| Contextual Infrastructure Planning and Design |
| Best Practice Community Consultation: Advice
to Project Managers |
| By Fiona Court, Sydney, Australia 61 2 9743 0333, courtf@pbworld.com,
fcourt@ppk.com.au
|
| From the perspective of
a government or proponent project manager, the imperative of any new
project is to reach a conclusion about its economic, environmental
and social viability. Desirably, the process will result in a product
that is approved of and supported by a majority of community members
and stakeholders. |
|
Outside of the technical aspects of a project, there are two fundamental
questions that project managers face: how to engage the political
and community consultation processes and how to manage a project within
their context. This article was written to provide advice to project
proponents and managers as they consider the assessment task requirement.
A brief overview of some of the challenges presented by the community
consultation process, and the basis for determining a program's success,
are followed by two case studies.
Figure 1: Advantages and disadvantages of conducting community
consultation (Source: Social Policy Development Unit, 1998,
Participation and the NSW Policy Process: A Discussion Paper
for the NSW Cabinet Office.) |
Challenges of the Community Consultation
Process
Managing community involvement in engineering-oriented projects such
as waste management, water or roads is not easy. Whilst some public
debates may be over the best location for a new community swimming
pool, others that fall within the responsibility of the government
engineer may involve more sensitive issues, such as new waste management
processes.
These issues are even more difficult to manage effectively if they
prompt diverse public responses, particularly if such responses are
diametrically opposed. The situation becomes even more complex when
dealing with multiple local government jurisdictions because of the
added difficulties of gaining political agreement across government
boundaries and allocating costs and benefits between different communities.
Community consultation planners must aim to assist project managers
with the process of managing social and political influences on the
development of infrastructure projects. This task includes project
managers on how to handle their internal clients, the project development
team and the consultation process.
In an ideal world, community consultation would result in majority
agreement on key issues, lateral thinking, win-win outcomes with community
discussion and input to the project, and no legal defence costs. In
the real world, however, achieving these results may not be that easy.
Several of the advantages and disadvantages of conducting community
consultation are presented in Figure 1. Some of the challenges are
as follows.
Political Process. The community consultation
process can appear to be in conflict with the political process that
involves elected representatives, special interest groups, environment
groups, the media and, if possible (but not always) the wider community.
Response to Change. Embracing change is not such
an easy matter for many communities. They often struggle with both
the nature and pace of change presented by many of our projects, and
advocate caution as they cling to the constant. There are many theories
about this societal response, particularly when government decision-making
is involved, but it provides a difficult context for infrastructure
planning.
Media Influence. Without question, the media affect how community
residents think and feel about a development. Sensationalist reporting
styles have certainly contributed to a lack of public tolerance in
assessing urban changes, and often reporting can be inaccurate, biased
or opinionated. According to E. Papadakis' Environmental Politics
and Institutional Change, published in 1996 by Cambridge University
Press, this can lead to an adversarial situation in which:
- People's ability to learn about the real
state of affairs regarding a project is limited.
- Intolerance is stirred up and attempts to
understand differences in opinion are undermined.
- The debate gets limited to rigid and absolute
dichotomies (if a particular policy is right, then another must
automatically be wrong).
- Imaginative or lateral thinking alternatives
are quickly given more value for their denigration of political
rivals than for their positive contribution to a proposal.
- Particular standpoints are attached to people
who come to embody these ideals, so defending these ideals becomes
personal and flexibility and consideration get lost.
NIMBYism. NIMBYism (not-in-my-back-yard) is an easily applied
status that can preclude exploration of concerns about a project and
allow easy criticism of people who chose not to agree to it on the
grounds of perceived unacceptable social and environmental impact.
NIMBYism can also lure planners or engineers into a dangerously cynical
position in which we feel we don't have to address real community
issues. Many project initiatives have been lost, supposedly to NIMBYism,
but if we look deeper, we may see that the outcome could have been
different if the project managers had been able to address the underlying
human and political processes that accompany project planning.
Achieving a Successful Consultation
Process
There are various definitions of community consultation, some of which
depend on the consultant's perspective and past experiences. Whatever
the process, however, various attempts have been made to establish
the criteria for determining if a consultation process is "successful."
This, too, can depend on perspective, as well as an adequate budget.
