- Current status:
After 15 years of experiments and case studies in different fields, public participation is having a kind of "boom" as a topic in public speeches and as a practice in everyday planning, legislation and new fields. There is an urgent need for training and guidelines; few laws include public participation. However, the Local Government Act requires municipalities to ensure there is real participation by residents. A 1992 survey shows that 82% support municipal autonomy and democracy, though only 51% are interested in national politics and follow it actively. Following a 15 year decline in municipal and national voting, a nation-wide participation project was begun in February 1997 to increase citizen participation and influence on government decisions; legal obstacles to participation have been removed. In January 1998, 62 projects in 54 municipalities were approved for state funding; evaluation reports are due in April of 2000.
- Sectoral differences:
Public participation has developed mostly in municipal and state government, though the private sector is becoming more interested, especially through EIA projects. For a report on the government's Participation Project and some of its ongoing case studies, see www.intermin.fi/engl/curr.html
- Differences by Field:
Public participation has been mainly in land use planning, residential development and large construction projects, mostly in connection with EIA.The Finnish Roads Administration has been a pioneer in large projects; it also has a guide book. State-owned forests have engaged in participative planning for three or four years. Participative EIAs have been employed in the waste management and energy sectors on large projects; some experiments in "customer participation" have occurred in the health field. Public participation will be part of a new real estate planning law.
- Trends:
Public participation seems to be increasing in municipal and state governments, with some positive signs in the private sector in the context of EIA and improved environmental management.
- Techniques:
Publications to inform citizens and various kinds of meetings are often used. From 1991-98, municipal referendums were held in 24 municipalities, mostly about amalgamation. Three were citizen-driven, since when 2% or more of the voters support an issue, it must be taken up by the local council within six months. Voter turnout ranged from 30 - 80%. The Association of Finnish Local and Regional Authorities surveyed municipalities early in 1998 and found a wide range of methods being used to inform citizens and obtain their views; municipal web pages and email were rapidly rising in use, since 25% of Finns use the Internet weekly.
- Pressures for Economy and Efficiency:
At this time, there is more concern to increase the level of participation than to reduce its cost; this will likely be important later.
- Stakeholders vs. Public:
Stakeholders provide continuing input through the process and are usually participants in other planning or advisory groups, so they have more impact on the planning process. The general public make individual inputs.
- Public Participation vs. ADR, Mediation, etc.:
The last two are used only in exceptional cases; developing them is a major challenge in Finland. These alternatives are not clearly distinguished, but are seen as part of public participation to be used in conflict situations.
- Employment:
There are two or three firms specialising in public participation and are said to be doing quite well. Most government agencies and engineering/planning firms have tried to use their existing staff; in-house public participation people are rare and are seldom hired from outside the organization. Some training of in-house staff in public participation is taking place.
- Policy vs. Project Focus:
The focus is mostly on project planning, but more attention is being paid to program planning and policy development, especially international policy. Public participation is also showing up in new legislation.
- Comments, Suggestions, etc.:
While largely developed as part of the planning process, participation should also be developed in organizations. e.g. the learning organization, and in environmental management systems. A challenging prospect for public participation is the need to simplify the often overlapping planning and decision making procedures which result from the incoherent and disjointed character of legislation.
There has been some discussion of having an IAP2 conference in Finland, especially after co-operation about public participation with the U.S. Forest Service and some Canadian organizations. A conference in Finland would be a real stimulus for public participation here and across Europe.
