This chapter explores the methods and practices of consulting citizens and stakeholders in relation to the green agenda. It highlights the growing use of consultation as a tool in the design and monitoring of green public policies, as well as its gradual institutionalisation. The chapter also identifies key levers to enhance the quality and impact of consultation processes, emphasising the importance of establishing the right frameworks and mechanisms to ensure the inclusion and participation of the most vulnerable and marginalised groups in decision-making.
Open Government for the Green Transition
Panorama of Good Practices Towards Meaningful Citizen Participation
Abstract
While access to information, transparency, data accessibility, and public communication are fundamental levers for enhancing awareness and understanding of climate issues and the impact of both individual and collective decisions, participation goes a step further, fostering a greater sense of ownership and action for the green transition.
In many countries, citizen and stakeholder participation has become essential in the development and implementation of environmental public policies. On a complex issue such as the energy transition, participation allows for a broad range of expertise and perspectives to be considered when shaping actions and measures to be taken (OECD, 2022[1]). This is all the more critical given that the costs and consequences of climate change – and the measures to address it – are not equally distributed across society, generations, or countries (OECD, 2022[1]). Governments must therefore not only design appropriate climate and environmental policies but also ensure a just and fair transition by building broad consensus to prevent blockages or conflict.
Given the scale of transformation required and the complexity of the challenges posed by the climate emergency, governments increasingly use consultation as a means to establish structured and reciprocal dialogue with stakeholders and citizens on clearly defined issues. The OECD Recommendation on Open Government (OECD, 2017[2]) defines consultation as " a more advanced level of participation that entails a two-way relationship in which stakeholders provide feedback to the government and vice-versa. It is based on the prior definition of the issue for which views are being sought and requires the provision of relevant information, in addition to feedback on the outcomes of the process" (OECD, 2017[2]).
Historically, countries have gradually implemented consultation processes on green transition issues to allow stakeholders1 – civil society organisations, the private sector, research institutions, etc. – to inform decision-making with their expertise. In the regulatory field in particular, the OECD Recommendation on Regulatory Policy and Governance urges member countries (Provision 2) to adhere to open government principles, notably participation, by giving the public the opportunity to "contribute to the development of draft regulations and the quality of the supporting analysis" (OECD, 2012[3]). The OECD work on regulation for the green transition further highlights the importance of deepening stakeholder involvement, including through more targeted consultation initiatives (OECD, 2023[4]). The upcoming OECD Regulatory Policy Outlook 2025 stresses the need for more inclusive approaches to build trust between citizens and governments, overcome local resistance – for instance in the context of renewable energy development – and harness the input of affected communities. It also notes the importance of consulting stakeholders abroad to better account for cross-border environmental spill-over effects (OECD, 2025[5]).
Beyond regulatory matters, OECD research also finds that citizen-led processes are expanding as a means to tap into people’s lived experiences and raise broader awareness of climate challenges. Each type of consultation has its strengths and can be combined strategically with others to maximise impact (see Table 3.1).
Source: Adapted from OECD (2022[6]), OECD Guidelines for Citizen Participation Processes, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f765caf6-en.
While consultation processes have broadened participation in decision-making and helped shape public policies more aligned with the expectations of citizens and stakeholders, they often remain weakly connected to actual policy processes, are limited to specific stages of the policy cycle, and tend to engage only a small segment of the affected population (OECD, 2022[6]). For instance, the OECD 2024 Survey on the Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions found that fewer than one-third of respondents believed the government would take public consultation feedback into account (OECD, 2024[7]). Furthermore, because consultation formats are adaptable, their quality varies widely depending on the frameworks, objectives, and available resources (expertise, funding, time).
OECD analysis has identified three major challenges to improving the impact and credibility of consultation efforts (OECD, 2022[8]; OECD, 2023[9]; OECD, 2023[10]):
Strengthening inclusion and representativeness: Consultation mechanisms often lack representativeness and may exclude individuals due to social, physical, economic, or cultural barriers. True democratic participation occurs “every individual potentially affected by a decision should have an equal opportunity to affect the decision” (Warren, 2002[11]). This is particularly crucial given that those furthest from political decision-making are often the most vulnerable to climate change impacts.
Developing standards to ensure consultation quality: Consultations are sometimes conducted with little methodological rigour and are undermined by late-stage involvement of citizens or stakeholders – when decisions are already made or when there is little room for influence. Citizen participation is only meaningful if there is a real window of opportunity to shape decision-making (OECD, 2022[6]). If not timed properly within the policy process, or if it lacks substance and resources, consultation can become counterproductive, eroding trust in government. To address this, the OECD has developed guidelines for citizen participation, including a 10-step roadmap for planning, implementing, and evaluating a participatory process (see Figure 3.1).
Enhancing and communicating the impact of consultations: The impact of consultations is often unclear due to limited information on their outcomes, which may discourage citizen engagement. While governments ultimately remain the decision-makers, it is essential to communicate and explain the outcomes of consultations to avoid polarisation, frustration, or accusations of “civic washing.” A common challenge is the lack of transparency about the consultation process and its influence. Participants do not necessarily expect their input to dictate policy outcomes, but they must understand the rules and scope of the process from the outset to form realistic expectations about the potential impact of their contributions.
Source: OECD (2022[6]), OECD Guidelines for Citizen Participation Processes, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f765caf6-en.
Thus, it is useful to examine the existing practices and levers that can help overcome the challenges limiting the impact of decisions and public ownership of climate issues.
To address the scale of the climate crisis, governments must mobilise all decision-making instruments and processes that form part of a governance framework conducive to the development and implementation of effective climate policies – be it legislation, regulations, public policies, or investment plans. Every decision, from passing new regulations to allocating financial resources, has consequences for the capacity to tackle climate change.
3.1.1. Significant improvements in legal and regulatory frameworks
To better embed consultation within climate governance, regional agreements such as the Aarhus Convention and the Escazú Agreement have enshrined public consultation into the commitments made by signatory countries. Under the Escazú Agreement, Article 7 requires states to guarantee the public the right to participate at the early stages of decision-making processes related to projects, activities, or authorisations likely to have a significant environmental impact. Similarly, Article 6 of the Aarhus Convention establishes consultation obligations for activities with potentially significant environmental effects. While including public consultation in international agreements marks significant progress in anchoring these practices within a legal framework, their non-binding nature often limits their impact. Countries must translate these principles into national legislation to ensure their effectiveness.
At the national level, regulation refers to the broad set of instruments through which governments impose requirements on businesses and citizens. This includes laws, formal and informal orders, subsidiary laws, administrative procedures, and standards. Examples of environmental regulation include mandatory environmental quality standards, emission caps over specific periods, and pollutant concentration limits in air or water discharges (OECD, 2023[4]). Within this framework, the lack of consultation can lead to poorly designed, ineffective regulations that fail to address the environmental challenges they aim to tackle (OECD, 2023[4]). Many countries have therefore stepped up efforts to organise targeted stakeholder consultations in support of sectoral legislation. In Costa Rica, for instance, a wide-reaching national consultation process successfully integrated input from a variety of voices, including experts on water resource issues, throughout the legislative development of the country’s Water Resources Bill (see Box 3.1).
