Problems and Purpose

The 2012 "Region of Consciousness" public engagement process was designed to involve citizens and local civil society in the development and redesign of the Mauthausen and Gusen concentration camps. The need for public consultation was determined when some of the locals wanted to tear down the remaining Nazi-era buildings. In response, the National Heritage Agency (BDA) issued a demolition ban. Following this ban, the BDA, along with the Federal Monuments Office, organized round table discussions between representatives from victim protection groups, local community members, historical experts, and both federal and municipal authorities of the three neighbouring villages - Mauthausen, Gusen, and St. Georgen.[1] These entities supported the idea of letting those most affected by the area to answer the question: "How can we envision the future of a region, when we are still carrying the traces of a burdened past?"[2] It was hoped that, through consultations, new ideas would be generated for projects and architectural regeneration to overcome the disagreements and conflicts:

• Between the federal government and local populations regarding the memorial protection status of Nazi SS barracks
• Between those who want to forget the past and those who want to preserve and honour it
• Between younger and old generations regarding the historical importance of the area
• Between tourists and locals (e.g. instance of the former perceiving the latter as 'Nazis' and instigating hostilities)

Knowledge about this past along with the respectful commemoration of it, could join together and result in desired benefits for the present through this process. Thirty-seven people were selected from the population at random to engage in a creative process over the course of day and a half. There they explored perceptions, expectations, and fears concerning the Bewusstseinsregion Projekt, as well as proposing and developing possible solutions.[3]

Participation during "Idea Workshops" allowed residents to collectively debate and discuss their visions of the future, in a way that did not deny the region's past while also including new and desirable perspectives for the region's development. The shared development process ensured that a shared vision of the future was supported by the vast majority of citizens. 

Background History and Context

The legacy of the Nazi regime maintains an effect on the citizens living in the three neighbouring villages of Mauthausen, Gusen and St. Georgen in Austria. This history is manifest in the concentration camp buildings in Mauthausen and Gusen, and in an armament factory in St. Georgen. While some of these facilities already function as memorials, it was not yet decided what to do with others: tear them down, develop them for other purposes, or to also hold them as memorial facilities. 

Organizing, Supporting, and Funding Entities

The public consultation process was required by the BDA, the Federal Monuments Office, Austrian Ministry of Sustainability and Tourism, and the Austrian Society for Environment and Technology - all of which have jurisdiction over the construction and development of public memorials. The process was designed by professionals from the Institute for Conflict Research. The entire process was supported by the surrounding municipalities. 

Project leader: 

• Alfred Zauner

Project execution:

• Alfred Zauner
• Brigitte Halbmayr
• Paul Mahringer
• Peter Menasse
• Michael Patak[4]

Participant Recruitment and Selection

For the six focus groups, experts were chosen and invited by the project managers. Those chosen included experts in science, art and culture, regional development and economic authorities, emigrants from the region, and those working in the field of memorial and historical preservation. 

For the Citizen Councils, participants were chosen from those living in each of the three municipalities. Participants were randomly selected using a number generator assigned to residents in the municipal registries. A gender quota of 50% was set and in two out of the three citizens’ councils six men and six women participated, while the third council consisted of five men and seven women. Occupation appeared mixed in all councils. Age quotas were also set so that the councils would reflect the population and - crucial to this specific project - to ensure inter-generational dialogue. In all, 500 people were chosen by lot and mailed an invitation to participate in the three idea workshops. 36 people were selected from respondents. 

The “Market place of ideas” and the final presentation was open to the public.[5]

Methods and Tools Used

The first phase of the process involved focus groups with targeted audiences including experts and stakeholders. Following the focus groups, three Citizen Councils (BürgerInnenrat - which organizers in this case termed "Idea workshops") were held in each of the three municipalities. The final event was open to the public and used a Market Place of Ideas approach during which members of the public - including those who had grown up in the region but now lived abroad - could learn about, discuss, and contribute to the Citizen Council's final decisions. 

Citizen Councils

In the Citizen Councils twelve participants deliberated the future prospects of the region. In this setting a special form of moderation was applied: Dynamic Facilitation, a method developed by Jim Rough (USA) in the early 2000s[6]. He called the original version of Citizen Councils, Wisdom Councils. The deliberative process is conceptualized as an open, inclusive, and dynamic conversation. At the start of the process the facilitator asked: “considering future prospects of the region, what topic do you find most important, what does your gut tell you is most urgent?” After having collected several topics and decided, what is most important for the group to talk about, the facilitator addressed one person at a time and listened. Any idea or sentiment is given space. The facilitator documents everything that is said on four flip charts visible to everyone: Problems, Solutions, Concerns and Facts. Then they ask another person to volunteer to speak. This process attempts to create an open and inclusive atmosphere. Although all participants hold a conversation with each other, they almost never directly talk to another, but only to the facilitator. Through this, aggression can be ventilated, without directly attacking other participants. Facilitators never censor what is said by participants. Dynamic Facilitation means moving with the energy of the group. Whatever appears important enough to be said, is welcome. Everything is documented on the flip charts, without exception.[7]

While in the first few hours mostly problems are noted while solutions are discussed later. Periodically, the facilitator summarizes the discussion so points can be further developed in the following sessions. In the end, participants draft a collective statement containing collectively agreed upon ideas. These statements were then presented to the public and discussed with other local citizens and politicians.[8]

What Went On: Process, Interaction, and Participation

To develop new perspectives for the region, a participatory process was designed by the project managers from the Institute for the Study of Conflicts. Two participatory instruments were employed: focus groups with experts, and the Citizen Councils (BürgerInnenrat), which were made up of twelve randomly selected local citizens who deliberate for one and a half days.