The Community's Perspective. Communities tend to see the consultation
process as successful if the process is honest, regardless of whether
the ultimate decision is completely satisfactory to all parties, and
if feedback from the community is recognised and resolved one way
or another. To achieve success from the community perspective, the
project manager needs to provide consultation avenues that enable
community members to:
- Obtain information easily
- Have confidence in the contact point
- Explore ways to further mitigate impacts
and implement design or policy changes
- Object to the proposal and/or contribute
to the rejection of a proposal
- Express discontent with traditional political
institutions and government decision-making.
The Project Team's Perspective. The project team is key to
a successful consultation process. Team members must be capable of
clear and objective public debate and have empathy with community
needs. Prior training or an understanding about community involvement
is essential. To achieve success, the team must:
- Maintain the integrity of the task, clearly
identify the objectives of the consultation program, and see that
everyone understands the collective goals
- Identify at the start exactly who is to be
reached by the consultations and why
- Have a project manager who is the internal
champion of the consultation process, not one who is cynical and
reluctant to engage in a robust process
- Work hard toward successful community initiatives
- Be creative, innovative and flexible in response
to community ideas and the project itself.
The Consultation Budget. Also key to the success of the community
consultation process is an adequate budget. The level of return on
the investment, or success of a program, can depend on this budget.
The ratio between the level of financial resources applied and the
success of a program is not an even one. Even after careful planning
has identified objectives and a team with a creative and flexible
approach has been put to the task, throwing money at something will
not necessarily result in a meaningful program. The level of money
to be spent depends on the characteristics of the project and likely
community interest (read political interest).
In all cases, the budget must be relevant to the task at hand, the
size of the audience to be reached and the input required by legislation
and agreed process. Based on project experience, we advise clients
that the level of return can be measured exponentially (Figures 2
and 3).
Case Studies
Despite the ongoing development of social and environmental impact
assessment methodologies, government and project proponents can still
look forward to extensive criticism, sceptical media and claims of
incompetence and conspiracy. We can be instrumental in minimizing
these reactions, however, by capitalizing on our experience and successes
in community consultation projects.
The two following case studies that we were involved with illustrate
the exponential "curve of return" on the level of resources
applied to a consultation program, and the success of that program
given social and political influences.
Stormwater
Management Plans
A recent state government direction required local councils to prepare
stormwater management plans on a catchment basis in consultation with
the community. The prescribed objectives of the community consultation
were to encourage the community to accept a degree of "ownership"
of the resulting Management Plan.
Within the Cooks River catchment are 400,000 residents who speak more
than 10 languages, 100,000 businesses and 13 local government areas.
With just six months to prepare the plan and limited resources, councils
split the consultation focus between key stakeholders (stormwater
managers, interest groups and government agencies) and the wider community.
The community consultation strategy included:
- Raising community awareness through distribution
of a project summary, media interest stories in many local
newspapers, colour posters in public locations such as libraries,
flyers delivered to households adjacent to the river and direct
contact with key interest groups
- Receiving community input through a questionnaire,
three community workshops, and a stand at a local community festival
- Providing opportunity for community review of the plan through
public exhibition and community launch of the plan.
Figure 2: Level of Return |
| 
Figure 3: Moderate Level of Return
|
| 
Figure 4: High Level of Return
|
Even with these steps, the community consultation program involved
much less than one percent of the community, perhaps either because
community members were not interested enough to be involved in stormwater
management issues or did not understand their involvement in stormwater
pollution problems. The key stakeholders who have the Cooks River
as their focus and understand stormwater issues were the main participants.
The key conclusions from this case are:
- Public meetings were not the most successful choice of activity
for the community because the subject matter was too broad and
covered too wide an area.
- Providing the "opportunity" to
participate is a narrow interpretation of the community's "willingness"
to participate.
- Interest in the issue needs to be stimulated
prior to involving the community and attempting to gain residents'
ownership of a plan, particularly for an issue such as stormwater
management.
- Education and awareness strategies probably
should have been undertaken and given adequate time and energy.
Given the study area size, the level of return for the investment
was therefore only moderate, as shown in Figure 4.
Liverpool
to Parramatta Rapid Bus Transitway Overview Report
Through the local government areas of Parramatta, Holroyd, Fairfield
and Liverpool in southwest Sydney, this project examined preliminary
designs for 30 kilometres (18 miles) of public transport infrastructure.
Input into decision-making was developed via an Overview Report released
prior to the commencement of formal approvals processes. The Overview
Report, which outlined key elements of the project, was widely distributed.
