STAKEHOLDERS INVOLVMENT
1. INTRODUCTION
Floods are a natural phenomenon and should not be considered an impediment to
economic development.
Flood disasters are the results of the interaction between extreme hydrologic events
and environmental, social and economic processes. But, floods despite their negative
consequences have positive impacts as well because they provide valuable natural
resources, thereby supporting livelihoods and economic activities.
Unfortunately, generally the emphasis is placed only on their destructive nature. That
is why, an integrated approach to flood management can play an important role in
sustainable development.
Stakeholder involvment is crucial to risk, adaptation, and vulnerability assessments.
That is because the stakeholders will be most affected by and adverse flood event
and thus may need to adapt. Stakeholders can be characterised as individuals or
groups who have anything of value that can be affected by an extreme natural
phenomenon as floods or by the actions taken to manage flood risks. They can be
policy-makers, scientists, communities and managers in the sectors and regions
most at risk now and/or in the future.
Individual and institutional knowledge and expertise are the principal resources for
adapting to floods. The adaptive capacity can be developed if stakeholders have time
to strengthen networks, knowledge, and resources, and of course if the have the
willingness to find solutions. The success of an stakeholder involvement means not
only in informing interested and affected people, but also in involving them to act on
the enlarged knowledge. Through an permanent process stakeholders can assess
the viability of adaptive measures by integrating scientific information into their own
social, economic, cultural, and environmental context. Approaches to stakeholder
engagement vary in a large area from passive interactions (the stakeholders only
provide information) to the level where the stakeholders themselves initiate and
design the process.
Current adaptation practices for flood risks are being developed by communities,
governments, Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), and other organised
stakeholders to increase their adaptive capacity. Stakeholders have a role to play in
scenario development and participatory modelling.
Stakeholders are also very important in assessing future needs for developing
policies and the measures to adapt. All these needs have been already recognised in
regional and national approaches to assessing flood risk prevention and mitigation.
Flood management issues are embedded in a lot of societal issues such as
environment, risk, policy and sustainability that need an increasing stakeholder
involvement.
Managers from public and private sectors find more and more that such an
involvement can improve the quality and the sustainability of the policy decisions.
Generally, the best practice in flood management is now shift from the traditional
decide - announce - defend model (in which case the focus is almost exclusively on
technical content) to engage - interact - co-operate model (in which case both
technical content and quality of process are of equal importance).
Together with openness, accountability, effectiveness and coherence, stakeholder's
participation is now recognised to be one of the five principles of good governance.
Public information, consultation and/or participation in flood management decision
are also required by a number of international treaties. These include the Joint
Convention and, in Europe, the Espoo and Aarhus Conventions.
In the same time the OECD/NEA Forum on Stakeholder Confidence (FSC) consider
stakeholder as a convenient label for any actor – institution, group or individual – with
an interest or a role to play in the societal decision-making process.
Different stakeholder's involvement can have in the same time different contributions
and of course different consultation needs at each stage of the decision - making
process.
In flood risk management, a list of possible stakeholders can include: the general
public; demographic groups, residents, representatives or elected officials of local
communities;
national/regional
government
ministries/departments;
regulators;
national/local NGOs, local pressure groups; the media; the scientific research
community; implementing organisations etc.
Stakeholder involvement represents today an integral part of a stepwise process of
decision making. At different phases of a project and / or programme development,
involvement can take the form of sharing information, consulting, dialoguing, or
deliberating on decisions. This processus can be seen as a meaningful part of
formulating and implementing a good policy. Some specific involvement initiatives
can be seen as part of a relationship among the different societal partners who are
concerned by the same issues (e.g. flood management).
Stakeholder involvement techniques must not to consider as convenient tools for
public relations, image-building, or for winning acceptance for a decision taken
behind closed doors.
In some contexts times and the means for stakeholders involvement are specified by
a law, while in other contexts, a specific player need to create the opportunity and the
means for involving other specific stakeholders.
Practitioners develop, apply, and evaluate various techniques for stakeholder
involvement so, a great number of approaches exist described in a large number of
publications.
In different situations it is a need for a short guide to let to the non-specialists in the
purpose to:
 form an idea of what is involved in choosing a technique;
 find their way to pertinent documents.