In April 2002, the first National Water Forum was held, bringing together over 200 specialists in water resource issues. One of the main outcomes of this process was the creation of the Water Technical Group (GTA), a body made up of more than 30 representatives from public institutions with competence in water matters, as well as representatives from universities, non-governmental organisations, and independent experts with experience in the field.
Aware of the need to develop a socially acceptable water law, the GTA launched an extensive process of dialogue and consultation, which included six regional workshops and two follow-up workshops. The results of this broad consultation were presented to the Environmental Commission of the Legislative Assembly and incorporated into the draft bill in January 2004.
Source: (LATINNO Database, 2018[12]).
Public consultation can be enshrined in law to establish it as a standard mechanism or practice for dialogue between governments, citizens, and stakeholders (OECD, 2022[6]). According to the latest data from the OECD Indicators on Regulatory Policy and Governance, the vast majority of OECD countries (36 out of 38 surveyed) have introduced a legal obligation to conduct public consultations on legislative acts (and 37 out of 38 for subordinate regulations) (OECD, 2025[5]). Enshrining public consultation in law, as is the case in Canada or Bulgaria (see Box 3.2), is considered good practice. It sets out clear rules on process and outcomes, promotes transparency, and creates well-defined frameworks for action. It also compels public authorities to consult stakeholders and citizens – even on complex or contentious topics such as the energy transition – and helps foster a culture of dialogue. In Canada, for instance, the government consults communities before adopting climate-related legislation, engaging Indigenous peoples, NGOs, businesses, and the general public to develop effective climate policies.2
Canadian laws embedding public consultation in environmental decision-making
The Canadian Impact Assessment Act (2019) requires public consultation for projects with environmental impacts. The Act specifies that the government must consult, in particular, Indigenous peoples and local communities.
The Species at Risk Act (2002) provides for public consultations during the development of action plans to protect endangered species, many of which are affected by climate change. These consultations enable feedback from citizens, scientists, Indigenous peoples, and environmental groups, ensuring that the measures taken to protect habitats and species are appropriate, effective, and socially supported.
The Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act (2021) requires consultation with citizens, Indigenous peoples, experts, and stakeholders throughout the process of achieving climate targets. The government must seek public input and recommendations when developing emissions reduction plans and adjusting climate policies.
Public participation in the development of environmental regulations in Bulgaria
Bulgaria has implemented mandatory consultation, both at the local and national levels, during the development of new environmental standards (laws, ordinances, etc.).
At the national level, all relevant information (draft text, explanatory notes, impact assessments, etc.) is made available to the public through an online portal. Citizens and stakeholders are invited to comment, make proposals, and engage in debate.
These contributions are then compiled and forwarded to the authorities, who may use them to revise the proposed texts. While no precise data exists on the direct impact of these consultations on the final legislation, the platform has enabled:
The involvement of all central government institutions;
The creation of a transparent environment fostering dialogue between the state, private sector, and citizens;
The improvement of public policy development by incorporating the expertise of citizens and stakeholders;
A reduction in costs (in time and resources) for both citizens to stay informed and institutions to conduct public consultations.
Source: Government of Canada (2024), Environment and climate change, https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change.html; https://www.strategy.bg/ ; https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/collection/eparticipation-and-evoting/document/bulgarian-portal-public-consultation-pivotal-policy-making-process-strategybg#:~:text=The%20Bulgarian%20Portal%20for%20Public,in%20Bulgarian%20policies%20and%20legislation.
3.1.2. Consultation as a tool for improving public policy
At the level of public policy frameworks, action plans (or strategies) are also strategic documents that governments develop to define concrete measures for tackling climate change. These plans typically include short-, medium- and long-term targets, along with monitoring mechanisms. Increasingly, such action plans involve public consultations in various forms to ensure the inclusion of the needs and ideas of all relevant actors (C40, 2024[13]). An illustrative example is found in Brazil, where the government has implemented an extensive consultation process for its national climate action plan. This process is considered innovative due to its hybrid format, its combination of stakeholder and citizen participation to broaden reach, and its commitment to providing ongoing feedback to participants (see Box 3.3).
In 2024, the Brazilian government launched a public consultation process to enrich the country's Climate Plan.
Online citizen consultation
In 2024, the government used an online platform to engage the public in shaping Brazil’s Climate Plan. Over 24,000 individuals participated in the initial phase of the consultation on Brazil’s climate commitments through to 2035. This 49-day phase allowed citizens to submit and vote on proposals. The ten most popular ideas received formal responses from the government.
Stakeholder consultation via National Councils
Alongside the online component, the government consulted advisory bodies known as National Councils. These councils bring together social movements representing various segments of society in both rural and urban settings: women’s organisations, LGBTQ+ communities, youth groups, anti-racist collectives, workers, human rights advocates, children’s groups, people with disabilities, health, education, environmental and housing organisations. All 32 national councils met to consolidate proposals for the Participatory Climate Plan.
Final online consultation
In October 2024, the government launched a final online consultation allowing citizens to comment on each paragraph of the draft text developed through the prior consultations.
Source: Government of Brazil (2024), Plano Clima Participativo,
https://brasilparticipativo.presidencia.gov.br/processes/planoclima/f/87/posts/456.
3.1.3. The role of independent bodies in ensuring effective citizen participation
To strengthen governance frameworks for public consultation on environmental issues, some countries have gone a step further by establishing independent bodies tasked with safeguarding citizen participation. In France, this role is played by the National Commission for Public Debate (CNDP), an independent administrative authority created in 1997 to guarantee every citizen the right to information and participation on environmental matters (Commission nationale du débat public, 2022[14]). Referrals to the CNDP are mandatory for major plans, programmes, or projects likely to have an environmental impact. While it does not issue opinions on the content of the projects, the CNDP ensures the integrity and quality of the deliberative process. It guarantees that public arguments are faithfully recorded, shared with project sponsors, and duly considered. On average, the CNDP organises five to six public debates each year and oversees over 150 public consultations on various projects and programmes.
In Canada, the Office de consultation publique de Montréal (OCPM) is a neutral and independent public institution that organises public consultations to gather citizens’ views on projects affecting neighbourhoods or the city of Montréal. For example, it led a major consultation on the city’s 2050 vision (see Box 3.4). The OCPM may be mandated by the City Council or Executive Committee, but can also be activated at the request of citizens, who have a right of initiative in public consultation. Consultations are carried out by commissioners who operate independently of the city administration. The aim is to improve projects by incorporating public concerns and expertise. The results are compiled in official reports containing recommendations for project improvement.
