Skip navigation

Deliberative Mapping

Brief Description:

Deliberative Mapping involves both specialists and members of the public. It combines varied approaches to assess how participants rate different policy options against a set of defined criteria.
.

Description:

The citizen and expert participants are divided into panels (often according to gender and socio-economic background to ensure that people are comfortable voicing their views). The citizens' panels and the experts consider the issue both separately from one another and at a joint workshop.
.
This allows both groups to learn from each other without the experts dominating. The emphasis of the process is not on integrating expert and public voices, but understanding the different perspectives each offer to a policy process.
.
The groups themselves determine which criteria they will use to score the options against, thereby limiting any structural bias. Deliberative Mapping incorporates both quantitative and qualitative methods and participants work both individually and as a group.
.

Used For:

Mapping out the range of values and priorities held by public and 'expert' individuals towards a particular controversy or series of policy options.
.
Can create a good understanding of which options different groups in general would prefer if they had the chance to learn more about the issue.
.

Suitable participants:

Fundamental to this approach is the involvement of both 'specialists' and members of the public.
.
A sample of the public (around 40 people) from varied backgrounds is recruited onto citizens' panels.
.
The experts (around 20) are selected to reflect the full spectrum of specialist knowledge in an area....
.

Cost:

High, exact figures hard to give due to the limited number of practical examples to date.
.
Requires expert facilitation.
.

Time Requirements:

This approach requires several months for the numerous meetings and workshops.
.

When To Use / What It Can Deliver:

You should use deliberative mapping when you want to understand public preferences, especially when the when the issue area is complicated. One of its strengths is its ability to give decision makers a good understanding of policy options.
.
Deliberative mapping can deliver greater legitimacy for decisions, information about public preferences towards policy option and information on the different aspects of an issue and the considerations around them.
.

When Not To Use / What It Cannot Deliver:

You should not use Deliberative mapping when you want the participants to make the decision directly or where you want the group to reach consensus.
.
Deliberative mapping cannot deliver a consensus view or a shared vision. It is not a very good toll for building better relationships between groups.
.

Strengths:

  • The results are considered opinions rather than articles of faith or rash judgement.
  • Specialists contribute to the process without dominating.
  • Combination of different approaches creates a deep and comprehensible understanding of public priorities.

Weaknesses:

  • Difficult to involve large numbers and high in cost and time-commitment.
  • The results of the process can be contradictory views that leave decision-makers without clear guidance.
  • Very few people have practical experience of running this kind of process.

Origin:

Social Research Developed from Multi-Attribute Decision Analysis (MADA) by academics to resolve problems such as expert-dominated discussion in other participatory methods.
.

Case Studies:


Related Methods


Restrictions In Use


Insert Content here

Further Information

Contact: Dr Andrew Stirling
Senior Lecturer, SPRU
The Freeman Centre, University of Sussex,
Brighton, BN1 9QE
Telephone: 01273 877118
Fax: 01273 685865
Email: A.C.Stirling@sussex.ac.uk

Popular Methods
21st Century Town Meeting
Citizens Jury
Deliberative Polling
Open Space
Participatory Appraisal
Participatory Budgeting
Webcasting