Because the participation of all stakeholders is not equivalent the need to offer some
knowledge about the different levels of involvement seems to be a pertinent idea. So,
in the following a short and non exhaustive list concerning the positive effects that
may result from stakeholder involvement arrangements will be presented. This short
list is intended to give some highlights for setting criteria that can be use for the
choice of technique for a given situation and for the evaluation of the involvement
process.
2. THE LEVELS OF STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION AND / OR INVOLVEMENT
Different levels of stakeholder participation or involvement are giving taking into
consideration the use of different techniques. The simplest approach consists in
simply transmit information to a passive stakeholder audience. The most complex
approach, situated at the other end of the scale, consist in a technique that can
significantly empower stakeholders within the decision making process.
In the following the way in how to choose a given level of involvement according to
the situation or to the objectives will be presented.
Planners must to take into account that stakeholders may desire, expect or be
entitled to a particular level of involvement. Some preliminary discussions, contact
with or observation of target stakeholder groups and a review of statutory
requirements, can be very helpful to determine the appropriate level. How much an
organisation can or wishes to be involved must to be very clear defined and well
known by all the participants in a project and / or programme.
3. THE POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT
The purpose of different inclusive approaches for information gathering and
deliberation is to enhance the credibility of the decision-making processes. But this is
not the only type of positive effect that can be expected from a stakeholder
involvement initiative.
There are three classes of effects that may result from the application of consultation
and deliberation techniques:
 substantive effects which include better, more acceptable choices from the
environmental, economic, and technical points of view;
 procedural effects which include better use of information; better management;
increased legitimacy of the decision making process;
 contextual effects which include better information to stakeholders and/or the
public; improvement of strategic capacity of decision makers; reinforcement of
democratic practices; increased confidence in institutional players.
All these potential positive effects of stakeholder participation can also used as
justifications for involving stakeholders in policy decisions.
4. SETTING THE CRITERIAS FOR THE SELECTION AND EVALUATION OF THE
TECHNIQUE
The technique that can be suitable for a particular situation depend on the
stakeholders to be engaged and of course on the aims and objectives of the
consultation.
In this situation a stakeholder involvement will need to take into consideration these
aspects of the involvement and to decide on the most appropriate technique to use.
To achieve this purpose a selection criteria must to be developed. The same criteria
can serve later to evaluate the response to the involvement programme.
The appropriate level of involvement represents a fundamental criterion that must be
carefully set and communicated to the potential participants.
As mentioned, an appropriate level of involvement represents a fundamental
criterion. It should be carefully set and communicated to potential participants.
A list of desired effects and goals, as well as of the constraints must to be made. This
list will contain also all form criteria for choosing a technique. After that, the members
of the organisation who want to implement a stakeholder involvement will discuss
both this list and the ranking of criteria. The criteria must to be ranked by order of
importance.
Generally it is known that the involvement techniques are not best used for an
isolated, one-off or add-on initiative. Fact is that an appropriate involvement of
relevant stakeholders is advisable throughout a good management or decisionmaking process. The application of specific techniques can give best results both for
participants and for the institutions that organise the dialogue, if they support a logical
step in well-defined process of management or of decision.
The overall process justifies the use of a specific instrument at a given time, in order
to obtain a needed output. In this process, many different issues or problems can
take centre stage at different times. They can frame the choice of techniques, in the
purpose to elucidate, national or local considerations, or predominantly societal or
technical choices.
5. HOW TO CHOOSE A TECHNIQUE FOR THE STAKEHOLDERS INVOLVMENT
Most publications show that the choice of a technique can be considerate as an art,
and not as a science. Stakeholder involvement techniques usually can be applied to
wide range of issues. As mentioned, the criteria developed in response to a specific
context, constraints, desired goals and effects, can largely differ between different
organisations.
This is the reason why, no “one size fits all” list of criteria must be done a priori. It
must be mentioned that a definitive matrix containing the matching techniques to
criteria don't exist. However, there are a lot of handbooks and manuals who describe
different techniques in terms of generic criteria (e.g. level of involvement, scale of
consultation – intensive vs. extensive, representative, inclusiveness, deliberative
etc.).
The experience in this domain shows that the success of some particular technique
application depend on external factors too (e.g. the phase of decision, the political
context and the cultural context.
After the preliminary list has been developed or the ranked list of criteria was settled,
the planner must to review existing techniques to form an idea of which might fit best.