Mandated by the Montréal City Council, the OCPM conducted a consultation in 2022 on the document “City Vision: Towards an Urban and Mobility Plan”. The consultation gave citizens an opportunity to familiarise themselves with the plan, engage in dialogue, and share their visions and proposals for the city’s future. The OCPM organised 110 activities: 92 in-person sessions (1,938 participants) and 18 online (7,079 participants), generating 4,310 proposals over a 13-month period. It worked in partnership with Indigenous community networks in Montréal and local educational institutions. The consultation took place in three phases:
Preliminary activities
Seven initial meetings to gather expectations from various groups and organisations (stakeholders);
Four webinars featuring experts to stimulate public reflection on key issues.
Information phase
A public session to present the plan (held at the OCPM and live-streamed);
On 21 April 2022, a session allowing citizens to question city representatives about the plan.
Consultation activities
An online discussion platform;
Online questionnaires;
Field interviews by a team of 13 interviewers during cultural and community events and along commercial streets, targeting specific groups (e.g. racialised or immigrant communities at the Black Women’s International Forum, people with disabilities at the Centre for Independent Living);
Citizen forums (conferences and workshops);
Youth workshops;
On-demand workshops: citizens could download a “ready-to-consult” kit to host their own discussion sessions;
Focus groups with various stakeholders;
Cultural and artistic activities for children and adolescents, including art mediation sessions, creative mapping workshops, and urban public art trails;
Six final hearings allowing participants to present their views before the commission and engage in dialogue with the commissioners.
The consultation report was published by the OCPM on 11 May 2023.
Source: (OCPM, 2023[15]).
3.2.1. Engaging and consulting citizens and stakeholders throughout the green policy cycle
As with any public policy, consultation on the green agenda can take place at different stages of the decision-making cycle, each offering distinct interests and benefits. Upstream, the aim is to give stakeholders and citizens the opportunity to help shape the overall direction of climate action and bring attention to issues that concern them. During the decision-making phase, consultation allows stakeholders and citizens to review government proposals and suggest improvements. After decisions are made, public participation can support monitoring of governmental commitments or the evaluation of implemented measures to ensure their effectiveness – or adjust them if necessary (OECD, 2022[6]).
Regarding stakeholders, involving them not only brings expertise, but also helps identify the needs of key groups and anticipate potential conflicts or obstacles when consulted early and throughout the decision-making cycle (OECD, 2022[6]). Frequently consulted actors vary across civil society organisations, academics and researchers, private sector representatives, environmental experts, and associations – the objective being to gather a diversity of expertise, opinions, and perspectives that enrich policy decisions. Evidence also points to the importance of transparency and the integrity of stakeholders involved as essential elements to legitimise the consultation outcomes (Weaver, Lötjönen and Ollikainen, 2019[16]; Averchenkova, Fankhauser and Finnegan, 2018[17]). Moreover, strengthening the connection between consultation and policymaking necessarily involves integrating budgetary constraints and financing policies. Consultations would benefit from incorporating discussions on cost estimation and potential funding sources, to ensure the feasibility and sustainability of the decisions taken. In parallel, the participation of citizens and civil society in “green budgeting” – i.e. using budgetary policy tools to incorporate climate and environmental considerations – has the potential to enhance transparency in public spending, and bolster governments’ credibility and accountability in this field (OECD, 2024[18]).
Most governments choose to bring stakeholders together on a case-by-case basis, through ad hoc participatory mechanisms. These consultations are designed to address specific issues or questions and are generally held during high-profile mobilisation periods. For example, this was the case in Türkiye in 2022, where a five-day Climate Council was held to develop a Roadmap for Future Green Policies, and in the city of Salvador (Brazil) in 2020, during the drafting of its climate mitigation and adaptation plan (see Box 3.5). The value of these initiatives lies in taking place early in the policy cycle, thus allowing stakeholders to place their concerns on the policy agenda. In Salvador, particular attention was given to diversifying the consultation formats to suit different audiences and create favourable conditions for inclusive and effective dialogue.
The Climate Council in Türkiye (2022)
Türkiye convened a five-day Climate Council to develop its roadmap for future national green policies. The Council brought together a wide range of stakeholders: the public and private sectors, universities, youth organisations, trade unions, NGOs, and more. Although the Council itself met from 21 to 25 February 2022, it was preceded by four months of preparatory meetings involving hundreds of stakeholders. The final Council session served to conclude discussions and secure agreement on the roadmap.
Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Plan in Salvador, Brazil (2020)
To design its climate mitigation and adaptation plan, the city of Salvador (Brazil) carried out a broad consultation process involving diverse participatory formats:
11 open meetings and capacity-building events;
22 listening sessions with civil society;
13 interviews with community leaders;
6 meetings with the private sector.
The consultation process with all stakeholders focused on defining the guiding principles for the future plan, which would steer upcoming actions and initiatives.
In total, over 1,300 people participated, and 500 contributions were collected. A monitoring and evaluation committee was also established.
Various practices allow the public to participate at different stages of the decision-making cycle: upstream, to share their expertise and priorities (for instance, through participatory diagnostics); throughout, to enrich the decision-making process; and downstream, to monitor the implementation of recommendations or consultation outcomes. Consultation during the follow-up phase is particularly valuable, as it helps reinforce the impact of public participation and addresses the commonly reported issue of weak feedback and follow-through. It is essential to inform participants about which recommendations have been taken into account and why, as this contributes to the transparency and accountability of the process and more broadly helps foster a culture of open government (OECD, 2022[6]). In Brazil, for example, the consultation process for the national Climate Plan is a strong example of an approach that enriches public decision-making both upstream and throughout the policy cycle (see Box 3.3). At the local level, the city of Salvador (Brazil) established a monitoring and evaluation committee for its Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Plan, and in Lille (France), a Metropolitan Climate Council was created to oversee and assess the plan – both of which stand as useful and relevant practices to extend public engagement across the policy cycle.
Some countries have also made efforts to evaluate their participatory processes to ensure their quality and impartiality. For instance, Chile launched a national consultation specifically aimed at strengthening its participatory mechanisms on environmental matters. This initiative could inspire other governments to periodically reassess the relevance and legitimacy of their participatory tools, in light of evolving knowledge and public attitudes towards climate action (see Box 3.6).
In Chile, a national consultation was launched to strengthen public participation tools related to environmental issues as part of the implementation of the Escazú Agreement.
The process began with a participatory diagnosis, involving workshops, small focus groups, and a dedicated email address to collect contributions from a wide range of citizens and stakeholders. Based on this initial input, a set of proposals was developed and submitted to a broader consultation process, carried out both online and in person across the country, with particular attention paid to vulnerable groups (12 targeted workshops were held in areas with large Indigenous populations). A methodological toolkit was also made available to facilitate local meetings: 21 were organised by municipalities and 15 by civil society organisations – an illustrative example of shared responsibility and partnership between public authorities and civil society.
Throughout the process, a wide-ranging communication campaign was deployed via various channels: mass mailing, social media, press releases, and testimonial videos on participatory experiences.
This consultation identified six main shortcomings in existing participatory processes:
1) The need to increase participation in the context of environmental impact assessments and strengthen the relevance of decisions at the municipal level.
2) The lack of adaptation of participation processes to vulnerable groups and the diversity of cultural, geographic, linguistic, and gender contexts, including local schedules and customs.