Schedule of Events

11/20/ 2012 

Launch event with the members of the municipal councils of Mauthausen, Langenstein and St. Georgen, at Donausaal Mauthausen

01/2013-03/2013

Focus groups

2/1&2/ 2013

First Idea Workshop, St. Georgen

3/1&2/2103

Second Idea Workshop, Langenstein

3/15&16/2013

Third Idea Workshop, Mauthausen

3/22/2013

Idea Marketplace, Mauthausen

4/26/2013

Public presentation event, Donausaal Mauthausen

Focus Groups

From January to March 2013 six focus groups were organized with experts from: 1) science, art and culture, 2) regional development, 3) economy, 4) emigrants from the region, 5) memorial initiatives and 6) an open focus group.

Civic Councils

In February and March three Citizen Councils were organized, one in each village: Mauthausen, Gusen and St. Georgen with the support of municipal authorities.

The innovative element in this project is the idea of dealing with the topic of the Nazi past and our relationship to history, by means of a participatory process. With professional facilitation, residents of the region exchanged views on the difficult and complicated situation in the region. The conversation included perceptions, annoyances, expectations, disappointments, and hopes regarding their region and its history. A sense of community across the generations was felt to be particularly fruitful and was achieved in this participation process through age-related mixing. The youngest participant was 15, the oldest was 76. For many participants, the differences in age, life experience, and social background was perceived as a particularly positive aspect.

Marketplace of Ideas

In March a “Marketplace of ideas” was organized, in which the ideas collected in the three citizens’ councils were presented, discussed, merged and further specified with an open public.

Final Presentation

In April the steps of the project and the collected ideas were presented in a public event in front of a large audience.[9]

Influence, Outcomes, and Effects

The project organizers wrote an extensive report summarizing the results from the focus groups and the Citizen Councils. The main topics were: Extending memorial; learning from regional history; future use of remaining buildings and spaces; encounter, dialogue and communication; confident region; networking and new structures.

The three regions founded an association to execute the ideas developed in the project. In the autumn of 2013 a three year plan was developed.[10]

Analysis and Lessons Learned

The Region of Consciousness process’ strengths lie in the dynamic integration of expert knowledge and participatory citizen engagement. Through this, the knowledge produced was a synthesis of academic specialization and public ideas. This not only enhanced the legitimacy of later political decisions, but also is reflective of their particular participatory quality. The great advantage of civic councils in comparison to deliberative polls, consensus conferences and other formats of citizens’ assemblies lies in the temporary separation of expert knowledge and every day knowledge in the first stage and their integration in the second stage. While in deliberative polls, for example, citizens only deliberate with each other after having been exposed to expert inputs.

Citizen Councils’ strengths lie in its integrative and inclusive effects. Participants feel free to utter grievances and concerns, while dynamic facilitation negates confrontation. The resulting atmosphere from this method is one of creativity, productivity and inclusivity. The textually open procedure reveals citizens’ true concerns, enabling a civil and creative discussion most participants enjoyed despite discussing a controversial and emotionally and politically charged topic.

Criticism of the process described above is concerning the effectiveness of the decisions made and the lacking concreteness of the decisions in the first place. While some very specific projects were defined, others were general ideas. In this case, local office holders appear serious and eager to realize many of the proposed ideas discussed and promoted from the participatory process.

See Also

Dynamic Facilitation

Wisdom Councils / Citizen Councils

References

[1] Silke Ruprechtsberger “Hope Blossoms Amidst the Nazi Ruins,” Fokus 8 May 2013, translated by Craig Eldon Reishus, Mauthausen_-_Wisdom_Council_ed_rz_2 (dk-media.s3.amazonaws.com)

[2] "BürgerInnenräte Bewusstseinsregion Mauthausen – Gusen – St. Georgen," July 2013, http://www.partizipation.at/fileadmin/media_data/Downloads/Praxisbeispiele/Praxisbeispiel_Raster_BR_Mauthausen.pdf . English-language translation: tinyurl.com/CC-Mauthausen.

[3] Ruprechtsberger “Hope Blossoms Amidst the Nazi Ruins.” 

[4] "BürgerInnenräte Bewusstseinsregion Mauthausen – Gusen – St. Georgen."

[5] Ruprechtsberger “Hope Blossoms Amidst the Nazi Ruins.”

[6] Dynamic Facilitation Home (dynamicfacilitation.com).

[7] Ibid.

[8] “Consciousness region Mauhausen – Gusen – St. Georgen. Space of remembrance and learning.” Institute for Conflict Research. ikf.ac.at/pro_BEWUSST.htm

[9] “Consciousness region Mauhausen – Gusen – St. Georgen. Space of remembrance and learning.”

[10] “Consciousness region Mauhausen – Gusen – St. Georgen. Space of remembrance and learning.”

External Links

Notes