Promoting Deliberative Democracy in the Basque Country in Spain

Executive summary

This report takes stock of the project carried out by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Arantzazulab, and public authorities in Gipuzkoa that included experiments with the use of public deliberation in the Basque Country (Spain). Building on the Tolosa and Gipuzkoa deliberative processes (promoted and designed by Arantzazulab with the support of the OECD and in collaboration with other local and international stakeholders) and interviews with key regional stakeholders, this report finds seven main areas of opportunity for improving deliberative processes in the region. The report also sets out three pathways for promoting and systemising deliberation across all levels of government in the Basque Country: 1) institutionalising deliberative practices, 2) embedding deliberation in public administration, and 3) mainstreaming deliberation within and outside government.

Key findings

The Tolosa and Gipuzkoa Assemblies benefited from a friendly legal and regulatory environment for sortition and deliberation, strong political buy-in and commitment throughout the process, available financial resources, support from an active network of deliberative experts and practitioners, and a long-term vision set by the organisers that valued evaluation and iteration. Moreover, the most important asset was the role of Arantzazulab, whose independence from the government, strong practical expertise on collaborative governance, and legitimacy with public and non-public organisations helped build a reliable operating environment and created safe spaces for experimentation.

While the case of Tolosa can be considered a good practice, the OECD and the independent evaluation point to seven areas of opportunity for increasing the quality and impact of future deliberative processes: (1) strengthening the connection with the public beyond those who directly participated, (2) streamlining the selection of the topic for deliberation, (3) improving the dissemination of information, (4) involving civil servants to ensure ownership, (5) setting the right governance structure, (6) systematising evaluation and (7) follow up.

Moving from ad hoc deliberative processes towards institutionalising deliberation in the Basque Country requires mapping and addressing current barriers to such institutionalisation. These include legal barriers, such as access to data for sortition, contractor lock-in to run civic lotteries, as well as legal obstacles to providing citizens with a stipend for their participation. The mapping also covers financial and structural barriers, such as the high costs of organising a deliberative process, overall lack of resources dedicated to democratic innovations, and limited knowledge of how to run deliberative processes inside and outside government. Finally, this mapping considers the need to better communicate the outcomes, benefits, and impact of deliberative processes.

Recognising that a successful path to institutionalising deliberative processes varies depending on the legislative, cultural, institutional, and administrative context in which they operate, this roadmap and its recommendations can serve as a valuable reference for policymakers in other regions and municipalities in Spain, as well as across OECD countries, to advance towards more permanent and systemic public deliberation.

Key recommendations

The OECD’s 10 recommendations are clustered into 3 main categories, also considered here as pathways to promoting and systematising deliberation across levels of government in the Basque Country:

Institutionalising deliberative practices by 1) updating existing legislation or adopting new frameworks that enable civic lottery and remuneration, 2) building permanent deliberative institutions that provide citizens with a regular opportunity to participate and reinforce synergies with representative institutions and 3) setting up independent oversight bodies for enhanced evaluation and continuous learning.

Embedding deliberation in public administration by 4) building a compelling narrative for public investment in deliberation to secure resources for future processes and enable economies of scale, 5) creating a dedicated, interdisciplinary public service for deliberation and 6) setting up a digital infrastructure for deliberation.

Mainstreaming deliberation within and outside government by 7) replicating deliberation beyond Tolosa and Gipuzkoa, 8) promoting democratic education and training in schools, 9) nurturing an “ecosystem” of people and networks to support deliberation and 10) reinforcing the conditions for experimentation in the Basque Country.