3) The need to improve the design and promotion of early-stage participatory processes in the policy cycle to ensure a diversity of voices are heard in decision-making.
4) The necessity of better communication and information dissemination, especially to people living in remote areas, along with improved traceability of how public input is considered in final decisions.
5) Challenges related to technical language, the digital divide (especially affecting older people and vulnerable groups), and insufficient time for informed and meaningful participation.
6) The lack of public funding to support adequate consultation meetings across all regions—particularly rural areas—and to facilitate interpretation, translation, and accessibility of materials.
In response, the Chilean government has identified thirteen priority actions to strengthen public participation in environmental policymaking.
Source: Ministry of Environment of Chile (2024[19]), Plan Nacional de Implementación Participativa del Acuerdo de Escazú 2024-2030.
3.2.2. Some governments have established permanent climate consultation mechanisms, primarily focused on stakeholders
To better incorporate stakeholder perspectives, many governments have set up permanent consultative bodies at both local and national levels, as outlined in Box 3.7. These consultation mechanisms are designed to advise public authorities on the development of environmental policies and, in some cases, to evaluate their implementation.
Permanent consultation mechanisms allow for the regular involvement of stakeholders in shaping green policies and help foster a culture of dialogue on environmental issues. In most cases, these bodies are defined by legal frameworks or are part of institutionalised instruments for dialogue between public authorities and actors in the environmental transition. Such institutional frameworks help clarify the objectives and rules governing these bodies, giving participants greater visibility regarding what is expected of their involvement and establishing clear communication mechanisms. According to the OECD (2022[6]), these actors are essential components of effective participation.
The Citizens’ Advisory Council on Climate Change (5C) – Costa Rica
This body was established by Executive Decree No. 40616 of the Ministry of Environment and Energy, fulfilling one of Costa Rica’s commitments under the Paris Agreement during COP21. The Council is composed of representatives from social, sectoral, and productive organisations with an interest in the environment and climate change, each with at least three years of activity in the country.
The Council’s purpose is to serve as an advisory body to the government on climate-related matters. The Ministry, as well as other governmental entities, may consult the Council on the design, implementation, and evaluation of public policies, programmes, and measures related to climate. The Council also monitors the implementation of Costa Rica’s international climate commitments under the COP framework and the UN Sustainable Development Goals (LATINNO Database, 2017[20]).
The Metropolitan Environmental Commission – Lima, Peru
The Metropolitan Environmental Commission of Lima was established to strengthen the city’s climate governance. It brings together actors from the public and private sectors, academia, and civil society.
Its objective is to advise the local government in defining and advancing its green agenda. The Commission covers all 43 districts of Lima, seeks to improve coordination of the city’s environmental policy, and promotes dialogue between stakeholders and public authorities (C40, 2024[13]).
The Climate Change Advisory Council – Ireland
This Council is responsible for advising and assessing the government’s climate action throughout the decision-making cycle: proposing topics for the agenda, advising the government on its climate measures, and evaluating their impact.
Although the Council’s opinions are non-binding, its assessments of Ireland’s progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions hold the government accountable, especially when results fall short of expectations. The Council publishes regular reports on the country’s emissions reductions and can highlight key issues for inclusion on the policy agenda. It is composed of around ten experts from academia, the public sector, and the private sector (Averchenkova, Fankhauser and Finnegan, 2018[17]).
Beyond stakeholder-oriented mechanisms, there is a pressing need to consider how to engage the wider public. While stakeholders contribute valuable expertise, citizens can also enhance policy-making by bringing in their lived experiences and perspectives.
Citizen participation also contributes to raising broader awareness of environmental issues (beyond already informed audiences) and supports greater ownership and implementation of green policies (OECD, 2022[6]). Moreover, by involving citizens more widely in shaping climate policies, governments can strengthen the legitimacy of difficult decisions and potentially anticipate or prevent conflicts. Governments have various tools at their disposal to consult the public: focus groups, roundtables, working groups, etc. (OECD, 2022[6]).
However, while public consultation is a valuable tool to assess opinions and gather lived experience to inform climate responses, most processes lack inclusivity and representativeness. Consultations tend to involve the same groups - the “usual suspects” (OECD, 2022[6]). These include individuals and groups already active and experienced in public participation, who are more likely to be overrepresented and have a greater say in shaping decisions.
In climate matters, this may also include certain groups particularly engaged with environmental issues – either due to heightened awareness or because they oppose current approaches. Conversely, large segments of the population – the “silent majority” – are often excluded. Many do not usually take part in these processes or feel illegitimate doing so. Barriers may be social, physical, economic, or cultural. Public authorities often fail to make the additional effort needed to reach these more marginalised groups, who are not associated with, or do not feel entitled to join, participatory mechanisms (OECD, 2022[6]). Yet this is a crucial issue: these same groups are often the first to be affected by the impacts of climate change, including Indigenous communities, migrants, women, and rural populations. It is therefore essential to explore how to make consultations more inclusive and reach the widest possible audience. Potential approaches include digital tools, hybrid formats, and tailored mechanisms to target specific population groups.
3.3.1. Using digital technologies to broaden citizen consultation and create structured exchange spaces
Alongside in-person formats (presented in earlier sections), the growth of civic technologies has become a key means to expand consultation and citizen participation.3 These tools can reach a wider audience, enable asynchronous participation, offer innovative ways for citizens to express their views, and process large volumes of input. Moreover, digital tools allow governments to communicate more easily about the outcomes of participatory processes and enhance accountability (OECD, 2023[21]). These digital consultation and participation platforms increasingly incorporate artificial intelligence technologies. For example, AI-powered categorisation tools help organisers process large volumes of citizen input by identifying themes and opinions; automated moderation tools can filter hate speech and spam; generative AI can produce simplified summaries of complex materials and help participants formulate contributions—thus levelling the playing field among citizens (OECD, 2025[22]). Other emerging technologies, such as virtual and augmented reality or blockchain, are also being explored to enhance and expand participatory processes (OECD, 2025[22]). Notably, virtual reality has proven particularly effective for visualising climate change impacts in a clear and accessible way (Fauville, Muller Queiroz and Bailenson, 2020[23]).
Digital tools are now widely used across the globe and at all levels of government (OECD, 2022[6]). They typically provide a direct means to consult citizens on climate issues and promote transparency about outcomes, and are used by both governments and civil society organisations.
For example, in 2019, in Chile, civil society organisations launched a digital citizen consultation to foster participation in developing a climate action programme. Citizens submitted ideas on seven predefined themes and added an eighth: public awareness. The final programme, based on these inputs, was published online and made accessible to all. In Kenya, the government held an online consultation to gather citizen and stakeholder feedback on the National Climate Change Adaptation Strategy, adopted in 2016 (Government of Kenya, 2016[24]). In Brazil, the government used the Brasil Participativo platform during the national climate action plan consultation process – an example of successful digital mobilisation to broaden participation, in parallel with other mechanisms (see Box 3.8).