It was agreed that community comment should be obtained through a
wide range of activities that included:
- Distribution of more than 100,000 newsletters
- A toll-free telephone information line
- An interactive Web site
- Advertisements in all local and regional
newspapers.
Comments were sought through:
- Staffed displays in shopping centres and
the local market
- Displays at more than 25 public venues including
public libraries
- Briefings to special interest groups such
as chambers of commerce.
Consulting with groups not fluent in English was particularly important
as up to 60 percent of the residents in the Fairfield local government
area speak a language other than English at home. Information brochures
including maps were translated and distributed via community networks,
support groups and clubs. Advertisements were placed in newspapers
and media releases were sent to ethnic radio. Fully briefed interpreters
were present at staffed shopping centre displays.
To summarise this program:
- More than 1,500 people participated directly in the consultation
program and many thousands more were aware of and talking about
the proposals. This was in a potential walking catchment area
of 60,000 people. There were four councils involved but no local
steering committee. The NSW Department of Transport "managed"
the process, and local politics could not "stall" the
process to resolve relatively local issues.
- The independent needs of each local government
area were noted-vigorous debate and planning compromise was still
needed. Council officers had to work hard consulting their own
internal clients (successfully!). This was very important and
should be a recognised element of every consultation process.
- The overwhelming response was that the community
cared about the impacts of the bus route and was concerned about
how it would fit into the context of regional public transport
provisions. The consultation program identified that awareness
of transit needs was high and, subsequently, there was a strong
public voice supporting the approvals process for public transport
improvements.
- Engaging the wider community gave the proposal
"backbone" and stimulated expectations for ongoing community
involvement.
The level of return for the level of investment in community consultation
was very high, as illustrated in Figure 4 on the previous page.
Whilst a proposal should not be developed to concrete substance (resulting
in fait accompli consultation), a clear proposal direction
was still required for many in the community to consider being involved.
This was a sensitive balance indeed.
Lessons
Learned
From our experience on the two case studies presented and other projects,
we have five lessons that we advise the local government project manager
follow when addressing the social and political drivers of a project.
These are:
- Be comfortable with the internal client. These may be
political entities, overseeing committees or a board with veto
powers. For combined government initiatives, understand each individual
client's agendas. Before looking outward to the community, look
inward to assess how to achieve a consolidated approach.
- Be familiar with the community audience
issues and understand the context of the project. Brief the
consulting team in a reiterative process. Consultation can be
a difficult process and it is nigh impossible without the project
manager's support.
- Consciously develop a list of "manoeuverables"
(my word). These are items that are negotiable. The concept
should not be concrete when consultation is starting, nor should
it be so vague that it is difficult to understand. Do not underestimate
"design" elements. A community will react to any facility
that is visually intrusive or does not contribute to the cohesiveness
of a community setting.
- Focus on the people, the team and the
approach. Success lies with:
- Maintaining the integrity of the project team and the program
objectives
- The project manager acting as the internal champion and leading
the consultation process
- Being flexible, accepting creativity and giving it a chance
to rise early in the process.
- Work hard to demonstrate the successful
inclusion of community initiatives. Resist the ego of the
consultant designer, pick up on sensible community ideas and insist
on their incorporation. Change midstream is great, although demanding
on the project manager, and it reflects upon flexibility. Work
with, not against, the subjectivity that will naturally arise
when ideas cannot be incorporated, explain how and why.
Consultation will be more successful if these lessons are taken into
account. See if a consultation planner can assist you. The first task
of a consultation program may be to consult inwardly prior to consulting
outwardly. Next, sponsor a workshop for your design team and the consultation
planner to make sure each of the above five points can be met and,
if need be, examine how to meet them.
Next, examine how to achieve the best "rate of return" for
monies spent because internal resources and money spent will need
to be justified. Finally, encourage a strong consultation report that
examines all areas where the proposal was noted and discussed. With
these steps, your chances of achieving political agreement at the
end of the day are much more likely. |
|
| Fiona Court is an Environmental Planner specialising
in community planning for PPK Environment & Infrastructure. She
has qualifications in science and planning and has worked in communications
and consultation for some eleven years. Fiona works with all levels
of government, the private sector and communities to communicate and
understand different proposals, and where possible, participate in
the decision-making process and in ongoing liaison and monitoring.
She has expertise in recreation and open space planning, transport
and access infrastructure, ports, building developments, water management,
solid waste and wastewater contaminated site remediation and airports. |
|
