In recent years, technology has found its place in the urban arena, promoting increased citizen participation and strengthening public trust.

Natural Language Processing (NLP), a sub-branch of AI that allows machines to understand and interact with human language, plays a key role in this process. Its application in processing public feedback during consultations is particularly noteworthy. Indeed, local governments, faced with the legal obligation to consult the public on a variety of municipal issues, are often overwhelmed by unstructured and difficult-to-analyze data.

A **2019 Deloitte report** established that "government agencies are inundated with unstructured and difficult-to-interpret data." Thanks to NLP, these organizations can extract relevant information from these data to inform policy development and decision-making.

A notable initiative was the one led by the **Privy Council Office of the Canadian government** in 2016. They used NLP to analyze public comments on national security laws. This experiment paved the way for the use of NLP to facilitate civic engagement and participation.

However, the use of this technology also raises crucial questions. Should they disclose the use of AI to filter and analyze public feedback? Transparency is essential to maintain public trust in the consultation process.

It is in this context that **Fluicity, pioneering platform in citizen participation**, has integrated AI for optimal management and analysis of public comments. Faced with the challenge of the large volume of citizen proposals, Fluicity has implemented an AI module capable of automatically grouping proposals by themes. Using AI and NLP, this module analyzes comments and categorizes them into different themes, thereby facilitating the identification of trends and major concerns of the population. This automated process saves valuable time and simplifies data analysis. Local governments can thus quickly understand the aspirations of citizens and respond effectively.

> This hybrid approach ensures that civic engagement remains authentic and respectful of citizens, while leveraging the advantages of AI.

However, Fluicity has taken care to keep the human at the heart of decision-making. The platform offers local administrations the opportunity to manually modify the thematic groups generated by AI. Thus, the final control remains in the hands of those who know their community best, while benefiting from the assistance of AI.

Fluicity perfectly illustrates how AI can be used to improve the efficiency of consultation processes while maintaining human responsibility in decision-making. This hybrid approach ensures that civic engagement remains authentic and respectful of citizens, while leveraging the advantages of AI.

In the end, AI is a valuable resource for strengthening civic engagement and public trust. However, its use must be guided by transparency and human interaction to ensure its acceptability and long-term effectiveness.

In recent years, technology has found its place in the urban arena, promoting increased citizen participation and strengthening public trust.

Natural Language 

Far from being confined to traditional fields like health, industry, or finance, AI is now emerging as a new key player in cities, enhancing citizen participation and strengthening public trust. How? By using natural language processing to analyze and understand citizen feedback during public consultations. Let's explore together how AI, through its concrete applications, revitalizes civic engagement in our cities.

Artificial Intelligence: A New Player in the Heart of Cities to Boost Civic Engagement

**Fluicity:** Welcome, Mr. Camps. We're excited to have you here today to discuss the city of Antwerp's vision for digital community engagement. Can you tell us how the city of Antwerp envisions these platforms? 

**Roel Camps:** Thank you for having me. The city of Antwerp has its own participation platform, which was not available in the market when we started. Antwerp has a complicated structure, on city level that is spread geographical over 9 districts there is a council with a mayor, vice mayors. And each district has its own district council with its district mayor and vice mayor. Local decision-making authority lies primarily at the district level, allowing them to make decisions independently. We like to be pioneers in the field of citizen participation. Antwerp is a very youthful city, with around 500,000 residents, one-third of whom are young people, we recognize the need to adapt and change. We initially built our participation tool in 2011 and renewed it in 2016 and in 2022. Our approach combines top-down and bottom-up participation. Due to our profound decentralization, we see the development of these tools to make employees within the city districts more self-reliant in terms of citizen participation and increasing or stimulating the participation reflex. Fluicity: That's impressive. When did the city of Antwerp first start using digital tools for democratic dialogue? Roel Camps: Our journey into digital tools for democratic dialogue began in 2010 when Antwerp was the European Youth Capital. In 2012, we launched our first digital tool specifically for youth participation. The following year, in 2013, an official law on participation was enacted, based on our youth policy, solidifying our commitment to engaging young people in the decision-making process. 

