Stakeholder engagement: the role of facilitators and gender in ‘opening up’ conversations and enabling participation

Figures & data

Figure 1. Stakeholder management, engagement and participation.

Source: Adapted from Weder (2022), Weder and Erikson (2023).

Figure 2. Inputs, processes and outcomes of the Australian citizens’ panels’ : A graphic abstraction where Gastil's (2018) framework is used as a scaffold.

Table 1. Participant demographics for citizens’ panel.

Variables	Quota (n)	Start	End
Gender
Male	20	19	15
Female	22	21	20
Age
20–24	4	3	3
25–34	9	8	6
35–44	8	8	6
45–54	7	7	7
55–64	6	6	6
65+	8	8	7
Total	42	40	35
Employment status
Employed full time	21	18
Employed part time	6	5
Shift work	2	1
Housework/ student /unemployed	6	6
Retired	5	5
Level of education (%)
Year 10 or lower	3%
Year 12 or equiv.	3%
Certificate III or IV	14%
Advanced Diploma/Diploma	9%
Bachelor’s degree level or above	71%

Table 2. Weekly topics and key questions addressed within the citizens panels.

	Learning topics	Questions for deliberation
Week 1	Climate change and energy today	Activity 1: What do you value most about our current energy system?
		Activity 2: What are the aspects/things about the current energy system you would like to change?
		Activity 3: What are the principles that would guide the path to a low-carbon energy future?
Week 2	Hydrogen, biogas and considerations for disadvantaged groups in the energy transition	Activity 1: What are the principles that would guide the path to a low-carbon energy future (cont)?
		Activity 2: What do you believe are the opportunities and challenges for future fuels in our daily lives and the economy more broadly?
		Activity 3: What are the considerations we need to make now to be able to incorporate future fuels in the future low-carbon energy mix for Australia?
Week 3	Potential decarbonisation pathways, trade-offs and challenges for energy transitions, energy vulnerabilities	Activity 1: Future fuels pathway exploration and evaluation.
		Activity 2: Voting on the alignment of the future fuels pathway with principles
		Activity 3: All electric pathway exploration and evaluation.
		Activity 4: Voting on the alignment of the all electric pathway with principles

Table 3. Questions covered in each week with reflection on complexity.

	Questions discussed	Type of discussion required
Week 1	Activity 1: What do you value most about our current energy system?	Activity 1: Linked to personal lived experience
	Activity 2: What are the aspects/things about the current energy system you would like to change?	Activity 2: Linked to personal lived experience
	Activity 3: What are the principles that would guide the path to a low-carbon energy future?	Activity 3: Ideation related to Activities 1 & 2.
Week 2	Activity 1: What are the principles that would guide the path to a low-carbon energy future (cont)?	Activity 1: Critical evaluation & ideation linked to weeks 1 and 3.
	Activity 2: What do you believe are the opportunities and challenges for future fuels in our daily lives and the economy more broadly?	Activity 2: Integration of information provided in Monday’s learning sessions with personal lived experience.
	Activity 3: What are the considerations we need to make now to be able to incorporate future fuels in the future low-carbon energy mix for Australia?	Activity 3: Integration of information provided in Monday’s learning sessions with personal lived experience.
Week 3	Activity 1: Future fuels pathway exploration and evaluation.	Activity 1: Integration & exploration of information provided in Monday’s learning sessions.
	Activity 2: Voting on the alignment of the future fuels’ pathway with principles	Activity 2: Analysis of Activity 1 against principles established in activities.
	Activity 3: All electric pathway exploration and evaluation.	Activity 3: Integration & exploration of information provided in Monday’s learning sessions.
	Activity 4: Voting on the alignment of the all electric pathway with principles	Activity 4: Analysis of Activity 3 against principles established in activities.

Table 4. Data items and details for Greater Melbourne citizens’ panel.

Data item	Data type	Description	Purpose	Details
Google docs	Qualitative	Notes produced by the breakout room facilitators in real time.	Identify broad topics discussed for each question. Used to feedback during citizens’ panels and to produce interim report.	Google docs:
				Week 1: 5,219 words
				Week 2: 4,147 words
				Week 3: 8,309 words
Video/ audio	Qualitative	Video and audio of Zoom main room and break out room discussions. Transcripts made from the recordings.	To record discussions and interactions. Also provide details of gender of participants in the breakout rooms.	Number of interactions: 2,867
				Word length all transcriptions: 80,907
				Minutes of recording: 787
Survey responses	Quantitative	Surveys completed at multiple times during the citizens’ panels.	To evaluate the process and measure participant engagement and transformation.	Relevant survey results added

Figure 3. The number of interactions (time spoken) each week divided into columns representing the interactions by the facilitator, male and female participants.

Figure 4. The word count for each interaction by week and by facilitator, male and female participants.

Figure 5. Number of interactions (times participants spoke) by male and female participants in each activity by week.

Figure 6. Word count of interactions by male and female participants in each activity in each week.

Figure 7. The number of participant interactions (times participants spoke) over the entire citizens’ panels process divided into columns representing the gender of the facilitator.

Figure 8. Number of themes started by male or female participants included in the summary report.

Figure 9. Sankey diagram to show the flow of exchanges during deliberation sessions.

Figure 10. How participants rate their overall experience by gender.

Figure 11. How participants changed or broadened their view after the week by gender.

Table 5. Remaining principles developed by the Greater Melbourne panel.

Number	Percentage of participants agreeing that principle ‘represents my view well’	Principle
Principle 4	76%	Australia should participate in global efforts to reduce CO2 emissions. It should prioritise the development of renewable energy introduce targets to approach zero net carbon emissions and a code of conduct informing Australians about all energy choices.
Principle 5	74%	Energy is an essential service. Big companies and government should act in the public interest, so that energy services are equitable. Energy providers should put human and environmental impacts alongside profit.
Principle 6	71%	Government and private support for education and research with a purpose to encourage innovative and progressive technology with an objective to produce financially viable renewable sources of safe, environmentally friendly and reliable energy.
Principle 7	68%	Governments’ decisions should be apolitical and instil fair incentives for moving towards renewables and penalties for non-compliance. They should allow free enterprise to develop alternative energies at a cost effective rate for the consumer, through tax incentive.
Principle 8	65%	There should be an obligation to provide energy to the citizens of Australia first before exporting to other countries. The energy transition throughout the years needs to have system redundancies to ensure energy security.

Weder, Franzisca. 2022. “Strategic Problematization of Sustainability Reframing Dissent in Strategic Communication for Transformation.” Public Relations Inquiry 11 (3): 337–360. http://doi.org/10.1177/2046147X211026857.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Weder, F., M. B. Marte, and B. Erikson. 2023. CSR Communication and Cultures of Sustainability. Brisbane: The University of Queensland.

 Google Scholar

Gastil, John. 2018. “The Lessons and Limitations of Experiments in Democratic Deliberation.” Annual Review of Law and Social Science 14 (1): 271–291. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110316-113639.

 Google Scholar