Do not wait; the time will never be ’just right.’ Start where you stand, and work with whatever tools you may have at your command, and better tools will be found as you go along.Napoleon Hill, author, 1883 - 1970
Methods of public participation range in type, and they reflect the specific characteristics of each place. Thus, while the basic toolbox for participation is relatively similar everywhere, how these tools are combined and how each tool is used can and should be adapted to local conditions and needs. Indeed, they should evolve constantly along with local conditions and be limited “only by the creativity of their practitioners” (Giering 2011, p. 2).
| Tool | Quality | Type | Uses | Risks | Examples |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Surveys, data collection | Consult | Information | Minimal input | Superficial | Online vote on location of cycle parking, new line, etc. |
| Public forums and large public meetings | Consult | Information exchange | Receiving inputs from broad audience | Superficial, formulaic, meaningless, frustrating | Public hearings when written briefs can be submitted, must be considered and receive response |
| Small group meetings | Involve | One-off or short-term deliberation | Generate new ideas, problem solving, planning along corridors | Irrelevant, high energy wasted | Charettes, working groups, manual development |
| Focus groups | Consult | Information gathering | Traditional research and analysis | Difficult to identify capacity for change, potential | User intercept, statement of choice, user satisfaction |
| Committees | Collaborate | Long-term relationship building and deliberation | Generate new ideas, problem solving, strategic development, earning broader support | Procedural, no real influence, no access to decisions | Advisory committees at the system-wide, corridor/neighborhood levels |
| Civil society initiatives and local networks | Empower | Two-way, extensive, deep | Building users’ and others’ knowledge into the system | Too small, potentially high conflict | Users’ associations, cooperation with neighborhood, environmental and other groups |
| Online engagement | Inform | Information | Offering up-to-the-minute, user-specific information | Superficial | Informational websites, plan-your-route, SMS texting of schedules for specific lines |
| Corporate social responsibility | Collaborate | Two-way, but tends to be paternalistic, hierarchical power relations | Community outreach, bridge building, greater understanding | PR, "greenwashing," no real change | Sponsorship car-free days, cycling Sunday routes, cycle parking, cycle taxis for users |
| Community engagement | Involve/collaborate | Short-term deliberation | Gain new insights into community issues and how to make BRT more relevant to needs, interests, aspirations | PR, no real change | Speaking at local fairs, services, meetings, events |
Categories based on Giering 2011 and other sources. Classification based on IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation: http://www.iap2.org.
When it comes to choosing between a bus-based system and rail, politicians and citizens alike tend to prefer surface and underground rail systems. Thus, being careful to frame a new BRT with a name and a set of associations relevant to the specific project and the lives of potential users is important.
BRT can learn from nonmotorized transport modes that have attracted powerful advocates in groups, movements, and among key planners and politicians who have organized to push these modes onto policy agendas and keep them there as banners for friendlier, more socially just, and sustainable cities. Enrique Peñalosa, the former mayor of Bogotá, has played this role in the case of BRT, but even in his home city efforts have flagged relative to other priorities in the face of recent political turnover and a lack of an engaged civil society that could offer continued support through the mercurial nature of politics.
As a rule of thumb, large-scale efforts will reach more people, but will impress them less. Small-scale efforts, especially ongoing work with a relatively small group of diverse but representative individuals, require more work, but can produce deep change.