**Fluicity: Was the decision to adopt digital tools primarily political or operational?** 

**Roel Camps:** It was a combination. operationally, I was tasked with developing a contemporary framework for voice-in, policy participation and advisory councils with an implementation plan. From there, after my research, I decided that it was necessary to embed digital tools to involve citizens in the policy of the city and the 9 districts in an open, accessible, transparent and continuous way. This eventually resulted in a new policy. 

**Fluicity: Could you shed some light on the types of digital dialogues you have implemented? Do you use tools such as [participatory budgeting, call for ideas, or e-voting](https://democracy-technologies.org/report-2023/?utm_source=Democracy+Technologies&utm_campaign=f33f9e4e76-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2022_11_29_03_04_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-48b74a5386-[LIST_EMAIL_ID])?** 

**Roel Camps:** We've created a unique methodology to identify suitable dialogue mechanisms for diverse situations, safeguarding genuine participation. For the majority of concrete issues (95% of projects), we advocate gathering individuals' life experiences as project input. For abstract issues, we emphasize youth exchanges between stakeholders, utilizing a blend of physical and digital tools to facilitate interaction. Since 2009, we've prioritized bottom-up participation to bridge the gap between youth and policymakers, which was partly digitally mediated due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Currently, we continue to utilize both physical and digital methods to gather youth insights and empower them to take action.

**Fluicity: How do you evaluate the benefits of digital community engagement platforms for the city? Are there improvements in terms of time, efficiency, or spending?** 

**Roel Camps:** Our top achievement in digital democracy has been the development of our own tool. It allows people to express their thoughts without feeling pressured and provides us with valuable insights. All employees in the city have the opportunity to participate, evaluate, and contribute their insights through the tool. We provide free training courses on using the platform. Previously, analyzing data took four weeks using Excel, but now we can do it in just one day. In 2016, we even considered the potential of incorporating AI into our platform to enhance human understanding of what people are saying. However, our city experienced a cyber attack and we are still facing challenges since then so we need more time to start innovating again. 

**Fluicity: That's unfortunate to hear about the cyber attack. In your experience, what aspects could be improved in digital community engagement?** 

**Roel Camps**: I dream of a bottom-up tool that can truly improve citizens' lives by addressing their complaints and ideas more effectively. We would ideally need fewer intermediaries when working with people's concerns, and we should find ways to facilitate quicker changes based on their ideas. While we didn't implement a feature for immediate response to citizen reports, as it may create the perception of instant changes, we understand the need to allocate resources efficiently. Currently, we use a report/questions app, but it doesn't allow for the generation of ideas. This is where AI could be very beneficial in providing timely and accurate responses to citizens. AI has the potential to help people in the city achieve better results within a short amount of time (see Democracy Technologies [article](https://democracy-technologies.org/getting-started/ai-update/) on this topic)

> AI has the potential to help people in the city achieve better results within a short amount of time.

**Fluicity: Finally, what legal framework do you think could be implemented to reinforce your work in trying to better engage citizens?** 

**Roel Camps:** That's a difficult question. We have internal resolutions with conditions to enforce decisions. If Belgium or the European Union can do anything, it would be to explain the uses and benefits of participation. For me, participation is not about winning debates, as we have elections for that purpose. It's important to enlighten more people, both citizens and politicians, about the value of participation. Politicians are often afraid to use participation as insights and inspiration for policy design. The ideas and experiences of civilians should be used as inspiration. "Inspraak" in Dutch means having a voice in, it doesn't necessarily mean having a decision-making role. We see it as a way of using the daily life-experiences as an inspiration in developing a humanfriendly city, in balance with the democratic systems of election. We need to educate people more and continue building a body of literature on the topic. I look forward to the next decade when more people will participate because they see the benefits it brings. 

> We see it as a way of using the daily life-experiences as an inspiration in [developing a humanfriendly city](https://get.flui.city/en/blog/comment-la-participation-citoyenne-peut-elle-amliorer-la-qualite-de-vie-d-une-ville), in balance with the democratic systems of election.

