Consensus Voting

Skip navigation

Home >> Public participation methods >> browse methods >> Consensus Voting |

Brief Description:

Consensus voting aims to identify the best consensus opinion through a balanced voting system.

Description:

In consensus voting, everyone (or party) is allowed to put forward a proposal. In the debate, people can ask questions, seek clarifications, or have new ideas. At all times, facilitators maintain a list of all the options available.

Consensus voting presents a range of voting options developed in consultation with stakeholders. Decision-makers are then invited to rank the options - the higher the preference for an option, the more points it gets. Finally, the number of points given to each option is counted.

Used For:

For any system of voting, be it within an organisation or on a local/national scale.

Can be used for the starting point for a discussion to arrive at an agreed decision (taking the vote into account).

Suitable participants:

Anyone - not restrictive in terms of suitability.

Cost:

Low

This depends on the number of participants and the choice of venue to hold the vote. If done within an organisation the cost would come with organising the event.

Time Requirements:

1/2 - 1 Day.

This can depend on the number of voters and the number of options to go through. Given that each person's viewpoint has to be canvassed and taken into consideration time requirements can be lengthy in terms of process.

When To Use / What It Can Deliver:

To gauge public opinion.

To gather a wide variety of viewpoints and create a consensus through the process.

When Not To Use / What It Cannot Deliver:

To help resolve deeply entrenched views.

Strengths:

Egalitarian - All members of a consensus decision-making body are afforded equal input into the process.

Encourages greater communication to gain a consenus when voting takes place.

Every person's vote counts.

Weaknesses:

Time consuming

Preserves the status quo - Given that all group members' preferences have to be accounted for it can give an advantage to minorities interested in maintaining the status quo despite majority opinion to the contrary.

Can cause the Abilene paradox - which is when the group collectively decides on a course of action that is counter to the preferences of any of the individuals in the group because no one individual is willing to go against the perceived will of the decision-making body

Origin:

During 18th Century France the Académie des Sciences discussed alternatives to the current monarchic government. Two voting alternatives were proposed from Le Maquis de Condorcet and M chevalier Jean-Charles de Borda, that are similar to how consensus is achieved today as both procedures voters cast their preferences on a range of options. Consensus Voting then re-appeared in the 1950's with Social Choice Theory and the work of Duncan Black which, in turn, has helped lead to the varying options available in the present day.

Case Studies:

Related Methods

Consensus Conference

Restrictions In Use

None

Further Information

For further information please see:

http://www.opendemocracy.net/deborda/articles/consensus_voting_and_conflict_resolution

and

http://www.innatenonviolence.org/old/workshops/consensus4.htm

Browse all methods