Public Agenda was founded in 1975 by Dan Yankelovich and Cyrus Vance to promote new and better ways for citizens to confront pressing public problems, and to close the gap between leaders, experts and the general public in the search for solutions. They conceived an organization dedicated to re-engaging the larger public on important public matters, to create the possibility for dialogue that gets beneath the "snapshot" or "knee-jerk" views of public sentiment.
Given the sorry state of public discourse, high levels of political cynicism, low levels of civic participation, and the general disconnect between leaders and the public, Public Agenda's mission is arguably even more urgent today. At the same time, communications technologies, attitudes towards government and policy-making, social demographics, and other aspects of society are evolving in directions that offer both challenges and opportunities. These times demand new methods that expand the scope of public engagement to address national and international issues, and that build new and lasting civic practices within communities.
Fortunately, the field of public engagement is growing rapidly, with many new organizations and methods emerging in recent years. But the field is still immature, and we believe it would benefit greatly from a sustained, rigorous, carefully targeted initiative with three specific strands of work:
- The Public Engagement Research Project, to better understand the dynamics and impacts of public engagement.
- The Digital Engagement Project, to explore the potentials of the Internet as a vehicle of engagement.
- The Theory Building Project, to decisively pushing forward the theory that underlies the field's efforts.
CAPE: WORKING PAPERS
In our research and in our work in the field, we've had an opportunity to think about a number of issues on the science and practice of public engagement. Here are some of CAPE's latest working papers (ready to download in PDF format):
| Digital Engagement: Bringing Partisan Bloggers Together on a Common Problem
By Scott Bittle and William Hallowell III |
Digital Engagement: Creating Civil Dialogue Across Ideological Lines
By Scott Bittle and Noam Shore |
| Digital Engagement: Something to Do: Promising Practices for Participation and Public Engagement Online
By Scott Bittle |
Digital Engagement: Providing Facilities and Support to Digitally Isolated Communities
By Maria Martha Chavez and Scott Bittle |
| Framing for Deliberation
By Alison Kadlec and Will Friedman |
Public Engagement: A Primer from Public Agenda
This primer, a seminal "Essentials" publication from CAPE, provides an introduction to the community engagement methodology that has been designed and extensively tested by Public Agenda. This document outlines the differences between authentic public engagement and "business-as-usual" approaches to public involvement and offers a brief summary of the essential elements of successful public engagement efforts.
Tags: Reframing Framing
Public Agenda's Will Friedman takes on framing in a new paper that provides a refreshing clarity and considerable insights. The essay, Reframing "Framing" is the first thought-piece from Public Agenda's Center for Advances in Public Engagement. Dr. Friedman, who is Executive Vice President at Public Agenda and the Director of CAPE, delineates "Framing-to-Persuade vs. Framing-for-Deliberation" and tackles honest vs. dishonest framing.
Transforming Public Life
When it comes time to solve community problems or make and implement public policy, the institutions, organizations, and individuals of Bridgeport, CT, defy business as usual through a remarkably inclusive and deliberative citizen-centered approach to problem-solving. As a result of roughly a decade of hard work by organizations, "ordinary" citizens and various local leaders, public engagement has become
embedded in the life of the community.
Changing the Conversation on Education in Connecticut
A report on 10 years of public engagement on public education topics in over 75 communities across Connecticut. Supported by the William Caspar Graustein Memorial Fund, the report serves as a comprehensive case study of how public engagement can work in communities across America and discusses the specific accomplishments in Connecticut.
Just Waiting to Be Asked?
School district leaders say they are eager for public engagement in educational decision making, but the venue they rely on most -- the school board meeting -- is primarily seen as a vehicle for the most vocal and disgruntled citizens. In this report, teachers, of all the groups surveyed, feel the most ignored. Parents and the public would like to see more community involvement, but two-thirds say they're comfortable leaving decisions to the professionals.
Public Engagement in Education
Commissioned by the Ford Foundation, this paper defines public engagement and outlines the successful strategies for involving citizens: how to get beyond the "usual suspects, how to ensure civil but candid discussions, and how to develop action plans. Includes five case histories of communities from Maine to California.
Talk It Over