**Fluicity: Thank you, Roel, for sharing your insights and experiences with us. It has been a pleasure speaking with you today.**

Fluicity: Welcome, Mr. Camps. We're excited to have you here today to discuss the city of Antwerp's vision for digital community engagement. Can you tell us how

Welcome to our conversation with Roel Camps, a pioneer in digital community engagement from the city of Antwerp. With his rich experience, ranging from leading Antwerp's European Youth Capital initiatives in 2010 to driving cutting-edge digital tools for democratic dialogue, Roel has been at the forefront of blending technology with civic engagement. As he continues to innovate within the complex structure of Antwerp's governance, Roel fosters a unique model of citizen participation that is both top-down and bottom-up. Get ready to delve into his insights on the city's ambitious vision, the successes and challenges they've faced, and the [future of digital community engagement](https://www.oecd.org/governance/innovative-citizen-participation/).

Digital democracy: Antwerp's vision on community engagement 

## What was the objective of the public debate on nuclear energy in France?

On the CNDP website, the objective is clear: "The relaunch of nuclear energy in France is a major democratic choice that engages society for decades to come. Everyone has the right to be fully informed and to participate in the elaboration of decisions on this subject, which the CNDP guarantees". Initially, the debate was supposed to evaluate four options: (i) not to build new nuclear reactors in France; (ii) to use a nuclear reactor technology alternative to the EPR2; (iii) to realize only one pair of EPRs; and (iv) to find another site than Penly. This debate was finally supposed to nourish the parliamentary debate on the Energy-Climate Programming Law expected in the second semester.

## What means were put in place to allow this participation?

The debate team first made the choice of a significant investment in the communication aspect. On the CNDP website, there is a lot of information on both the methodology of the debate and the subject under discussion. Explanatory videos were designed by specialized media partners, newsletters were sent to Internet users, social media campaigns were invested in, all with the aim of reaching a large number of varied audiences.

On the purely participatory aspect, a series of meetings was proposed, accessible in person or online. It was also possible to participate on a digital platform for citizen participation, which offered a question-and-answer module on which 253 participants interacted, and a discussion forum on which 1,100 participants attended. Finally, a panel of 25 French citizens made proposals on the climate and geopolitical uncertainty related to the debate.

## How did this debate ultimately go wrong?

The public debate on the construction of new EPRs has been suspended since early February: "its organizers felt short-circuited by the calendar of the Elysée and the government. Yet it was supposed to be a model of democratic exercise," according to France Info. In the "issues of the debate" section of its website, the CNDP clearly explained the conditions under which the debate would be useful: "Does the debate intervene before the decision is made? How to avoid the debate being reduced to a battle of experts? What can we expect from this public debate?" Unfortunately, none of these preliminary questions have truly received a satisfactory answer in recent months. The question of the priority of the debate over the decision is fundamental because it conditions the ability of the debate to influence political decision-making. "This seems obvious but it is not uncommon for this condition not to be respected within the framework of a public debate". In the case of the nuclear energy debate, the Senate intervened in the heart of the debate, by removing the objective of reducing the share of nuclear energy in electricity production to 50% by 2035. Because of this, the debate did not achieve its objective of nourishing the parliamentary debate on the Energy-Climate Programming Law expected in the second semester of 2023.

The question of the risk of the battle of experts also missed its target. Despite a significant amount of content and meetings broadcast on the site, one gets lost. To try to make up for its shortcomings on this complex subject, the average citizen must spend several hours of training on the subject and become aware of each issue through recordings of public meetings, each lasting more than two hours. The digital platform seems to be designed only to ensure the monitoring of these long meetings. Moreover, the level of knowledge of the participants is already very high. "Is there a thermocline favored by the discharge of warmer waters? What are the consequences for phytoplankton and zooplankton? Instead of dumping residual warm water into the sea, why not use it to heat greenhouses, buildings, swimming pools...?" etc.. In short, not only is the subject complex and technical, but the participation tools are intimidating and the "beginner's version" of the consultation path is non-existent.

Finally, on the question of what could be expected from this debate, if the objective of influencing parliamentary work has been stated, more concrete answers are expected for the coming months. Indeed, the methodology for processing and analyzing data, the transparency of the restitution, and its popularization among the media for a wider audience will be necessary to help the CNDP fulfill its mission of "enabling everyone to weigh in on political projects." At this stage, on the CNDP website, we can only read "The debate team now has two months to process all the contributions and publish its report. EDF and RTE will then have three months to publish their decision and their responses to the recommendations of the Commission in charge of the debate." This last step will be essential to justify the usefulness of the means invested and to demonstrate recognition to all participants, no matter how expert they may be.