The Brazilian government developed the Brasil Participativo platform using open-source software to engage citizens in shaping and improving public policies. In 2023, the platform recorded over 4 million unique visits and 1.4 million direct interactions, resulting in 8,000 proposals and 1.5 million votes for the 2024–2027 multi-year plan.
In 2024, the government used Brasil Participativo to consult citizens on its Climate Plan. Within just seven days, users submitted over 100 proposals via the platform. The consultation allowed citizens not only to access information and submit ideas, but also to comment on others’ suggestions and vote for the most impactful proposals to address the climate emergency. The most-voted initiatives will be reviewed by the government and may be integrated into the Climate Plan, helping to shape Brazil’s climate policy until 2035.
At the local level as well, there is a wide range of innovative practices using digital technologies to consult citizens, as seen in Helsinki (Finland) and Grenoble (France) (see Box 3.9).
Decidim is an open-source digital platform designed to promote citizen participation in democratic decision-making. Originally developed in Barcelona, Decidim enables governments, institutions, and organisations to implement participatory processes such as public consultations, participatory budgeting, citizens’ assemblies, and popular legislative initiatives.
The platform aims to foster transparency, inclusion, and deliberation by providing tools for citizens to submit ideas, vote on proposals, comment, debate, and track decisions and their implementation. Its source code is freely available, allowing any organisation to adapt it to their specific needs.
Decidim has been widely used, particularly at the local level, for public consultations on climate-related issues:
Helsinki (Finland)
The city of Helsinki used Decidim to consult citizens on its carbon neutrality strategy.
Objective: Make Helsinki a carbon-neutral city by 2035 by engaging citizens in the development of climate policies.
Process: Residents submitted ideas and suggestions to strengthen the city’s climate action, such as increasing renewable energy use and reducing energy consumption.
Grenoble (France)
The city of Grenoble, actively committed to energy transition, used Decidim to carry out a consultation on its Climate Plan.
Objective: Gather public input on issues such as energy efficiency, consumption reduction, and renewable energy development.
Process: Citizens participated through both in-person workshops and online contributions on Decidim to help identify and prioritise climate action areas.
Source: https://decidim.org/tags/casestudy/.
The analysis of documented practices highlights several key success factors for online consultations: user data security, process transparency, effective communication to raise awareness of available tools, and ease of use, among others. The success of the Better Reykjavik platform (see Box 3.10) can also be attributed to its integration throughout the entire public policy cycle. Citizens are not only able to respond when a consultation is opened by the government, but also to propose issues for inclusion on the policy agenda – with a systematic response provided by the administration in the event of rejection (ensuring accountability). Moreover, its continuity despite political changes has allowed it to become a long-term governance tool and a permanent space for citizen–government dialogue.
Better Reykjavik is an online platform launched in 2010 to engage citizens in addressing urban challenges. It has endured despite changes in political leadership and has become an established tool for governance. The platform allows citizens to submit, discuss, and prioritise public policy proposals and ideas, giving them a direct influence on decision-making.
Developed and maintained by a non-profit organisation (rather than the government), the platform has gained strong support from citizens, policymakers, and the administration. It has thus become a key channel for interaction between the public and the government. Since its inception, it has also benefited from a major communication campaign led by the city.
The Better Reykjavik platform offers a range of functions grouped into three main categories:
Agenda setting: Any citizen can submit proposals, often related to transport or environmental issues. The highest-rated ideas are reviewed monthly by a project manager at City Hall and, where the city has competence, are forwarded to the relevant standing committee for discussion by elected officials in a fully transparent manner. If an idea is rejected, the author receives an explanatory email and can request a meeting to discuss it;
Participatory budgeting;
Crowdsourcing public policy: This function enables citizens to co-create new public policies. For example, in 2017, the public was consulted to co-develop the city’s new education policy.
To facilitate participation, users can log in using their social media accounts or email address. However, electronic ID or a password is required for voting. Particular attention is given to safeguarding user data.
By 2019, more than half of the city’s population had taken part in consultations on the platform, indicating a relatively high level of uptake across the community.
3.3.2. Combining in-person and digital formats enhances the inclusiveness of public consultations
While digital tools can help broaden participation in consultations and provide citizens with extensive information, they also have certain limitations, particularly in terms of the quality of exchanges – such as superficiality or a lack of fluid interaction. A fully digital approach also carries the risk of excluding segments of the population who either lack access to digital tools or are unfamiliar with how to use them (Décider ensemble, 2023[25]).
One way to address these challenges is through the hybridisation of practices – that is, combining in-person and digital formats. Experience shows that blending digital and in-person methods can harness the strengths of each: broader reach through online platforms, higher-quality discussions through in-person engagement, and targeted tools for vulnerable or marginalised populations. As a result, more and more governments are seeking to combine formats to improve their citizen consultation mechanisms.
Mexico: The consultation for the national strategy on Agenda 2030 aimed to gather citizens’ views on indicators, actions and goals related to sustainable development. It involved dialogues, forums, and an online portal to enable participation from the public, private sector, civil society, and academia. The contributions collected are being used to develop a national strategy to meet the Agenda 2030 goals) (LATINNO Database, 2018[12]).
France: The European Metropolis of Lille (MEL) opted to develop its Territorial Climate, Air and Energy Plan in collaboration with citizens, launching a wide-ranging consultation that combined digital tools and in-person events in a variety of formats (workshops, discussion cafés, climate hackathons, etc.), with the aim of reaching a large and diverse segment of the population (see Box 3.11).
Brazil: The city of Rio de Janeiro implemented a hybrid process including in-person workshops, a digital platform, and youth-focused activities to consult the public on the city’s sustainable development and climate action plan. In total, over 35,000 people took part in the initiative (see Box 3.11).
Development of the Territorial Climate, Air and Energy Plan (PCAET) for the European Metropolis of Lille
Between 2018 and 2019, the European Metropolis of Lille (MEL) conducted an extensive consultation process to develop its new Territorial Climate, Air and Energy Plan (PCAET). Over 1,000 contributions were gathered through various consultation and participation channels:
A launch event presenting the diagnostic findings;
An online platform offering questionnaires, open submissions, and detailed information about the process;
A citizens’ panel that met six times to discuss the theme “Supporting behaviour change”;
Workshops involving municipalities and businesses;
Ten public discussion cafés held across the metropolitan area, with a focus on engaging young people. Public figures and influencers, such as a YouTuber, were involved in these events;
A “Climathon” bringing together around thirty students, researchers, and local experts to collaborate and present a project addressing urban nature, water issues, and climate adaptation;
Street dialogues;
Eight workshops targeting socio-economic stakeholders;
Meetings and workshops with elected officials and staff from the Metropolis and local municipalities.
In total, nearly 1,400 people were reached and 620 proposals were submitted. All ideas were compiled into a summary report in the form of a white paper, which was handed over to elected representatives. As a result, the PCAET project was adjusted to reflect citizens’ priorities (European Metropolis of Lille, 2019[26]).
