Problems and Purpose

The purpose of the Pierce County Rural Climate Dialogue was to engage rural voices, which are typically underrepresented and unheard, in a conversation on climate change and extreme weather (2). This was done through presentations from experts, guided discussion and dialogue, and surveys. There were concerns that rural communities were not getting the services or resources that they needed to adapt to an ever-changing climate and that their opinions were not reflected in planning or policymaking. Therefore, the conversation was focused on uplifting rural citizens to determine how public and private organizations could best support these communities.

Background History and Context

Before the Pierce County Rural Climate Dialogue, the Center for New Democratic Processes (CNDP) had already established itself as a leader in hosting “citizen’s juries” and engaging in deliberative discussion on climate change in a series of Rural Climate Dialogues in Minnesota (2). Therefore, a Citizen Jury took place for this event. Previously known as the Jefferson Center, CNDP has been using the Citizens Jury model since 1971, and some examples of this as found on Participedia include their Rural Climate Dialogues in Minnesota (as mentioned above) and Your Voice Ohio.

The Pierce County Rural Climate Dialogue brought together 15 community members from rural Pierce County, Washington who represented a microcosm of the region (1). In a five-day virtual event, participants were tasked with answering the following question - “How might our community, in the face of extreme weather and climate change, secure a healthy, resilient, and economically vibrant future?”. Through a series of presentations and discussions, participants came together to create a shared, community-based response to climate change and extreme weather events. The outcomes and findings would form the Community Action Plan, which would help inform the Pierce Conservation District’s Climate Resiliency 2021-2025 Strategic Goals and Targets and be used to shape the commissioning partners’ ongoing conservation work. By sharing the Community Action Plan with decision-makers and policymakers, such as government agencies and elected bodies, these outcomes from rural participants could shape future planning from Pierce County on how to tackle climate change. Additionally, the outcomes could help initiate a series of climate pilot projects funded through a grant received by the Pierce Conservation District.

Organizing, Supporting, and Funding Entities

This event was led by the Center for New Democratic Processes (CNDP) (1). CNDP is a nonprofit formerly known as the Jefferson Center for New Democratic Processes and has worked for four decades in civic participation and deliberation (3). They use a model called the “Citizens Jury” to increase community engagement, and are the first in the United States to do so. 

For the Pierce County Rural Climate Dialogue, CNDP worked with the Pierce Conservation District, the Puyallup Watershed Initiative, and Voices for Rural Resilience (4) (5) (6). The Pierce Conservation District (PCD) is a non-regulatory association focused on supporting community-driven solutions to tackle environmental challenges, such as protecting natural resources, working with public and private partners, and assisting in restoration. The Puyallup Watershed organization is led by the Puyallup-White River Local Integrating Organization (PWR-LIO), which is a locally formed forum working collaboratively with others on ecosystem recovery efforts, as well as the Puyallup River Watershed Council, which aims to restore, protect, and enhance the environmental, economic, and cultural health of the watershed. Finally, Voices for Rural Resilience is focused on uplifting people to have agency in tackling climate change and creating collective community dialogue, particularly in rural areas.

Participant Recruitment and Selection

Participants in the Pierce County Rural Climate Dialogue were recruited from the rural areas of eastern and southern Pierce County, Washington (2). The only criteria were residency and that participants needed to be 18 years and older; no experience or other qualifications were necessary. For participants who did not have access to broadband or technology, CNDP offered them all the materials necessary to participate.

A pool of 200 applicants was created to reflect the demographic makeup of rural Pierce County, including age, gender, ethnicity, education, political affiliation, and region (1). Out of this group, 15 participants were recruited by random selection and stratification.

Methods and Tools Used

The Citizen’s Jury method developed by the CNDP was used for the Pierce County Rural Climate Dialogue.  A citizen jury, similar to a regular jury, has jurors - or participants -  that receive information on a subject from local expert testimony “witnesses”; in this case, presentations were given on extreme weather and climate change from meteorologists, climate and energy scientists, and public health and emergency management experts.

CNDP’s Citizen’s Jury method operates under the Dialogue-to-Action model, which has three components (7). Firstly, to co-define - to research and build relationships with stakeholders to gain a deeper understanding. In this case, that meant working with PCD, PWR-LIO, and Voices for Rural Resilience. Secondly, co-designing a Citizens Jury that provides information resources is essential to engaging participants and helping them think through recommendations. Finally, participants should co-create an end product that highlights participants’ thoughts and reflections on what actions should be taken to solve a problem. This can then be implemented by partners, sponsors, nonprofits, or local agencies.

What Went On: Process, Interaction, and Participation

The participants were selected at random and through stratification until 15 jurors were obtained for the five-day dialogue (1). The question posed to participants through the dialogue was, “How might our community, in the face of extreme weather and climate change, secure a healthy, resilient, and economically vibrant future?” (9). Over the five days, the participants learned about the impacts of climate change on Pierce County through presentations ranging in topics. They gathered information about the weather in Pierce County; identified local impacts of climate change on public health; and disaster and emergency management(1).