## What lessons can we learn from this?

The three questions raised by the CNDP on the usefulness of a public debate: (i) the priority of the debate over the decision, (ii) the need to avoid the battle of experts, and (iii) the expected impact of the debate, are particularly interesting and useful for any institution planning to launch a citizen participation device. Being able to clearly answer these questions before embarking on a process is not always easy. However, it is a necessary condition for the success of a citizen consultation.

Regarding the experience of participants, especially in digital citizen platforms, it is essential, when the subject is complex and/or sensitive, to promote a highly structured path, allowing anyone to participate according to their means, regardless of their level of knowledge, with the aim of reaching a large and diverse audience. Example: a public questionnaire to test participants' knowledge, a training path integrated into the platform to access more open levels of participation, etc...

Finally, whether it is a simple local citizen consultation or a complex national public debate, the sincerity of political will is probably the greatest factor in its success. Thus, in the absence of alignment of the various powers in place on the interest of a public debate, it will be difficult to allocate the necessary time for the proper conduct of exchanges and impossible to give it weight in political decision-making.

The question of the risk of the battle of experts also missed its target. Despite a significant amount of content and meetings broadcast on the site, one gets lost. To try to make up for its shortcomings on this complex subject, the average citizen must spend several hours of training on the subject and become aware of each issue through recordings of public meetings, each lasting more than two hours. The digital platform seems to be designed only to ensure the monitoring of these long meetings. Moreover, the level of knowledge of the participants is already very high. "Is there a thermocline favored by the discharge of warmer waters? What are the consequences for phytoplankton and zooplankton? Instead of dumping residual warm water into the sea, why not use it to heat greenhouses, buildings, swimming pools...?" etc.. In short, not only is the subject complex and technical, but the participation tools are intimidating and the "beginner's version" of the consultation path is non-existent.

Finally, on the question of what could be expected from this debate, if the objective of influencing parliamentary work has been stated, more concrete answers are expected for the coming months. Indeed, the methodology for processing and analyzing data, the transparency of the restitution, and its popularization among the media for a wider audience will be necessary to help the CNDP fulfill its mission of "enabling everyone to weigh in on political projects." At this stage, on the CNDP website, we can only read "The debate team now has two months to process all the contributions and publish its report. EDF and RTE will then have three months to publish their decision and their responses to the recommendations of the Commission in charge of the debate." This last step will be essential to justify the usefulness of the means invested and to demonstrate recognition to all participants, no matter how expert they may be.

## What lessons can we learn from this?

The three questions raised by the CNDP on the usefulness of a public debate: (i) the priority of the debate over the decision, (ii) the need to avoid the battle of experts, and (iii) the expected impact of the debate, are particularly interesting and useful for any institution planning to launch a citizen participation device. Being able to clearly answer these questions before embarking on a process is not always easy. However, it is a necessary condition for the success of a citizen consultation.

Regarding the experience of participants, especially in digital citizen platforms, it is essential, when the subject is complex and/or sensitive, to promote a highly structured path, allowing anyone to participate according to their means, regardless of their level of knowledge, with the aim of reaching a large and diverse audience. Example: a public questionnaire to test participants' knowledge, a training path integrated into the platform to access more open levels of participation, etc...

Finally, whether it is a simple local citizen consultation or a complex national public debate, the sincerity of political will is probably the greatest factor in its success. Thus, in the absence of alignment of the various powers in place on the interest of a public debate, it will be difficult to allocate the necessary time for the proper conduct of exchanges and impossible to give it weight in political decision-making.

What was the objective of the public debate on nuclear energy in France?

On the CNDP website, the objective is clear: "The relaunch of nuclear energy in France

The debates on nuclear power organized by the National Commission for Public Debate have just ended in an atmosphere of heightened mistrust. Over the course of four months, the various stakeholders (government, CNDP, project promoters, civil society) found themselves in a tangled web that called into question the very usefulness of public debate on the issue of nuclear power. What are the reasons for the mixed results of this democratic exercise, and what collective lessons can we learn from it? The team at Fluicity, experts in collective intelligence, take stock of the situation.

