Participant competencies in deliberative discourse: Cases of collaborative decision-making in the Superfund program.

Abstract

Collaboration is being employed more frequently in U.S. environmental policy decision-making, particularly contentious decisions. Collaborative decision-making consists of broad participation among stakeholders, in a sustained dialogue on a wide range of issues. Participants have a role in defining the problem and the solution, and share information freely. A facilitator is often present, as the participants seek consensus. Case studies were conducted on two highly collaborative processes to select Superfund cleanup remedies--New Bedford Harbor, MA and Pine Street Barge Canal, VT. An analytical framework was developed from deliberative democracy to assess the participatory competencies of individuals. The competencies were identified using content analysis of interview and case documentation and dramaturgical analysis of videotaped and observed meetings for the time period December, 1993-December, 1996. The results showed all participants needed key problem-solving skills and human engagement capabilities. Problem-solving provided the ability to devise many options to solve social and technical problems, while human engagement capabilities supplied the civic will to deliberate. Problem-solving skills included communication, learning, and knowledge and resource use skills. Human engagement capabilities consisted of multiple motives and coping skills. There were core competencies required by all participants, as well as essential competencies that at least one member of the group needed for successful collaboration. Furthermore, participants from different stakeholder groups needed a few unique competencies, e.g., government officials needed some competencies that citizens did not, and vice versa. The findings add human nature factors to dispute resolution frameworks and deliberative democracy theories. It extends rules of thumb, such as separating the people from the problem, to include additional coping skills. While trust is important, the findings suggest distrust is an important motivator. Learning makes coping with frustration and fatigue easier. Predictability is important to coping. Vital community and collaborative leadership can be shared among community participants. Human nature in democracy acknowledges people's mixed motives and emphasizes the importance of a functional citizenry, capable of functioning in diverse and uncertain situations. These cases reflect deliberative democracy within traditional adversary democracy.