There were seven presentations total - “Weather and Climate Background #1”, by retired meteorologist Jeff Renner; “Weather and Climate Background #2”, by Guillaume Mauger of the University of Washington Climate Impacts Group; “Wildfire Smoke, Air Quality and Public Health”, by Judy Olsen of the Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department; “Agriculture and Climate Change”, by Carrie Brausieck of the Snohomish Conservation District; “Emergency Preparedness and Climate Change”, by Roxanne Castleman-Reffalt of the Pierce County Department of Emergency Management and Fire Chief Todd Wernet of the South Pierce Fire & Rescue Department; “Wildfire Awareness”, by Charley Burns, formerly of the Washington Department of Natural Resources; and “Climate Change and Utilities” by Sarah Sweet, John Nierenberg, and Cullen Ritchie of Tacoma Power. Each presentation consisted of a video component, a bulleted list of important information, impact statements, and potential actions compared to tradeoffs. At the end of each presentation, participants were asked to choose up to three actions out of the ones discussed that they thought were most important. As they learned about the issues surrounding their county, the participants also developed recommendations for actions that could be taken in response to these impacts and continue to have this dialogue occur today (1).

Influence, Outcomes, and Effects

The outcomes and findings of the Climate Dialogue will inform the Pierce Conservation District's Climate Resiliency 2021-2025 Strategic Goals and Targets and be used to shape the commissioning partners’ ongoing conservation work (8). Outcomes will be shared with decision-makers to inform future planning, specifically in Pierce County government agencies and elected bodies which shows that the initiative influenced their official government (8). Data may be used for future projects by the Pierce Conservation District (8). 

Following the conclusion of the Rural Climate Dialogues, participants were administered a survey to determine responses on climate change and public health, disaster and emergency preparedness, and generally on event facilitation (9). The vast majority of participants agreed that they were concerned about the risks of these issues, and believed that individuals, as well as government agencies, should take action on climate change. Participants also had a largely positive view of the event itself, feeling that they were encouraged to share their opinions and take part in deliberative discussions.

In the Community Action Plan, participants were asked to provide statements to the public based on the question, “What is important for those not involved in the Rural Climate Dialogue to know about the work that you’ve done together over the past 5 days?”.  Most participants spoke about the diversity of thought in the community dialogue, as well as the varied information they received through the presentations that shaped their opinions. Participants were also asked to provide statements to their neighbors through the question, “How would you explain your experience working with your colleagues and participating in the dialogue to your family, friends, or neighbors?”. Most participants spoke about how nice it was to meet their neighbors in the county virtually, connect about important issues, and how the community could come together to tackle climate change.

Analysis and Lessons Learned

There are many areas in which the initiative worked well, such as the structure of the dialogue. In their statements and the survey results, participants spoke of enjoying the presentations and conversations, and the citizens’ jury helped shape their thinking on climate change. Additionally, the dialogue was very diverse - in the community action plan, CNDP created a graph of the Pierce County percentage of a demographic - location, gender, age, race/ethnicity, party affiliation, education level, and employment status - the ideal number of participants out of 15 that they wanted to select representing a certain demographic, the number of selected participants meeting that demographic, and the actual number of participants that ended up taking part in the dialogue. For every single category except employment status, the number of participants lined up with the Pierce County population demographics (9).

Potential changes for future, similar dialogues could include a larger number of participants - while the 15 people chosen were relatively representative of Pierce County, a larger turnout could create more diversity of thought and contribute more to the statements and ideas generated. Additionally, in a post-pandemic world, having in-person dialogues may have made participants feel more comfortable to share their thoughts, as online discussion can often pose difficulties for those who struggle with technology and save money for CNDP, who wouldn’t have to distribute tech over Pierce County.

Overall, the Pierce County Rural Climate Dialogue was very successful in bringing together a diverse group of people to discuss how to address climate change and extreme weather in rural Washington. As the Pierce Conservation District and governmental agencies work to implement the recommendations crafted in the Community Action Plan, it will be interesting to see how the information the participants were given will shape Pierce County's climate policy moving forward.

See Also

References

1. (2021). Pierce County Rural Climate Dialogue. Center for New Democratic Processes. https://www.cndp.us/pierce-county-dialogue/
2. (2021). FAQs. Pierce Conservation District. https://piercecd.org/622/FAQs
3. (n.d.). About Us. Center for New Democratic Processes. https://www.cndp.us/about-us/
4. (n.d.). Who We Are. Pierce Conservation District. https://piercecd.org/31/Who-We-Are
5. (n.d.). Get Involved. Puyallup Watershed. https://puyallupwatershed.org/get-involved/
6. (n.d.). Our Process. Voices for Rural Resilience. https://voicesforrural.org/our-process
7. (n.d.). How We Work | Citizens Juries. Center for New Democratic Processes. https://www.cndp.us/about-us/how-we-work/
8. (n.d.). Rural Climate Dialogues. Pierce Conservation District. https://piercecd.org/604/Rural-Climate-Dialogues
9. (n.d.). Community Action Plan. Pierce Conservation District. https://piercecd.org/621/Community-Action-Plan
10. (n.d.). Presentations. Pierce Conservation District. https://piercecd.org/627/Presentations

External Links

Notes