It can be very helpful to the planner to contact and discuss experience with persons
who already have conducted involvement initiatives. In this situation, the planner can
consult and/or retain the services of a professional to set up and conduct the
initiative, but it is very important that the planner perform himself the preparatory
steps to identify the right family of techniques before buying services.
6. LOOKING TOWARDS IMPLEMENTATION
The major part of the existing publications concerning the stakeholders involvement
and implementation techniques present a wide range of techniques varying from best
practice to flow charts and worksheets that may be printed out.
The organisational goal of informing or educating implies the developing of
appropriate public information materials. Information materials can be useful only if
they can be understood and interpreted by the intended audience.
Preparing an adequate information material, like is preparing an adequate survey
questionnaire, is a professional task. Each must be adapted to the initial position of
the stakeholder population. For the information material and for the survey
questionnaire development, it can be beneficial to perform an in-depth, reducedscale preparatory study exploring the initial positions or the mental models of the
various stakeholders.
Usually, higher levels of involvement imply that participants will have both the
opportunity to communicate their views and judgements in detail and to learn from
other stakeholders. The planner can find the preparatory and / or small-scale studies
and / or consultations very useful for scoping the issues or it identify target
stakeholder groups.
The planners of stakeholder involvement in the technical areas will benefit from
advice on communicating about flood risks, translating the complex information about
floods and possible consequences of flooding into a accessible form, and interacting
with a wide range of stakeholders who possible don't have an technical training. And,
finally, the planner can wish to made a broad announcement of stakeholder
initiatives, or publicise their outcomes using the mass media.
7. TECHNIQUES AVAILABLE FOR HIGHER LEVEL INVOLVEMENT
The commonly-cited techniques corresponding to the higher levels of stakeholder
involvement are discussing, engaging, and partnering. But, there are a lot of other
techniques who can be used as it will be present in the following. It must to be
mention that handbooks for planning, implementing, and evaluating stakeholder
involvement programmes are identified.
8. DIFFERENT LEVELS OF STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION AND / OR
INVOLVEMENT
As it was already said before in this paper all participation is alike so, different levels
of stakeholder participation or involvement are offered by very different techniques.
One approach may simply transmit information to a passive stakeholder audience. At
the other end of the scale, a technique can significantly empower stakeholders within
the decision - making process.
Some organisations proposed a continuum of public involvement which can be
considerate as a very reasonable idea.
Different activities presented in box 1, below can blend into each other because no
strict line can be drawn between adjacent activities.
Box 1
A continuum public involvement
Low level of public involvement or influence:
 Inform, educate, share or disseminate information.
 Gather information, views.
Mid level:
 Discuss through two-way dialogue
High level of public involvement or influence:
 Fully engage on complex issues
 Partner in the implementation of solutions
Planners must know that stakeholders can desire, expect or need to be entitled to a
particular level of involvement. Preliminary discussion, the contact with or the
observation of target stakeholder groups, and finally the review of statutory
requirements, will be very helpful to determine the appropriate level. How much
involvement the organisation can or wishes to offer must be very clearly defined from
the beginning and it must to be clearly communicated to potential stakeholder
participants, at the outset of the programme.
A number of reports of different organisations confirm the need to well clarify the level
of involvement of different stakeholders, and the degree of two-way communication
that can be expected by the participants:
 consulting the public when the legal scope for them to influence the decision is
small sometime can causes anger, so it is important to be clear on what issues
reasonably can be influenced.
 the basis for the decision must be very clearly understood.
 it is important to be clear what the information will be provided to the
stakeholders and what will be the feedback provided by the decision - maker
as a consequence of the stakeholders involvement.
 it must to be taking into consideration the fact that people want to see that they
have influenced the process and have had a meaningful impact on the
outcome.
9. GUIDANCE ON CHOOSING DIFFERENT LEVELS OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Box 2 presents some guidelines in choosing between different levels of public
participation.
How to choose between different levels of public involvement
In what cases may it be appropriate to involve the public?
In all situation concerning matters of safety, local impacts; development of policies,
statutes and new programmes; development and implementation of legislation and
regulations and / or other issues with social, economic, cultural or ethical implications
the implication of stakeholders by sharing or disseminating information is very
important.