Nuclear Debate Ends in Mistrust: Lessons Learned from a Complex Democratic Exercise

## LOOKING BACK AT THE END OF 2022

### More integration between physical and digital devices:

* Import paper files (proposals or votes) collected during physical meetings;
* Generate a QR code on the platform's content pages to connect citizens more easily via physical campaigns;

![QR codes available for each page](/images/qrcode-lien-plateforme-participative.png "QR codes")

### Better knowledge and more precise targeting of populations:

* Add new fields to the registration forms such as neighbourhood, occupation or gender;
* Secure consultations by targeting users according to certain segments or by checking their identity document.

### More effective analysis of your consultation results:

* Compare the platform demographic data with those of your territory;
* Monitor traffic on your pages on your dashboard to check the impact of communication campaigns; 
* Accelerate the understanding of citizens' contributions thanks to an artificial intelligence engine that automatically summarises the proposals.

### An ever more accessible and modular platform

* Check the level of accessibility when customising it;
* Possibility of writing content in several languages;
* Choose the default display of contributions (list, map or carousel)

## OUR PLANS FOR 2023

* More artificial intelligence to make it easier for you to process contributions and analyse the results of your consultations;
* New management roles allowing the delegation of administration to other stakeholders;
* New voting and participation tools to meet a greater number of use cases;
* Greater modularity of your space, both in terms of the home pages and the consultation pages;
* Send newsletters to groups of users;
* And many other surprises 😉

2023 is the year of all possibilities! How about seizing this opportunity to involve citizens in the life of your territory? Take advantage of the tools and innovations proposed by the Fluicity team to create more effective and inclusive spaces for dialogue and consultation.  Feel free to [contact our experts ](https://get.flui.city/demo/)in citizen participation for more details !

LOOKING BACK AT THE END OF 2022

More integration between physical and digital devices:

Import paper files (proposals or votes) collected during physical meeti

The Fluicity team has a lot of surprises to help **public actors** create stronger links with the citizens of their territory!
During the end of 2022, we worked hard to develop an even [more efficient platform](https://get.flui.city/en/plateforme-consultation-citoyenne/). In 2023, we are going further by adding **artificial intelligence** to facilitate the processing of consultations, by creating new roles and by developing new voting modalities.
Stay tuned 📻

Product update 2023

At the end of 2022, the world is trapped beneath the weight of a multitude of old and new problems. There are myriad causes of political and economic instability, including :

* the spiking prices of food and energy
* ballooning inflation and an impending recession
* the unstable context of continuing climate change
* long unresolved inequality
* the Covid-19 pandemic
* declining standards of living
* the Russian war of aggression in Ukraine.

Worryingly, the number of people who believe that democracy is the answer to these problems is shrinking. The Global State of Democracy’s latest findings reveal a “decline in and stagnation of democracy around the world.  While many democracies have put in place the laws and infrastructure required to support democratic institutions, unequal access to those institutions is a serious and continuing problem”.

## O﻿ur key concerns

* Global opinion surveys show that this period has coincided with declining public faith in the value of democracy itself. The World Values Survey (which covers 77 countries) demonstrates that less than half (47.4 per cent) of all respondents believe democracy is important, down from 52.4 per cent in 2017
* In the US threats to democracy persists after the Trump Presidency, illustrated by polarization, counter majoritarianism and the rolling back of long term establish rights
* Nearly half (43 per cent) of democracies—a total of 17 countries—in Europe have suffered erosion in the last five years. These declines affect 46 per cent of the high-performing democracies.
* in the middle east, more than a decade after the Arab Uprisings, protest movements continue to be motivated by government failures in service delivery and economic opportunities—key aspects of social contracts.

