Influencing health policy through public deliberation: Lessons learned from two decades of Citizens'/community juries

Chris Degeling, Lucie Rychetnik, Jackie M. Street, Rae Thomas, Stacy M. Carter

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Citizens’/community juries [CJs] engage members of the public in policy decision-making processes. CJs can be employed to develop policy responses to health problems that require the consideration of both community values and scientific evidence. Based on the principles of deliberative democracy, recent reviews indicate that findings from CJs have successfully been used to influence health policy decision-making. Despite this evidence of success, there appears to be a gap between the goals of health researchers who organize CJs and the needs of policy actors and decision makers. Drawing on our experiences working with CJs and recent research on CJ methods, we describe a synopsis of the current state of the art organized around four key questions, and informed by insights from deliberative theory and critical policy studies. Our intention is to stimulate further discussion as to the types of health policy questions that can be usefully addressed through public deliberation, and provide guidance on the methodological and political dimensions that need to be considered in deciding whether a CJ is an appropriate approach for informing a policy decision-making process.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)166-171
Number of pages6
JournalSocial Science and Medicine
Volume179
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Apr 2017

Fingerprint

Health Policy
deliberation
health policy
citizen
community
Policy Making
Decision Making
decision-making process
Democracy
deliberative democracy
policy studies
Juries
Public Deliberation
Health
Public Policy
health
evidence
decision maker
Research Personnel
decision making

Cite this

Degeling, Chris ; Rychetnik, Lucie ; Street, Jackie M. ; Thomas, Rae ; Carter, Stacy M. / Influencing health policy through public deliberation : Lessons learned from two decades of Citizens'/community juries. In: Social Science and Medicine. 2017 ; Vol. 179. pp. 166-171.
@article{d0f29376a52440f09e1f5cba4a66ae57,
title = "Influencing health policy through public deliberation: Lessons learned from two decades of Citizens'/community juries",
abstract = "Citizens’/community juries [CJs] engage members of the public in policy decision-making processes. CJs can be employed to develop policy responses to health problems that require the consideration of both community values and scientific evidence. Based on the principles of deliberative democracy, recent reviews indicate that findings from CJs have successfully been used to influence health policy decision-making. Despite this evidence of success, there appears to be a gap between the goals of health researchers who organize CJs and the needs of policy actors and decision makers. Drawing on our experiences working with CJs and recent research on CJ methods, we describe a synopsis of the current state of the art organized around four key questions, and informed by insights from deliberative theory and critical policy studies. Our intention is to stimulate further discussion as to the types of health policy questions that can be usefully addressed through public deliberation, and provide guidance on the methodological and political dimensions that need to be considered in deciding whether a CJ is an appropriate approach for informing a policy decision-making process.",
author = "Chris Degeling and Lucie Rychetnik and Street, {Jackie M.} and Rae Thomas and Carter, {Stacy M.}",
year = "2017",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.03.003",
language = "English",
volume = "179",
pages = "166--171",
journal = "Social Science and Medicine",
issn = "0277-9536",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Influencing health policy through public deliberation : Lessons learned from two decades of Citizens'/community juries. / Degeling, Chris; Rychetnik, Lucie; Street, Jackie M.; Thomas, Rae; Carter, Stacy M.

In: Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 179, 01.04.2017, p. 166-171.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Influencing health policy through public deliberation

T2 - Lessons learned from two decades of Citizens'/community juries

AU - Degeling, Chris

AU - Rychetnik, Lucie

AU - Street, Jackie M.

AU - Thomas, Rae

AU - Carter, Stacy M.

PY - 2017/4/1

Y1 - 2017/4/1

N2 - Citizens’/community juries [CJs] engage members of the public in policy decision-making processes. CJs can be employed to develop policy responses to health problems that require the consideration of both community values and scientific evidence. Based on the principles of deliberative democracy, recent reviews indicate that findings from CJs have successfully been used to influence health policy decision-making. Despite this evidence of success, there appears to be a gap between the goals of health researchers who organize CJs and the needs of policy actors and decision makers. Drawing on our experiences working with CJs and recent research on CJ methods, we describe a synopsis of the current state of the art organized around four key questions, and informed by insights from deliberative theory and critical policy studies. Our intention is to stimulate further discussion as to the types of health policy questions that can be usefully addressed through public deliberation, and provide guidance on the methodological and political dimensions that need to be considered in deciding whether a CJ is an appropriate approach for informing a policy decision-making process.

AB - Citizens’/community juries [CJs] engage members of the public in policy decision-making processes. CJs can be employed to develop policy responses to health problems that require the consideration of both community values and scientific evidence. Based on the principles of deliberative democracy, recent reviews indicate that findings from CJs have successfully been used to influence health policy decision-making. Despite this evidence of success, there appears to be a gap between the goals of health researchers who organize CJs and the needs of policy actors and decision makers. Drawing on our experiences working with CJs and recent research on CJ methods, we describe a synopsis of the current state of the art organized around four key questions, and informed by insights from deliberative theory and critical policy studies. Our intention is to stimulate further discussion as to the types of health policy questions that can be usefully addressed through public deliberation, and provide guidance on the methodological and political dimensions that need to be considered in deciding whether a CJ is an appropriate approach for informing a policy decision-making process.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85014616065&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.03.003

DO - 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.03.003

M3 - Article

VL - 179

SP - 166

EP - 171

JO - Social Science and Medicine

JF - Social Science and Medicine

SN - 0277-9536

ER -