Inform and / or educate
Different, factual information is needed to describe a policy, a programme or process;
a decision that has already been made (in the case when no decision is required but
it is considered that the general public needs to know the results of a process even
there is no opportunity to influence the final outcome). Information is needed also in
the case when it is need for acceptance of a proposal before a decision may be
made or in the case of an emergency or crisis who requires immediate action. Also,
information is necessary to abate concerns or prepare for a future involvement.
Discuss or involve
Two-way information exchange is needed. Both 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. If the organiser wishes to encourage discussion
among and with stakeholders; input may shape policy directions and programme
delivery.
Engage
It is necessary for stakeholders to talk to each other regarding complex, value-laden
decisions. Here is a capacity for stakeholders to shape policies that affect them and
also here is opportunity for shared agenda setting and open time frames for
deliberation on issues; options generated together will be respected.
Partner
These means that institutions want to empower stakeholders to manage the process
and stakeholders have accepted the challenge of developing solutions themselves.
In these case institutions are ready to assume the role of enabler and there is an
agreement to implement solutions generated by stakeholders.
10. THE POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT
Bottom-up approaches for information gathering and deliberation are helpful to
enhance the credibility of the decision-making processes. And this is not the only
type of effect that can be expected from a well-run stakeholder involvement initiative.
As it was already mentioned there are three classes of effects may result from the
application of consultation and deliberation techniques:
 substantive - concrete decision outcomes;
 procedural - modifications to the process of deciding;
 contextual - side effects.
Box 3 lists the potential positive effects of stakeholder participation. These can also
be used as justifications for involving stakeholders in policy decisions.
Box 3
Potential positive effects of participatory approaches
Substantive effects:
 More pertinent choices from the environmental point of view
 More pertinent choices from the economic point of view
 More pertinent choices from the technical point of view
 More socially acceptable choices
Procedural effects
 Improvement of the quality of the informational basis of decision processes
and better use of information
 Better integration of the wider context that determines the range of choices for
the decision
 Opening up the domain of choices considered
 More dynamic processes
 Better conflict management
 Increased legitimacy of the decision process
 Improvement of the effectiveness of the process in terms of costs and time
 Improvement of the power of influence of less organised interests
Contextual effects
 Better information to stakeholders and/or the public
 Improvement of strategic capacity of decision makers
 Changes in the perception and conceptualisation of the social context
 Modification in traditional power relations and conflicts
 Reinforcement of democratic practices and citizens’ involvement in public
domains
 Increased confidence in institutional players
11. SETTING CRITERIA FOR TECHNIQUE SELECTION AND EVALUATION
The decision to involve stakeholders can reflect different needs or goals. Different
types of consultation or deliberation processes have the potential to give different
effects.
Finally, each organisation as well as each target set of stakeholders has his own very
specific constraints. For all these reasons, it is important to correlate the stakeholder
involvement technique to needs and constraints keeping in mind the need to achieve
the desired effects and goals. To achieve this target, from the beginning a set of
selection criteria must to be developed. The same criteria will serve later to evaluate
the results of the involvement programme.
As already mentioned, the appropriate level of involvement represent a fundamental
criterion. It must be carefully set and communicated to potential participants. Criteria
could be drawn taking into account the involvement goals, or the potential effects.
Members of the organisation who will implement stakeholder involvement should
discuss this list and the ranking of criteria taking into account the order of importance.
In fact, the appropriate involvement of relevant stakeholders is advisable throughout
a management or decision-making process. The specific techniques will give best
results, for participants and for the institutions that organise dialogue, if they support
a logical step in well-defined process of management or of decision. In this case the
overall process justifies the use of a specific method at a given time, in order to
obtain a needed output. In this process, different issues or problems take centre
stage at different times. This will give a frame to the choice of techniques, in order to
elucidate national or local considerations or predominantly societal or technical
choices.
12. CHOOSING A TECHNIQUE
Most publications show that the actual choice of a technique is more an art than a
science. Generally stakeholder involvement techniques can be applied to a wide
range of issues. As already discussed, the criteria developed in response to a
specific context, constraints, desired goals and effects, differ between organisations.
That is why, no one size fits all list of criteria can be offered a priori to an organisation
or to decision - makers. A definitive matrix matching techniques to criteria don't exist.
However, there are a lot of handbooks and manuals who describe different
techniques in terms of generic criteria meaning level of involvement, scale of
consultation intensive or extensive, representative character, inclusiveness etc.
