Developing Future Action Plans (US0112)

Expand Public Participation in Developing Future U.S. National Action Plans Citizen engagement and public participation are among the most important elements of the NAP cocreation process. During the development of this NAP4, everyday Americans provided some of the most thoughtful and engaging ideas. As we begin to contemplate a fifth national action plan, we will prioritize including a more geographically diverse and diffuse representation of citizen stakeholders in the development of the document. We will aim to conduct a series of consultation sessions, in-person meetings, and livestreamed discussions around the country to generate ideas, encourage public input, and engage in conversations with the most important stakeholder – the American public.

8. Expand Public Participation in Developing Future U.S. National Action Plans

Main Objective

“Expand Public Participation in Developing Future U.S. National Action Plans”

Milestones

“Prioritize including a more geographically diverse and diffuse representation of citizen stakeholders in the development of the document.”

“Aim to conduct a series of consultation sessions, in-person meetings, and livestreamed discussions around the country to generate ideas, encourage public input, and engage in conversations with the… American public.”

Editorial Note: For the complete text of this commitment, please see the United States’ action plan at: https://open.usa.gov/assets/files/NAP4-fourth-open-government-national-action-plan.pdf.

Commitment analysis

This commitment will expand public participation in developing future national action plans, particularly the fifth NAP (NAP5). Citizen involvement in co-creating NAPS is integral to countries’ efforts to open government. The commitment will incorporate a more geographically diverse and “diffuse” set of stakeholders into the co-creation process via consultation sessions, in-person meetings, and livestreamed discussion.

OGP’s Articles of Governance require OGP members develop NAPs “through a multistakeholder process, with the active engagement of citizens and civil society.” The OGP Participation and Co-Creation Standards “support participation and co-creation at all stages of the OGP cycle.” [103] During the NAP creation process, the Standards stipulate that participating governments or the responsible multistakeholder forum [104] should publish the process for developing the NAP, including opportunities for public involvement and the process by which the NAP is finalized; provide opportunities for stakeholders’ participation in the NAP design; and provide stakeholders with sufficient information on the NAP/OGP process to be informed participants. [105] “The collaboration of citizens, civil society, political and official champions and other stakeholders is essential to developing, securing and implementing lasting open government reforms.” [106]

The commitment is relevant to the OGP value of civic participation by nature of its emphasis on expanding public participation in the NAP co-creation process.

With respect to civil society, the commitment’s aim of expanding public participation in the NAP co-creation process broadly resonates with comments made by stakeholders during NAP4’s co-creation. Alex Howard (Demand Progress Education Fund) [107] notes that NAP4’s “final objective, which is aimed at improving ‘Public Participation in Developing Future U.S. National Action Plans,’ is painfully ironic, given how little effort at public engagement the Trump White House and federal agencies made over the past two years.” [108] Anonymous sources with knowledge about the NAP4 co-creation process broadly agreed, highlighting the relatively small number of co-creation events, the relatively non-iterative nature of the co-creation process following the GSA event on 8 September 2017 (see Section 3.2), and disagreement over the scope of public engagement on NAP4. Interviewees further affirmed that some civil society stakeholders declined to participate in the NAP4 co-creation due to concerns about the Trump administration’s commitment to public accountability, and that their participation would imply tacit support. [109]

The IRM researcher assesses that the commitment has a minor potential impact owing largely to the lack of specificity in the commitment text, specifically surrounding the scope of geographical expansion of the co-creation process as well as the scope of the consultation activities envisioned (i.e., number, frequency, depth of opportunities for public participation, etc.). The commitment also neglects to specify what is meant by “diffuse” representation of citizen stakeholders beyond geography. All co-creation events for NAP4 were hosted in Washington, DC (see Section 3), albeit with some opportunities for remote participation via teleconference. [110] While expanding geographical participation in the co-creation process is therefore laudable, the lack of sufficient specificity surrounding the proposed expansion precludes a more substantial assessment of moderate potential impact.

Commitment 8. Expand Public Participation in Future Action Plans

● Verifiable: Yes

● Does it have an open government lens? Yes

● Potential for results: Minor

● Completion: Substantial

● Did it open government? Marginal

This commitment aimed to redress the process deficits that, in the eyes of civil society, delegitimized NAP4, alienated civil society organizations, and reduced the ambition of the resulting commitments. The commitment focused on expanding public participation in the next co-creation process. In particular, it stated the need to reach more diverse groups of citizens and organizations, including geographically, and conduct a variety of consultation events, both virtually and in person, to engage with the public.

In May 2022, the government kicked off engagement with stakeholders across civil society, government agencies, and the broader public to co-create NAP5, [57] which was submitted to OGP and published in December. [58] As stated in the official call for participation, [59] the process would take place in five phases. Roughly two of those phases were expected to take place within the period of implementation of NAP4, ending on August 31, 2022.

The first phase was dedicated to identifying and reaching out to diverse civil society and community stakeholders, providing information about the process and its participation mechanisms and collecting ideas. [60] The second phase was dedicated to organizing input into themes, problem statements, and proposed solutions. The rest of the process was expected to be completed after the end of the NAP implementation period. That included drafting, reviewing, providing feedback, obtaining clearance, publishing, announcing, and disseminating the new NAP.

According to a civil society stakeholder, however, after the launch meeting in May, it all went quiet for months. The co-creation timeline was “wiped off the internet” and then rescheduled, as a result of which two online workshops were held in October. The rest of the process was completed before the end of December. [61]

In normal circumstances, a commitment like this—containing a promise to meet the basic requirements of OGP’s co-creation standards—would not have been part of a NAP. Its inclusion amounted to an acknowledgment that a crucial element of the open government process had failed to materialize in NAP4. It was also an attempt at preserving the possibility of righting the process in the future. Its implementation is assessed as having had positive results because it succeeded in relaunching a process that many had practically given up for dead. Those results are assessed as marginal because they were limited to complying with the OGP process rather than opening government in any substantive area of policy-making. Additionally, concerns regarding the quality of the co-creation process and the resulting NAP remain. [62]