory Governments
- the provision of cessation services and treatment such as Quit lines and treatments such as nicotine replacement therapy
- community support and education to prevent young people taking up smoking
- policies that address the social, economic and cultural determinants of health
- the tailoring of initiatives for disadvantaged groups
- research, evaluation and monitoring
- workforce development to build the necessary knowledge and skills among those working in tobacco control.
The tobacco control strategy adopted by Australia has clear strengths and provides insights for other policy makers tasked with achieving sustained and widespread behavioural change. These include:
- the importance of having an explicit behavioural change approach informed by behavioural theory and evidence and the alignment of all policy tools to reinforce behavioural change
- the power of a comprehensive approach that achieves an effective balance between the various components (e.g., education, information, mass media, legislation, restrictive measures or incentives, and assistance services) within government policy parameters and funding constraints
- the benefits of working effectively with other jurisdictions and stakeholders within an agreed framework which clearly outlines areas of responsibility and facilitates cooperation and sharing of resources
- the need for a planned, long-term approach and investment—ongoing investment— in tobacco control, including improving the effectiveness of measures, maintaining funding for mass media promotion, and a progressive toughening of regulations which has been required to keep tobacco use on a downward trend
- the importance of an evidence-based approach, including investment in research and evaluation to assist in planning the evolution of the comprehensive policy, where resources are best directed and in demonstrating that behavioural change is being achieved.
Tobacco control also highlights some difficulties in achieving behavioural change, including:
- overcoming the more resistant barriers to behavioural change facing particular groups, such as Indigenous people and people with a mental illness
- the difficulties in keeping communication channels open among the various jurisdictions and stakeholders, not only during policy formulation, but particularly in the implementation phase of the current National Tobacco Strategy.
These findings highlight some of the core skills required by policy and programme managers involved with behavioural change strategies. They include communication and influencing skills, the ability to work cooperatively, and big picture thinking skills, in addition to the more traditional analytical, conceptual, and project management skills. There is also a need for policy makers to be aware of, and apply, behavioural change theory and to understand the need to invest in evaluation and research.
Changing behaviour—The National Landcare Programme (NLP)
A case study undertaken by the Commission of the National Landcare Programme, managed by DaFF, demonstrates how DaFF has used the programme to engage with landholders in order to encourage their adoption of natural resource management measures.
The NLP aims to tackle the problem of improving natural resource management in Australia.
The NLP has successfully engaged landholders using two key behavioural change techniques to influence them to adopt natural resource management measures:
- support for Landcare groups and other groups, which have targeted landholders most ready for change, increased landholders’ self-efficacy (i.e. their confidence in their ability to achieve a specific goal in a specific situation), successfully harnessed peer pressure and reduced the risks for individuals associated with adopting new natural resource management measures
- funding conditional incentives for landholders to undertake natural resource management measures with the expectation of reciprocal contributions from landholders themselves.
Interactions among the NLP, other natural resource management programmes, State and Territory Governments, and the regional structure under the current Natural heritage Trust make for a very complex governance and operating environment. The case study illustrates that managing such programmes requires policy and programme managers to possess a range of complex skills and knowledge, including high-level communication skills, flexible and creative thinking, and relationship management.
The case study suggests that a more explicit focus on behavioural change, consideration of behavioural theory and evidence, a renewed focus on stakeholder engagement, and more detailed knowledge of stakeholder preferences could make the NLP even more effective in influencing behavioural change.
7 OECD 2001, Citizens as Partners: Information, Consultation and Public Participation in Policy-Making, <http://www.oecd.org>
8 M. Abramson, et al 2006, Six Trends Transforming Government, IBM Center for the Business of Government, Washington, D.C., p. 20, <http://www.businessofgovernment.org/pdfs/SixTrends.pdf>
9 The Hon. Gary Nairn MP, Address to the Australian Government Solicitor’s Forum, 29 March 2007, <http://www.agimo.gov.au>
10 AGIMO 2007, Principles for ICT-enabled Citizen Engagement, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, <http://www.agimo.gov.au/practice/delivery/checklists/citizen_engage_principles>
11 Marc Holzer et al 2004, Restoring Trust in Government: The Potential of Digital Citizen Participation (Report for the IBM Center for the Business of Government), <http://www.businessofgovernment.org/pdfs/HolzerReport.pdf>