To meet its objectives, MEL decided to broaden the governance structure of the Plan by establishing a Metropolitan High Council for the Climate, responsible for monitoring and evaluating its implementation. This is a notable example of shifting from ad hoc consultation towards institutionalised citizen participation. The Council will be composed of four groups: municipalities, socio-economic actors, experts and scientists, and citizens.
Social participation in the development of Rio de Janeiro’s Sustainable Development and Climate Action Plan (2018–2020)
In drafting its sustainable development and climate action plan, the city of Rio de Janeiro set out to reach the widest possible audience while ensuring the inclusion of diverse social profiles within a complex society. Several tools were deployed:
Training and engagement workshops for municipal staff and external partners to build capacity in climate issues and public participation;
Face-to-face engagement activities with citizens;
The creation of the Participa.rio digital platform, centralising public consultations linked to urban planning processes (polls, idea submissions, etc.);
Specific mechanisms targeting young people:
A dedicated children’s and youth section on the online platform;
Meetings held in schools across different city districts;
A “subjective mapping” of the city’s neighbourhoods carried out with children.
Altogether, more than 35,000 people participated in the initiative, thanks to the range of available engagement channels.
3.3.3. Creating dedicated consultation mechanisms to enable the participation of communities excluded from public decision-making
Vulnerable communities disproportionately affected by climate change – such as refugees, migrants, people living in precarious situations, and Indigenous populations – often have little or no presence in decision-making spaces (Open Government Partnership, 2022[27]). It is therefore particularly important that citizen participation processes ensure those most affected by climate change are heard and play an active role in shaping environmental policies, in order to enhance the legitimacy, effectiveness, and sustainability of climate action (OECD, 2022[1]).
In this regard, certain countries and cities have introduced targeted mechanisms to amplify the voices of under-represented populations, such as ad hoc consultations aimed at specific groups or communities. For instance, in Costa Rica, the government established a dedicated consultation mechanism for Indigenous peoples in 2018 to promote their participation (see Box 3.12).
Established in 2018, the General Consultation Mechanism for Indigenous Peoples is a legal instrument that sets out, in advance, the procedures to be followed by the state and private individuals or entities in relation to projects that may affect Indigenous peoples’ collective rights. Its aim is to obtain their free, prior, and informed consent and/or agreement. The mechanism has been endorsed by 22 of the 24 Indigenous territories.
It involves the creation of Indigenous territorial consultation bodies, which serve as interlocutors with the government. Each territory appoints the members of its body in accordance with its own customs and practices.
The consultation process includes eight stages:
1) Submission of a consultation request by the government, private entities, or Indigenous peoples;
2) Verification by the government of the admissibility of the request;
3) Preparation of preliminary agreements by the parties involved to determine elements such as timing, location, funding, observers, etc.;
4) Information exchange;
5) Internal evaluation by Indigenous peoples: Indigenous communities meet internally to assess administrative measures, executive-backed legislative proposals, or private projects, and to take a position within the timeframe set in the preparatory agreements. This stage is led by the Indigenous peoples through their Territorial Consultation Body;
6) Dialogue, negotiation, and agreements;
7) Completion of the consultation process;
8) Monitoring and implementation of agreements.
Source: (Government of Costa Rica, 2018[28]).
Governments can also reserve seats within permanent consultation bodies for stakeholders who act as intermediaries or spokespersons for specific minority groups. This is the case, for example, in Brazil, where the city of Salvador launched a consultation process to develop its climate change mitigation and adaptation plan, ensuring the participation of community leaders, as well as representatives from civil society and the private sector. Alternatively, public authorities can establish permanent bodies tasked with representing communities that are more vulnerable to climate change. In the United States, for instance, the city of Los Angeles created a Climate Emergency Mobilisation Commission (see Box 3.13), whose role is to represent the most vulnerable and under-represented populations. In New Zealand, the Māori Council – established under the Māori Community Development Act of 1962 – is a national advisory body enabling Indigenous communities to participate in the development of public policies affecting the Māori population. Beyond its advisory role, the Council also advocates for greater consultation and partnership with the government on key national issues, including the ecological transition. These dedicated spaces offer marginalised groups a secure framework in which to express themselves and put forward policy proposals.
To strengthen community engagement and ensure that traditionally marginalised voices are included in the decision-making process, the city of Los Angeles established the Climate Emergency Mobilisation Commission (CEMC) in 2022. The Commission is made up of 19 members, including seven representing the most polluted areas of the city, as well as youth representatives, trade unionists, Indigenous community leaders, and experts in climate and health.
The Commission is mandated to advise the City Council and the Mayor on the development of equitable climate policies. Both online and in-person meetings are held to facilitate dialogue between the public and Commission members.
Source: (City of Los Angeles, 2022[29]).
3.3.4. Consulting young people to ensure their voice is reflected in the development of climate policies that will affect them the most
OECD research has highlighted the importance of taking into account the voice of youth and the intergenerational dimensions of policy to ensure the long-term sustainability of public action (OECD, 2022[1]). At the same time, the OECD Survey on the Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions (2024) reveals that only 37% of respondents trust governments to balance intergenerational interests (OECD, 2024[7]). The survey also shows that young people tend to place less trust in national governments than older generations: 43% of those aged 50 and over reported high or moderate levels of trust in government, compared to only 36% among 18–29-year-olds (OECD, 2024[7]). Conversely, recent studies indicate that this same age group is more supportive of public climate action (62%) than older groups (OECD, 2024[30]).4
The full inclusion of young people in the green transition is all the more crucial as they will spend the majority of their lives in a world heavily affected by climate change and will bear the brunt of its consequences (Han and Ahn, 2020[31]). Likewise, the public policies and measures adopted in response to the climate crisis will have a significant impact on their socio-economic conditions and on the long-term evolution of lifestyles and consumption patterns.
Youth are strongly mobilised around climate issues, but this is often expressed through non-institutional channels of participation such as protests, school and university strikes, volunteering, and online activism (OECD, 2020[32]; Han and Ahn, 2020[31]). For example, this mobilisation peaked in March 2019 during the global Fridays for Future movement, which, according to organisers, brought together nearly two million people across 130 countries (Han and Ahn, 2020[31]). Other more local initiatives have also demonstrated young people's commitment to community-level climate adaptation efforts. Young people can therefore be powerful agents of change.
At the same time, young people remain underrepresented in politics relative to their share of the population.5 Their participation in institutional channels – such as elections – is also consistently lower. Data from the OECD Survey on the Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions (2021) shows that a smaller proportion of 18–29-year-olds vote in national and subnational elections compared to older groups. However, they are more likely to engage through signing petitions, posting political content on social media, or taking part in protests (OECD, 2022[33]; OECD, 2023[34]).
Thus, the strong motivation and willingness of youth to act are hampered by significant barriers, such as the inability of institutions to communicate effectively with young people, a lack of accessible public consultation mechanisms, and insufficient financial and technical capacity among civil servants. Efforts are therefore needed to reform and adapt institutional participation channels to meet young people's expectations and enable them to shape and implement climate-related measures and initiatives. In this regard, the OECD Recommendation on Creating Better Opportunities for Young People calls for “creating or strengthening institutions such as youth advisory bodies and opportunities for stakeholder participation, including through information sharing, consultations and engagement with youth councils […] in all policy areas that young people determine are of interest to them, including global challenges such as climate change and biodiversity loss” (OECD, 2022[35]). The OECD has also developed a Youth Action Plan Toolkit, which provides guidance and good practices to help countries implement this Recommendation, including measures to re-engage youth in public life and decision-making processes (OECD, 2024[36]).