## Where we find hope



![](/images/ad0dc-1fenznl8eretbdinr5ising.jpeg)

* Russia's war of aggression in Ukraine has highlighted that democracy is central to the defense of peace and prosperity. The defense of democracy and its values has become more important to the Europeans since the Russia invasion
* As a result the expansion of democracy in Armenia, Moldava, Ukraine is a clear manifestation of the desire to root national identity and sovereignty in democratic institutions.
* Innovative forms of political participation have been tested all over Europe, including citizens’ assemblies, participatory budgeting in cities like Paris or Milan, sortition and new participation platforms in Estonia and Madrid
* Despite myriad challenges, Africa remains resilient in the face of instability. Countries including The Gambia, Niger and Zambia continue to improve in democratic quality. In South Africa, Young activists have been involved in formulating government climate policy: several worked on the City of Johannesburg’s 2021 Climate Action Plan.
* Mexico’s National Electoral Institute developed a Civic Culture Strategy that aims to empower citizens and increase their participation in public debate, advocacy and strengthening the accountability of political institutions
* Canada’s Human Rights Commission has taken steps to tap into participatory processes to guide decision making on social issues. For example, the Federal Housing Advocate, housed at the Commission, relies on public submissions from Canadians suffering housing issues and homelessness to inform policy recommendations.

> In order to reinvent democracy in 2023, we must take bold and innovative steps to ensure that our democratic systems are inclusive, representative, and capable of addressing the urgent issues of our time. This may include implementing new technologies, such as online voting systems and online participation platforms, to increase accessibility and participation. It may also involve reforming our political institutions and structures to promote greater transparency and accountability.

So let us stand together and defend democracy. Let us continue to speak out against injustice and inequality. Let us support free and fair elections, and protect the rights of all citizens. Let us work to build a better future for ourselves and for generations to come.

Here's to a wonderful end of the year, and to a brighter future for us all.

With love and best wishes,

The Fluicity Team

At the end of 2022, the world is trapped beneath the weight of a multitude of old and new problems. There are myriad causes of political and economic instabilit

As civic tech advocates, the Fluicity team is deeply concerned about the state of democracy. Over the past year, we have seen a disturbing trend of governments around the world taking actions that undermine the fundamental principles of democracy.  In 2023, it is crucial that we reimagine and rebuild our democratic systems in order to address the numerous challenges and inequalities that exist within our society. In this end of the year note, we wanted to illustrate this urge by summarizing what we’ve learned from the latest report entitled “[The Global State of Democracy 2022](https://www.idea.int/democracytracker/publications)” from a civic tech point of view.

Fluicity 2023 wishes

Citizen participation can change cities by giving citizens a voice in the decisions that are made about their city. Citizen participation can also help to make cities more responsive to the needs of their citizens. 

Some ways that citizens can participate in their city include:

1. Attending city council meetings
2. Voting in local elections
3. Serving on city boards or commissions
4. Volunteering with local organizations
5. Participating in city surveys or focus groups
6. Engage on digital consultation platforms

##  Digital consultation is a game changer 

Nowadays; digital consultation platforms are becoming a standard for cities that need to reach a larger audience and facilitate resident engagement with digital access. In countries like US, Canada, Chile, Spain, UK, France and Belgium, digital collective intelligence tools are now regularly used to co-create public policies and public projects.

The example of the city of Barcelona is a good case to show how digital **consultation platforms** can be used to improve **citizen participation.** In 2002, Barcelona launched its participatory budgeting process, which allows citizens to decide how to spend a portion of the city’s budget. The process is facilitated by a digital consultation.

Another good example is the Wallonia Region that used a **digital participation platform** to massively engage citizens in their post-covid relaunch plan in 2020. The platform, called “Get up Wallonia'', was used to collect citizens’ ideas and proposals on how to improve the quality of life in the Wallonia Region on various thematics : environment, local life, solidarity, economy etc...

In the context of the energy crisis and pricing inflation, many cities use their recurring participatory tools to engage citizens in the collective effort needed to reduce energy consumption. For example, in Bruxelles or Strasbourg, the city councils have launched open and collaborative consultations designed to allow citizens to participate to the crisis resolution.

##  Building a successful online participation process

 The success of a public consultation will depend on a variety of factors, including the topic of the survey, the target audience, and the promotional strategy and how often consultations are done. However, some tips on how to build a successful community engagement campaign include:

 1. Choose a topic that is relevant to your target audience. There are many potential topics that could be suitable for public consultation. Some examples could include plans for the development of a new public park or green space, proposals for major infrastructure projects, or the creation of a new policy or program that affects the public. Ultimately, the best topic for public consultation will depend on the specific needs and interests of the community in which the consultation is taking place. It's important to choose a topic that is relevant and important to the people who will be participating in the consultation.

