Contact us

Citizens' Assemblies and Digital Wrapping

Citizens' assemblies. With the rise of digital communication and engagement, some believe that face-to-face discussions about local issues are on the wane. As an antidote, we are seeing more interest in Citizens’ Assemblies, which place personal encounters at their heart. But what if we can have the best of both? The depth and reflective practice of the Assembly with the wide participation and engagement of online engagement and social media? 

We can. And it can work well. 

Creating an effective citizens' assembly 

Citizen engagement is at the heart of governance and of democracy. For democracy to work well it needs citizens that are interested and able to engage in decisions. These assemblies are defined as a group of people who are brought together to learn about and discuss local or wider issues and they need to have a few key features to work well:

  • Be representative of the wider population
  • The evidence presented to assembly members must be balanced, accurate and comprehensive
  • Participants should hear from, and be able to question, a wide range of specialists i.e. researchers, people with direct experience of the issue, other stakeholders and campaigners

Citizen assemblies and engagement

The ways we are engaging have transformed in the past few years. The obvious phenomenon is the rise of engagement through social media  - both communication platforms like Twitter, Facebook and blogs but also with direct petition sites. We are increasingly discovering both the reach of digital engagement and the extent to which it is open to manipulation. Paid content, highly targeted exposure to one-sided content, and the creation of echo-chambers all contribute to greater polarisation. This is at a time when issues facing citizens and  governments are perhaps more acute and complex than they have been in decades. 

The model of Citizens’ Assemblies has gained attention with a wave of them beginning in 2019. Supporters of the idea cite Ireland’s positive experience using a Citizens’ Assembly to advise on important topics - fixed term parliaments, referendums, population ageing, and climate change. Assemblies are seen as a positive means of involving citizens in policy-making, in a way that is open, diverse and credible to people across policy divides. If politics are getting more tribal, managed face-to-face debate is seen as a way of breaching seemingly entrenched loyalties in pursuit of a compromise for the common good. 

Citizens’ assemblies are just one example of engagement that places face-to-face encounters at its heart. Architects and planners have developed the format of the Planning Charette and more widely, participatory planning. In these activities, citizens have access to experts to help shape ideas about their local environment and operate within a structured process for managing conflicting views. These processes are seen as key to obtaining public views in an alloyed manner and a way of enabling people with differing views to reach agreed compromises and ways forward. 

Nevertheless, the number of people who are actually ensconced in a Citizens’ Assembly is low. An organisation tracking Citizens’ Assemblies in the UK lists them as having 60-100 participants (1). This works and can work very well, but rather like a statistically “representative sample” it is not the same as mass engagement. 

At Commonplace we often provide a “digital wrapper” for processes that emphasise the centrality of face-to-face activities. In 2023, the London Borough of Camden used Commonplace to talk about its Citizens’ Assembly  as part of its engagement for a nighttime strategy. The project itself received over 400 contributions and 3500+ visitors.

In 2017, Commonplace also supported a planning charrette in Havant, Hampshire run by architects Levitt-Bernstein. The Commonplace website was viewed by over 1,300 people (counting only those who engaged beyond the Landing Page - the total visitors to the site number over 1,800). 200 people responded online contributing 365 responses. Clearly, far more people engaged with the website than could practically attend the charettes and in that sense, the digital platform achieved its goal. The information received helped the design team to get a better understanding of the place, as well as helping to frame the workshops in terms of subject matter to be addressed.  

In essence, the two models of best practice - face-to-face and digital - combine to create a basis for change that is widely disseminated to the public, understood and engaged with.  

Want to find out more? Book a demo with one of our experts.

Contact us to find out more


David Janner-Klausner

David Janner-Klausner

Co-founder & Deputy CEO