Some countries have already established dedicated structures to support youth participation (OECD, 2022[1]). For instance, the Local Conference of Youth (LCOY) was launched in Canada in 2022 to bring together young people aged 15 to 35 and youth organisations to exchange views on climate and environmental issues (OECD, 2024[30]). Similarly, Denmark established a Youth Climate Council to provide recommendations to public authorities on how to achieve the transition to a low-carbon economy by 2050 in an effective and cost-efficient manner (see Box 3.14). This initiative is particularly notable as it was driven by civil society, especially youth organisations.
The Danish Youth Climate Council is a youth-led advisory body established by the government following an initiative from the Danish Youth Delegates and the National Youth Council. It is an independent body composed of 14 members aged 18 to 29, with two-year mandates to work on green public policy. The members come from diverse educational and professional backgrounds, including climate activists, students, and technical professionals representing the Danish labour movement.
The Council’s role is to gather young people’s views on climate issues across the country and submit policy recommendations every six months to the Minister for Climate, Energy and Utilities. For example, the Council has issued proposals on food policy, climate policy, taxation, the North Sea, and the green recovery. Its recommendations are now integrated into the ministry’s policymaking process, giving young people direct influence over future climate policies.
The Council also aims to raise broader public awareness of climate issues. It regularly takes part in external events and contributes to public debate through media appearances. In addition, local Youth Climate Councils exist in several cities across Denmark.
Source: (OECD, 2020[32]; OECD, 2024[36]).
In Peru, youth involvement in the development of legal frameworks has also helped bring certain priorities to the forefront and led to the integration of the principle of intergenerational equity within the legal framework governing climate action. This process is particularly noteworthy as it includes a second phase implemented at the local level, during which capacity-building activities were carried out to enable young people to participate effectively in shaping the law’s implementation modalities (see Box 3.15).
In Peru, the youth collective Jóvenes Peruanos frente al Cambio Climático (JPCC) contributed to the drafting of the national Climate Law in 2017 by producing technical reports advocating for the inclusion of the principle of intergenerational equity. These reports highlighted the heightened vulnerability of young people to the impacts of climate change and included normative proposals for integrating youth participation into the national climate strategy, as well as calls for strengthening the education component of the law.
As part of its strategy, JPCC organised meetings with various stakeholders and participated as an observer in the parliamentary commission responsible for drafting the law.
Following the successful adoption of the Climate Law in 2018, young people also called for involvement in the development of its implementing regulations, coordinated by the Ministry of the Environment.
To that end, at the decentralised level, the Ministry financed the participation of one youth representative per macro-region in Peru. In Lima, the Ministry invited JPCC to help define participation criteria and organise a youth-specific workshop. JPCC assisted with mapping youth organisations, disseminating the invitation through its networks, and proposing a methodology adapted to young people's needs – including preliminary capacity-building on the technical aspects of the law and the use of youth facilitators. Around one hundred young people took part in the workshop, providing input on how to operationalise the principle of intergenerational equity and calling for youth representation within the National Climate Change Commission.
Source: (UNDP, 2022[37]).
Finally, in Cambodia, as part of the development of sectoral public policy in the transport sector – a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions – the government organised a consultation process specifically targeting young people, using tailored formats to reach this audience (see Box 3.16).
In Cambodia, the transport sector has become one of the largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions due to the country’s rapid urbanisation. In response, the Ministry of Public Works and Transport, in partnership with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), launched the project "Sustainable Urban Mobility for All Initiative." The aim is to collect data on traffic and air quality to inform public policy and to develop more inclusive and sustainable mobility solutions.
Specific efforts were made to engage youth:
The Youth Ideation Tour (2018–2019), held in Phnom Penh, Siem Reap, and Battambang, brought together 200 students who shared their ideas and solutions for tackling road congestion and safety challenges.
The Youth Impact Challenge (2019–2020) invited young people to form teams and present their solutions to urban mobility and transport issues. Participants received personalised coaching and attended lectures. The three winning teams each received $5,000 to help launch and implement their projects.
These initiatives helped to strengthen young people’s knowledge of climate issues, boost their engagement, and build confidence in their ability to contribute to the development of sustainable mobility solutions for the country. They also created opportunities for dialogue with entrepreneurs and representatives from various ministries.
Consultation is an effective tool for widening decision-making to include citizens and stakeholders. Innovative practices show that it remains relevant when embedded within a robust governance framework and when it genuinely reflects the voices of citizens and stakeholders early on and throughout the policy cycle. However, its limitations are also well known and highlight the need to better integrate consultation into more ambitious forms of engagement, such as deliberation or direct decision-making (e.g. participatory budgeting).
Research also shows that simply establishing consultation spaces – whether online or in person – and making them open to all is not sufficient to ensure diversity of participation or the quality of exchanges. Voluntary participation often attracts individuals with similar profiles (e.g. relatively well-off socio-economic backgrounds, strong interest in public affairs) (Petit, Guihéneuf and Urman, 2023[39]). Numerous barriers hinder inclusive participation, including political polarisation, social exclusion, and discrimination (OECD, 2022[40]). Overcoming these challenges is essential to involving the broader population in the green transition and ensuring that proposed solutions are widely understood and accepted.
References
[17] Averchenkova, A., S. Fankhauser and J. Finnegan (2018), The role independent bodies in climate governance: the UK’s Committee on Climate Change, https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/The-role-of-independent-bodies-in-climate-governance-the-UKs-Committee-on-Climate-Change_Averchenkova-et-al.pdf.
[13] C40 (2024), Climate Action Planning, https://www.c40knowledgehub.org/s/topic/0TO1Q0000001lR9WAI/climate-action-planning?language=en_US.
[29] City of Los Angeles (2022), Climate Emergency Mobilization Commission, https://www.climate4la.org/commission/ (accessed on 26 July 2024).
[14] Commission nationale du débat public (2022), La CNDP, Mode d’emploi, https://www.debatpublic.fr/sites/default/files/2022-04/MODE-D-EMPLOI-CNDP_2.pdf.
[25] Décider ensemble (2023), Guide sur l’articulation numérique-présentiel – Dans une démarche de participation citoyenne, comment jongler entre ces deux mondes ?, https://assets-global.website-files.com/65717d03eaee09aef74995dc/65ba6c3a2e7b2429bd35c137_Guide-articulation-numerique-presentiel_VF.pdf.
[26] European Metropolis of Lille (2019), Changer de modèle et passer à l’action : concertation du plan Climat Air Énergie Territorial 2018-2019, Les éditions de la métropole européenne de Lille, https://www.lillemetropole.fr/sites/default/files/2024-04/Livre%20blanc%20de%20la%20concertation%20du%20PCAET%202018-2019.pdf.