 2. Make the survey easy to complete. Keep the questions short and simple, and provide clear and concise instructions. 

 3. Promote the survey widely. Use a variety of promotional channels, including social media, email, and - when possible - press and traditional media

4. use a modern online participation platform providing all the tools to efficiently consult citizens and manage their participation (surveys, participatory budgeting, co-construction, collective intelligence)
5. Consult citizens often and on a wide variety of subjects to train people to participate and create a culture of participation. 

As more and more people become engaged in their communities, it's clear that citizen participation is an increasingly important part of our society. **Online participation platforms** offer a way for individuals to have a greater say in decision-making processes and can help promote greater transparency and accountability in government. They also contribute to the development of a **participatory culture**, which can help to foster a sense of community and belonging among residents, as they are given the opportunity to have a say in the decisions that affect their lives. This can lead to a greater sense of ownership and responsibility among individuals, which can in turn promote more active and engaged citizenry. Additionally, a participatory culture can lead to more effective and responsive governance, which can improve overall quality of life for all residents.

Citizen participation can change cities by giving citizens a voice in the decisions that are made about their city. Citizen participation can also help to make 

Nowadays; **digital consultation platforms** are becoming a standard for cities that need to reach a larger audience and facilitate resident engagement with digital access.

How can citizen participation improve a city's lifestyle?


In the context of managing the energy crisis, not all communities are on a level playing field in designing and implementing their sobriety strategies. Larger cities have more investment capacity but face more stakeholders and decisions may be slower. Small and medium-sized cities will need to focus on the major emitters of CO2 such as households, mobility and the service sector. More generally, cities will have to make three types of decisions:

- careful management of the budget & freeze on future recruitments in 2023
- immediate reduction of certain energy expenditures in the public space
- sustainable investment in equipment and devices to reduce energy consumption

Here is a list of actions published by the website [FutureProoved.com](https://blog.futureproofed.com/climate-plan-starter-pack-for-a-growing-city) and has been proven effective in other cities.

## 1. Start with municipal buildings

### 💡 **Review the lighting of the administrative buildings.**

This involves making the lighting in municipal buildings more efficient.

Example of action:

- Switch to LEDs and save tens of thousands of euros
- Temporarily moving buildings that are too expensive to heat (example of a [college in Avignon](https://www.huffingtonpost.fr/environnement/article/face-a-la-flambee-du-prix-du-chauffage-ce-college-d-avignon-demenage-des-eleves_209811.html) in the Vaucluse)

### 🏢 **Insulation of municipal building roofs.**

Insulating the municipality's roofs saves energy, reduces emissions and sets an example for citizens.

Action example:

- Save tens of tons of CO2 per year by insulating municipal roofs.

### 🚛 **Reducing emissions from the municipal fleet.**

This encourages more efficient use of the existing fleet.

Related Action:

- Have municipal employees trade in cars for bikes, setting an example for more sustainable mobility.

## 2. Alternatives for the mobility sector

### 🚗 **Private transportation.**

Promote the use of bicycles or walking instead of cars.

Sample action:

- Make it safer for cyclists to park their bikes in the city.
  Carpooling. No more one-man shows in the car. Sharing is caring.
  Sample action:
- offer a car to share to employees of a company or help organize carpooling to the train station or to work.

### 🚆 **Public transportation.**

A modal shift to public transport (without train). The promotion of the use of public transport can be possible from the municipality.

Example of action:

- offering a free bus through the city center.

## 3. Focus on household consumption

### 🏡 **Home insulation.**

Undertaking a complete renovation is desirable, but probably not financially attractive. Roof insulation is the most cost-effective measure for homes. Wall insulation and floor insulation come second and third.

Sample Actions:

- Offer a platform to visualize energy consumption (ex: Linky in France),
- Give incentives for insulation (e.g. MaPrimeRénov' in France), Organize an information session around complete renovations.

### 🔌 **Purchase of 100% green electricity.**

Buying green electricity is becoming the norm for many households. Your city can speed up this process. For example, by negotiating discounts with electricity suppliers.

### 🍽️ **Reduction of electricity consumption through more energy efficient appliances.**

Replacing inefficient appliances with more efficient ones can save a lot of money and energy.

