Activist residents of the semi-rural town of Grez-Doiceau organized a minipublic in 2014 on the future of the town. The G100 was open to all citizens and a portion of the participants were selected by lot.
Problems and Purpose
The main objective behind the organization of the G100 in Grez-Doiceau was to dream of the future of the municipality and to imagine how citizens can act in order to achieve it.
Background History and Context
Relatives of activists involved in the organization of the G100 were previously involved in the establishment of a G'Off within the framework of the G1000. This approach inspired the initiative at Grez-Doiceau.
Organizing, Supporting, and Funding Entities
The initiative was organized by activists from the municipality, who joined forces with the Constellation network and its Belgian unit called Belcompétence. The municipality was not involved in the financing of the activity.
Participant Recruitment and Selection
The approach was based on a mixed recruitment structure. First, a call to all was shared across different networks to invite all those who were interested in participating in the G100. At the same time, some participants were recruited by drawing lots. In the end, 3 of the 50 people present were drawn (while 1,156 phone calls were made).
Methods and Tools Used
This deliberative approach was directly inspired by the G1000 method. The discussions were moderated by 14 volunteer facilitators from the Constellation network from France and Belgium. The organizers used tools such as artistic representations.
What Went On: Process, Interaction, and Participation
The G100 officially took place on October 11 and 12, 2014. During the first day, the organizers presented the objective of the process and the participants, in order to get to know each other, exchanged views in small groups. Subsequently, they presented their visions of the municipality in 2040 in the form of drawings or words. These representations were brought together to form a "common dream". For the second working day, the participants were separated into groups at random in order to develop implementation proposals. These were then grouped together and ten themes were identified. Still in small groups, the participants worked on these themes. At the end of the process, the participants were invited to continue their engagement, if they wanted to, within ten working groups.
Influence, Outcomes, and Effects
After the completion of the G100, several working groups continued to meet and develop concrete actions for the municipality.
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.