[23] Fauville, G., A. Muller Queiroz and J. Bailenson (2020), “Virtual reality as a promising tool to promote climate change awareness”, Technology and Health, pp. 91-108, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-816958-2.00005-8.
[28] Government of Costa Rica (2018), Mecanismo General de Consulta a Pueblos Indígenas N° 40932- MP-MJP, http://www.pgrweb.go.cr/scij/Busqueda/Normativa/Normas/nrm_texto_completo.aspx?param1=NRTC&nValor1=1&nValor2=86267&nValor3=111809&strTipM=TC.
[24] Government of Kenya (2016), Kenya National Adaptation Plan: 2016-2023 – Enhanced climate resilience towards the attainment of Vision 2030 and beyond, https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/NAPC/Documents%20NAP/Kenya_NAP_Final.pdf.
[31] Han, H. and S. Ahn (2020), “Youth Mobilization to Stop Global Climate Change: Narratives and Impact”, Sustainability, Vol. 12/10, p. 4127, https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104127.
[12] LATINNO Database (2018), Consulta General de la Estrategia Nacional de la Agenda 2030, https://latinno.net/es/case/13262/ (accessed on 15 mai 2024).
[20] LATINNO Database (2017), Citzens Climate Change Advisory Council, https://latinno.net/en/case/6115/.
[19] Ministry of Environment of Chile (2024), Plan Nacional de Implementación Participativa del Acuerdo de Escazú 2024-2030, https://mma.gob.cl/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Plan-Nacional-de-implementacion-participativa-del-Acuerdo-de-Escazu-Chile-2024-2030.pdf.
[15] OCPM (2023), Réflexion 2030 : Rapport de consultation publique, https://ocpm.qc.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/rapports/rapport-final-R%C3%A9flexion%202050.pdf.
[5] OECD (2025), OECD Regulatory Policy Outlook 2025, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/56b60e39-en.
[22] OECD (2025), “Tackling civic participation challenges with emerging technologies: Beyond the hype”, OECD Public Governance Policy Papers, No. 72, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ec2ca9a2-en.
[18] OECD (2024), Green Budgeting in OECD Countries 2024, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9aea61f0-en.
[7] OECD (2024), OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions – 2024 Results: Building Trust in a Complex Policy Environment, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9a20554b-en.
[36] OECD (2024), OECD Youth Policy Toolkit, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/74b6f8f3-en.
[30] OECD (2024), The OECD Reinforcing Democracy Initiative: Monitoring Report – Assessing Progress and Charting the Way Forward, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9543bcfb-en.
[4] OECD (2023), “Better regulation for the green transition”, OECD Public Governance Policy Papers, No. 40, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c91a04bc-en.
[21] OECD (2023), Getting Civic Tech Right for Democracy – Background note, Unpublished.
[34] OECD (2023), Government at a Glance 2023, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3d5c5d31-en.
[10] OECD (2023), “Open Government in Honduras: Towards Effective Implementation”, in OECD Public Governance Reviews: Honduras: Inclusive and Effective Governance for Better Outcomes, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/70a6df01-en.
[9] OECD (2023), Open Government Review of Romania, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ff20b2d4-en.
[33] OECD (2022), Building Trust to Reinforce Democracy: Main Findings from the 2021 OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions, Building Trust in Public Institutions, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b407f99c-en.
[1] OECD (2022), “Governing Green: Gearing up government to deliver on climate and other environmental challenges”, in Building Trust and Reinforcing Democracy: Preparing the Ground for Government Action, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/45cc57a7-en.
[6] OECD (2022), OECD Guidelines for Citizen Participation Processes, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f765caf6-en.
[8] OECD (2022), Open Government Review of Brazil : Towards an Integrated Open Government Agenda, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3f9009d4-en.
[35] OECD (2022), Recommendation of the Council on Creating Better Opportunities for Young People, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0474.
[40] OECD (2022), “Upgrading participation, representation and openness in public life”, in Building Trust and Reinforcing Democracy: Preparing the Ground for Government Action, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/aee358d3-en.
[32] OECD (2020), Governance for Youth, Trust and Intergenerational Justice: Fit for All Generations?, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c3e5cb8a-en.
[2] OECD (2017), Recommendation of the Council on Open Government, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0438.
[3] OECD (2012), Recommendation of the Council on Regulatory Policy and Governance, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0390#backgroundInformation.
[27] Open Government Partnership (2022), Environment and Climate, https://www.opengovpartnership.org/policy-area/environment-climate/ (accessed on 15 June 2024).
[39] Petit, G., P. Guihéneuf and V. Urman (2023), Toujours les mêmes : est-ce que problème ?, https://democraties.media/toujours-les-memes-est-ce-un-probleme/ (accessed on 17 August 2024).
[37] UNDP (2022), Aming Higher: Elevating Meaningful Youth Engagement in Climate Action, https://www.undp.org/sites/g/files/zskgke326/files/2022-05/UNDP-Elevating-Meaningful-Youth-Engagement-for-Climate-Action-2.pdf.
[11] Warren, M. (2002), “What Can Democratic Participation Mean Today?”, Political Theory, Vol. 30/5, pp. 677-701, https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591702030005003.
[16] Weaver, S., S. Lötjönen and M. Ollikainen (2019), Overview of national climate change advisory councils, https://researchportal.helsinki.fi/en/publications/overview-of-national-climate-change-advisory-councils.
[38] Youth Empowerment in Climate Action Platform (2023), Youth and climate governance in Asia and the Pacific: A compendium of best practices, https://www.yecap-ap.org/_files/ugd/5033a0_2d3ea8d8194044b7af2ccab0db666084.pdf.
← 1. Defined by the OECD (2022[6]) as "any interested and/or affected party, including: individuals, regardless of their age, gender, sexual orientation, religious and political affiliations; and institutions and organisations, whether governmental or non-governmental, from civil society, academia, the media or the private sector".
← 2. For example, in February 2024, the Government of Canada launched a public consultation process on the greenhouse gas emissions reduction target for 2035. See: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/news/2024/02/government-of-canada-launches-public-engagement-on-the-2035-greenhouse-gas-emissions-reduction-target.html.
← 3. Civic technologies (“civic tech”) are defined by the OECD as digital tools that strengthen democracy by enabling the public to be informed, to participate in decision-making and policy-making, and to increase the responsiveness and accountability of governments (OECD, 2023[21]).
← 4. The data show that 57% of 30–49-year-olds and 58% of 50–64-year-olds are supportive of climate policies (OECD, 2024[30]).
← 5. While 20–39-year-olds account for an average of 34% of the voting-age population in OECD countries, only 23% of members of parliament were under the age of 40 in 2022 – and 11 percentage point representation gap. Significant disparities also persist within executive bodies. In 2022, across OECD countries, only 56 out of 756 cabinet members were under 40 (7%), and just 16 were aged 35 or younger (2%) (OECD, 2023[34]).