(Illustration by iStock/lvcandy)
The last year has spotlighted the frailty of many US institutions, as well as Americans’ lack of trust in them. The COVID-19 pandemic, racial injustice, voter suppression, and other issues that have come to the fore have stress-tested the country’s civic and democratic systems, and they’ve unfortunately revealed how much our public health systems have suffered from neglect, and how much other institutions, including civil justice organizations, have suffered from lack of investment. Alongside these revelations, people’s belief in the integrity and efficacy of existing social and economic systems has sunk to a new low, eroded further by government officials refusing to acknowledge when institutions have actually done their job effectively, as with the verification of 2020 presidential election results. A lack of civic trust, exploited by former President Donald Trump, contributed to the violent insurrection at the Capitol earlier this month, and it will continue to threaten the nation’s ability to attract new voters and increase participation.
Effectively rebuilding and restoring people’s trust in US civic and democratic institutions requires that both the new Biden-Harris administration and Americans themselves do things differently. Rather than just “building back better,” we need to build with new intention; we need to look to the future while also acknowledging the past. This means creating a culture of democracy where everyday people regularly participate in the processes and systems of governance that wield influence over policy and affect their lives—particularly those focused on addressing racism and oppression, and on creating equitable outcomes for Black, Brown, and immigrant communities. It also means institutions must listen to communities, and use community insights and expertise to build policies and programs people believe in and can trust. In other words, we must invest in co-governance capacity so that individuals, grassroots organizations, and policy makers are working hand in hand. Here’s a look at three ways we can do this in practice.
Empowered Digital Engagement
Currently, when the government wants policy input, lawmakers consult issue-area experts and a few national organizations that are representative of communities. They then write the policy and put information on it out for comment, either via official channels (where most people can’t find it) or a website. But in an era of information and disinformation overload, transparency and access to open data isn’t enough. It simply doesn’t translate into publicly accessible knowledge or participatory civic engagement.
To move toward co-governance, we must examine and thoughtfully adopt durable models of institutional design to ensure that civic engagement is more than just a checkbox, a public relations campaign, or a one-off information-sharing exercise. We need a people-first, feedback approach that is adaptive and responsive to communities and their needs, not just data dumps.
Taiwan’s response to COVID-19 offers a good example. The government helped quickly curb the spread of the pandemic by recognizing both its own and the public’s unique strengths and limitations. In particular, it provided reliable data about the number of masks in pharmacies to civic tech volunteers and communities, allowing them to use their on-the-ground expertise to make the data useful and tailor it to their needs. To do this, it relied on g0v.tw, an online community focused on developing information platforms and tools that help Taiwanese residents participate in society. The organization translated the data in a way that helped people find face masks and address anxiety related to the virus. It also created an app that uses smartphone data to help determine whether people are in a high-risk area. Taiwan’s digital minister Audrey Tang calls this data-sharing approach “fast, open, fair and fun.”
Rather than just providing numbers, government must consider people and their needs, allow citizens to contribute their expertise, and make the most of existing public resources.
Participatory Economic Democracy
Another co-government model relates to budgeting. Government budgets reflect social and economic priorities, and thus represent civic power. To build a culture of democracy where communities trust government institutions, people need to have a tangible and equitable say over where their tax dollars go.
One promising model is participatory budgeting (PB). First developed in the 1980s by the Brazilian Workers’ Party, PB aims to rebuild public confidence in civic engagement by giving communities decision-making control over a portion of the public budget. In the United States, the nonprofit Participatory Budgeting Project has worked with city councils and local governments to use participatory budgeting as a way to place racial and social equity front and center. PB efforts have shown that communities do in fact participate when asked (especially in Black and Brown communities, and including young people, non-citizens, and formerly incarcerated people), and various initiatives have deployed online mechanisms to reduce barriers to entry.
Chicago Ward 49 was the first place to use PB in the United States. In 2009, the community allocated its budget to fixing sidewalks, as well as adding streetlights, a community garden, and public murals. In 2014, Greensboro, North Carolina opted to spend PB funds on public transportation. And 2020 data from Public Agenda, in collaboration with New York University, shows that after five years of employing PB in New York City, greater portions of one district’s capital investments went into schools, public housing, streets, and traffic improvement, while less went to parks and recreation, housing preservation, and development projects.
PB can lift up voices not often heard in government decision-making, demystify part of the governing process, and give people power within an important but historically cloistered facet of governing.
New Models of Decision Making
Finally, the people impacted by policy should have a greater voice in policymaking. The new administration can tap into the energy and expertise of residents and community groups to create new mechanisms that empower them, both to participate in the process of policymaking and to provide feedback on how policies do or do not affect them. This kind of human-centered investment can help address glaring flaws in our public institutions, as well as get ahead of problems that have yet to surface.
Citizen advisory boards and assemblies are two useful models gaining momentum across American communities. Consider the Office of Community Wealth Building (OCWB) a permanent city agency in Richmond, Virginia, started in 2014, that provides anti-poverty strategy and policy advice to the mayor. The organization aims to reduce poverty by implementing systemic changes around economic development, housing, and education. During the formation of the OCWB, a citizen advisory board composed mainly of people living or working in high-poverty neighborhoods, vetted recommendations for how the organization should operate. The OCWB has also convened focus groups with community-based organizations and established open listening sessions for residents to share their feedback on new city policies.
In Jackson, Mississippi, the city has created opportunities for Black residents to build economic and political power through a community-owned infrastructure called Cooperation Jackson, which includes green cooperatives for food, and housing. Jackson community members have also created People’s Assemblies, a vehicle for self-determination and autonomous political authority, where residents come together to share their opinions on policy. People assemblies, a model used around the globe for decades, are also emerging in other localities, including Newark, New Jersey.
Taking Co-Governance to the Federal Level
Now is the time to change the way we govern. Multiple health, racial justice, economic, and climate crises underscore America’s need for co-governance innovation and participation. These approaches can build a more inclusive culture that will, in turn, allow us to govern our multi-racial, multi-ethnic democracy with greater effectiveness. However, to build trust, we need to link them to concrete and meaningful outcomes for community decision making—at national, state, city, and county levels.
The federal government has the opportunity to build on local efforts, and help scale new models and set measures for success, including making racial equity a core outcome, not an afterthought. Co-governance efforts can start small and scale by showing how structured engagement, both digital and in-person, can deliver results. While no one approach will cure the many ills plaguing our democracy, these models have the potential to drive a radical new vision.
Support SSIR’s coverage of cross-sector solutions to global challenges.
Help us further the reach of innovative ideas. Donate today.
Read more stories by Sonal Shah & Hollie Russon Gilman.