Data

General Issues
Environment
Specific Topics
Climate Change
Location
Arlon
Wallonie
6700
Belgique
Scope of Influence
Regional
Start Date
End Date
Ongoing
No
Time Limited or Repeated?
A single, defined period of time
Purpose/Goal
Make, influence, or challenge decisions of government and public bodies
Approach
Consultation
Co-governance
Spectrum of Public Participation
Consult
Total Number of Participants
45
Open to All or Limited to Some?
Limited to Only Some Groups or Individuals
Recruitment Method for Limited Subset of Population
Stratified Random Sample
General Types of Methods
Deliberative and dialogic process
General Types of Tools/Techniques
Facilitate dialogue, discussion, and/or deliberation
Recruit or select participants
Propose and/or develop policies, ideas, and recommendations
Legality
Yes
Facilitators
Yes
Facilitator Training
Professional Facilitators
Face-to-Face, Online, or Both
Face-to-Face
Types of Interaction Among Participants
Discussion, Dialogue, or Deliberation
Information & Learning Resources
Expert Presentations
Decision Methods
Voting
Communication of Insights & Outcomes
Public Report
Public Hearings/Meetings
Type of Organizer/Manager
Academic Institution
Funder
Conseil Provincial du Luxembourg
Type of Funder
Regional Government

CASE

Climate Citizen Parliament

12 febbraio 2021 Jaskiran Gakhal, Participedia Team
10 febbraio 2021 Antonin Lacelle-Webster
28 gennaio 2021 julien.vrydagh
General Issues
Environment
Specific Topics
Climate Change
Location
Arlon
Wallonie
6700
Belgique
Scope of Influence
Regional
Start Date
End Date
Ongoing
No
Time Limited or Repeated?
A single, defined period of time
Purpose/Goal
Make, influence, or challenge decisions of government and public bodies
Approach
Consultation
Co-governance
Spectrum of Public Participation
Consult
Total Number of Participants
45
Open to All or Limited to Some?
Limited to Only Some Groups or Individuals
Recruitment Method for Limited Subset of Population
Stratified Random Sample
General Types of Methods
Deliberative and dialogic process
General Types of Tools/Techniques
Facilitate dialogue, discussion, and/or deliberation
Recruit or select participants
Propose and/or develop policies, ideas, and recommendations
Legality
Yes
Facilitators
Yes
Facilitator Training
Professional Facilitators
Face-to-Face, Online, or Both
Face-to-Face
Types of Interaction Among Participants
Discussion, Dialogue, or Deliberation
Information & Learning Resources
Expert Presentations
Decision Methods
Voting
Communication of Insights & Outcomes
Public Report
Public Hearings/Meetings
Type of Organizer/Manager
Academic Institution
Funder
Conseil Provincial du Luxembourg
Type of Funder
Regional Government

The Climate Citizen Parliament brought together 45 citizens drawn by lot to discuss the environment and propose concrete solutions for the provincial council of the Province of Luxembourg in Belgium.

Problems and Purpose

In order to reflect on the changes to be adopted to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 in the Belgian province of Luxembourg and the projects to be carried out to materialize the commitment made, the provincial deputy in charge of sustainable development, Thérèse Mahy (CDH), launched the Citizen Parliament on Climate [1], whose objective was to transmit ideas for concrete solutions to the provincial council.

Background History and Context

On November 28, 2014, the Provincial Council of the Province of Luxembourg unanimously adopted the Positive Energy Territory Charter (TEPOS), by which the Province undertakes to achieve energy neutrality by 2050. However, this text does not detail the practical arrangements to be implemented.

Organizing, Supporting, and Funding Entities

The Provincial Council of Luxembourg is the initiator of the minipublic, the practical organization of which is ensured by a team of researchers from the University of Liège.

Participant Recruitment and Selection

Once the momentum started, the provincial council took the helm of the process and instructed a team of researchers from the University of Liège (ULiège) to organize the mini-public. The selection of participants was delegated to the company Sonecom. On the basis of a survey carried out beforehand, 2,500 citizens were drawn by lot within the province of Luxembourg. A letter was sent to them, to which 75 of them responded favorably. In the end, 45 of these 75 volunteers were selected on the basis of age, gender, territorial distribution and professional occupation criteria. In addition, 15 alternates were also selected.

Methods and Tools Used

Know what methods or tools were used? Help us complete this section!

What Went On: Process, Interaction, and Participation

The members of the panel met during the weekends of September 12 and 13, October 3 and 4, and October 24 and 25, as well as during the evening of November 20, 2015. There were 36 participants during the first weekend, 34 for the second, and 33 for the last. Their mission was to write an opinion for the provincial council about the energy neutrality of the province; finding this subject too broad, participants decided to prioritize certain themes. A professional facilitator accompanied the process, while the facilitation of the discussion tables was provided by researchers from ULiège. The process alternated between plenary sessions, expert hearings, and breakout sessions. The drafting of the final report took place during the third weekend; participants were supervised by the main facilitator. The final report was approved in a vote held on November 20, 2015 (absentee votes by email were permitted). It had twenty-four recommendations.

Influence, Outcomes, and Effects

The report was presented by two participants during the meeting of the provincial council on November 27, 2015. It was discussed by the provincial council, which presented a response document in September 2016 to the opinion formulated by the participants. This response document aimed to link the strategic objectives of the council with the opinion formulated by the citizens and to answer the questions formulated by the participants. Follow-up meetings were then scheduled.

Analysis and Lessons Learned

Want to contribute an analysis of this initiative? Help us complete this section!

See Also

References

The original submission of this case entry was adapted from Vrydagh, J., Devillers, S., Talukder, D., Jacquet, V. & Bottin, J. (2020). Les mini-publics en Belgique (2001-2018) : expériences de panels citoyens délibératifs. Courrier hebdomadaire du CRISP, 32(32-33), 5-72. https://doi.org/10.3917/cris.2477.0005. Please refer to the revision history for a detailed account of subsequent edits and additions made by the Participedia community.

External Links

Notes

[1] We thank Christoph Niessen for his help in collecting this information. Cf. in particular C. Niessen, “When Citizen Deliberation Enters Real Politics: How Politicians and Stakeholders Envision the Place of a Deliberative Mini-Public in Political Decision-Making”, Policy Science , volume 52, n ° 3, 2019, p. 481-503.