Some studies notes two families of criteria for selecting a technique
 criteria related to process considerations;
 criteria to the acceptance by the public of the technique.
Experience shows that the success of a particular technique depend also on external
factors: the phase of decision, the political and cultural context.
When the decision - maker or organisation’s ranked list of criteria is settled, the
planner must review existing techniques to form an idea of which of them respond
better to his needs.
When the set of potentially suitable techniques was identified, more detailed sources
must be consulted. From this point of view there are a number of handbooks who
point the reader to detailed information. The Internet is also a useful tool for
searching out methodological descriptions and case studies.
One means for comparing techniques is to consult very pragmatic advice on their
implementation.
It will be of great help for the planner to contact and discuss experience with persons
who already have conducted involvement initiatives. Such consultation can take
place at different points as the planner moves through the steps suggested above.
As the desired technique comes into focus, planners must try to make some ideas
exchange with persons who have used that particular method.
13.
WHAT
TECHNIQUES
ARE
AVAILABLE
FOR
HIGHER
LEVEL
INVOLVEMENT?
Box 4 shortly describes some combination techniques.
Box 4
Commonly cited techniques for informing deliberation through stakeholder
involvement
Public hearings: regulated, formal arrangements for times and places at which
members of the general public and other types of stakeholders can give evidence or
question public authorities about decisions under consideration.
Deliberative polling: but collects views after different persons have been introduced
to the issue and have thought about it. The purpose is to have an indication of what
people would think if they had the time and information to consider the issue. This
technique includes a feedback session, sometimes with a high media profile.
Focus groups: these are small groups of invited or recruited persons to discuss a
theme or proposal; provides insight on their reactions, values, concerns and
perspectives, and give an indication of how group dynamics influence opinions.
Citizen advisory groups: these are small groups of persons who represent various
interests or expertise (e.g. community leaders) who meet on a regular or ad hoc
basis to discuss concerns and provide informed input.
Consultative groups: these are forums that call together the key representatives of
civil society (NGOs and CSOs), economic and political spheres, to make policy
recommendations and to improve the ongoing dialogue between these actors.
Nominal group process: is a structured group interaction technique designed to
generate a prioritized list of high-quality ideas within two hours or less. This technique
is particularly helpful for setting goals, defining obstacles, and gathering creative
responses to a particular question.
Multi-actor policy workshops: in this case small groups mixing key stakeholders
and technical experts, aimed at collecting a range of viewpoints on what are the
important question raised by the dialogue issue. This technique may allow an
innovative view of the problem to emerge, along with new approaches to its solution.
Charette: in the case of the use of this technique groups formed by 20 to 60 persons
work co-operatively to find solutions to a given problem in a set time period (generally
one day). For applying this technique an experienced facilitator is needed. This
technique is use to assemble practical ideas and viewpoints at the beginning of a
decision process, and to address difficult matters involving many different interests.
Delphi process: persons with different expertise or interests relevant to a given
problem participate in a series of planned and facilitated discussions (face-to-face or
by correspondence). The method is used to develop fact-based decisions and
strategies reflecting expert opinion on well-defined issues.
Round tables: in this case representatives of different views or interests come
together to make decisions on an equal footing. The method is most valuable when it
is used at the beginning of a process to set broad policy orientations.
Citizen task forces: a group of persons with some special knowledge or
representing some interest of the community may be appointed to a temporary task
force, organised to consider in depth some issue on which decision is required. The
group need to meets a number of times in the company of organising entity
representatives, the purpose being to consider information and to formulate
recommendations.
Study circles: a number of 5 to 20 people agree to meet together a number of times
to discuss a specific topic. The information materials are provided over time. It is
useful to monitor or document the evolution of a group’s thinking in regard to a
particular issue and generate recommendations based on a shared body of
knowledge.
Scenario workshop: in this case a local meeting will be organized. Many different
scenarios are used to stimulate vision making and dialogue between policy makers,
experts, business and concerned citizens. The technique allows the exploration of
different possible future strategies and at the same time facilitates actual cooperation
in the direction of the strategy chosen.
Consensus conferences: these are organised at a national level. A small group of
volunteer citizens is chosen to be representative of the public at large or to represent
a spectrum of viewpoints. They meet for several times to learn about the dialogue
issue and to question relevant experts. At the end the participants produce a report
with their conclusions and recommendations, to be delivered to public decision
makers.
Participatory site selection: different committees grouping representatives of the
citizen and various types of technical experts work together a number of months or
years to develop solutions acceptable from both a technical and societal point of
view. Different other techniques can be used to inform or consult the larger
community (e.g., information campaigns) and the committee can extend its lifetime to
monitoring the installation.
Local monitoring, oversight and information committees: instated at the time of
pre-selection or created when a risk-producing installation is built, such committees
are mechanisms for ongoing involvement and dialogue among stakeholders and with
the general public. Different levels of empowerment are provided to these
committees: in some contexts, they take major decisions or at the other end of the
scale, they serve primarily as a forum for exchange and dissemination of information.
They typically include representatives from elected bodies and from civil society
organisations and they can be of small or very large size (6 to 90 persons).
Stakeholder involvement techniques may be focused on any suitable dialogue issue.
In the given case, the dialogue issue could be flood management overall, or any of
the specific decisions, options, steps, or issues (economic, ethical etc.) that make up
part of flood risk management.
14. STAKEHOLDERS INVOLVMENT FLOOD RISK MAPPING IN ROMANIA
Taking into account the flood events who take place in the last years in the
Romanian part of the Danube Floodplains and the produced damages, it is
considered that mapping both flood hazard and flood risk in the area are of a great
importance. That is why, from the beginning the idea of mapping the floodable areas
in this region raised a strong interest and the DANUBE FLOODRISK project is
considered as a very important one.
It is considered that not only the decision - makers but also public and different other
groups of stakeholders are and can be involved in project implementation.
Identified stakeholders are:
- decision - makers meaning all state organisms involved in flood management at
state level: Ministry of Environment and Forest, Ministry of Administration and the
Interior, Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, Ministry of Regional
Development and Tourism, Ministry of Public Health, Ministry of Education,
Research, Youth and Sports, Ministry of Economy, Trade and the Business
Environment, Ministry of Communication and Information Society, Ministry of Public
Finance;
- state agencies playing a role in flood risk management: Romanian Water National
Administration (including Water Basinal Administrations Olt, Jiu, Arges - Vedea,
Buzau - Ialomita and Dobrogea - Litoral and the representatives of the Administration
at county level); General Inspectorate for Emergency Situations, National
Meteorological Administration, National Administration of Land Development,
Romanian National Company for Motorways and National Roads SA; State
Inspectorate in Construction; Romanian National Committee for Emergency
Situations, Romanian Inter - ministerial Committee for Emergency Situations;
National Institute of Hydrology and Water Management etc.
- other agencies at national level: S.C. HIDROELECTRICA S.A
- regional level factors:
 at county level: Counties Committees for Emergency Situations; Counties
Councils (Caras - Severin, Mehedinti, Dolj, Olt, Teleorman, Giurgiu, Calarasi,
Ialomita,
Braila,
Galati,
Tulcea
and
Constanta
counties);
Counties
Inspectorates for Emergency Situations (for all the counties situated in the
Danube floodplains);
 at local level: Local Councils (municipal, town and communal), Local
Committees for Emergency Situations.
- citizens
- non - governmental organisations at different levels.
In Romania, the Stakeholder oriented flood risk assessment for the Danube
floodplains - DANUBE FLOODRISK - project objectives and tasks were already
presented in numerous conferences, workshops and round - tables with a great
number of participants being appreciated as a very important step in flood risk
management and in the future implementation of European Flood Directive.
REFERENCES
[http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/conferences/2004/cer2004/pdf/rtd_2004_guide_
success_communication.pdf]
ESMAP, the World Bank and ICMM. Community Development Toolkit. 2005.
www.esmap.org, www.worldbank.org, www.icmm.com
European Commission - COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION Towards a
reinforced culture of consultation and dialogue - General principles and minimum
standards for consultation of interested parties by the Commission. Brussels,
11.12.2002. COM(2002) 704 final
European Commission (2004)
communications. Online:
European research: A guide to successful
OECD (2003) Engaging citizens online for better policy-making. Policy brief. Paris:
OECD Observer. Online: [http://www.oecd.org/publications/Pol_brief]
OECD/NEA/RWM/FSC(2004)7 - Stakeholder involvement techniques. Short Guide
and Annotated Bibliography. Forum on Stakeholder Confidence (FSC)