Example Action:

- Offer free tips to identify the most inefficient household appliances.

### 🚛 **Reducing emissions from the municipal fleet**

The municipality can subsidize the purchase of household composters or plant shredders to reduce the number of trips made by dump trucks.

### 🤓 **Develop coworking**

The downside of telecommuting is that households must keep the heat on to work from home.

Examples of actions:

- create coworking spaces (e.g., in the city library) to reduce household heating expenses,
- like carpooling, help to set up "co-working" in order to work every other day at the neighbor's place. Bonus: it creates links!

## 4. Investing in renewable energy

Renewable energy production is a critical backbone of any climate action strategy. Here are the most interesting options:

### 🌞 **Photovoltaic panels on the fireplaces.**

This is cost-effective and further reduces emissions from the household sector. The cost of solar energy is now among the cheapest.

Example of action:

- organize grouped purchases for its inhabitants for example in firewood and wood pellets.

### 🌬️ **Wind turbines.**

Each wind turbine is cost effective and offsets a lot of carbon emissions. If it is organized with citizen participation, it is more likely to succeed.

Action example:

- citizen participation in small and large municipalities.

### 🏢 **Photovoltaic panels in municipal buildings with energy cooperatives.**

Democratizing access to renewable energy production is possible through energy cooperatives.

Action example:

- open the roofs of municipal buildings to citizen cooperatives.

## 5. The participatory mode to empower citizens

Adapting your municipality to climate change is inevitable and essential. This adaptation depends on each place and each context, specific to your territory. To make the right decisions and strengthen their implementation, it is important to **develop citizen involvement in your energy efficiency plan.**

Example of action: set up a citizen participation platform to consult your citizens on their expectations and capacities in terms of energy sobriety. This method has also proven its effectiveness: on the one hand, to make citizens responsible for complex decisions, and on the other hand, to engage them in a sustainable way in this collective effort. In concrete terms, it is possible to:

- launch a citizen questionnaire to ask citizens about your Climate Plan,
- organize a "reverse participatory budget" allowing citizens to vote and prioritize the most desirable spending cuts for their city
- give citizens the means to propose original levers for reducing their energy consumption in their territory.

![Votation Sables d'Olonne](/images/votation-sables-olonne.jpeg)

_As an example, the city of Les Sables d'Olonne decided to launch a questionnaire on the citizen participation platform Fluicity to engage citizens in their crisis management policy by inviting them to position themselves on related projects._

This approach makes it possible to make citizens aware that these decisions - which touch on habits that are anchored in our daily lives - will be difficult, even unpopular, and that a collective effort will be necessary for them to have an impact on our energy autonomy.

> More and more cities are relying on the participatory approach to implement these profound transformations.

This is the case of European capitals such as [Bruxelles](https://fairebruxellessamen.be/processes/changeitnow) or [Strasbourg](https://participer.strasbourg.eu/detail-participation/-/entity/id/404942670) who have set up dedicated platforms. **So why not you?**




In the context of managing the energy crisis, not all communities are on a level playing field in designing and implementing their sobriety strategies. Larger 

The price of energy has risen dramatically: the price of gas has increased between 10 and 20 times between the beginning of 2021 and today. The situation is similar in the electricity market. This puts many local authorities and companies in extremely difficult financial situations.

* How can communities implement effective strategies to control expenses and energy consumption?
* How can we make citizens responsible for these critical issues for the future of our territories?

The Fluicity team conducted the survey based on the testimonies of its partner cities and the website [FutureProofed](https://www.futureproofed.com/).


5 tips for communities to deal with the energy crisis


_Arthur Del Marmol, head of the firm in charge of mobility and digital transition._

### Before using Fluicity, how did you organize your neighborhood surveys?

We used to do consultations through flyers that were distributed to all the boxes. This could concern the installation of a speed bump or a one-way street. It was very punctual on subjects that directly impacted the concerned residents.

In order to answer, the citizens had to send us back a reply coupon indicating if they were in favour or against the development. They had the possibility to add a comment in a rather limited space. Then, we collected the answers by mail or by post and we retranscribed them one by one in Excel format to know the rate of favourable to the project. This took a lot of time and resources.

> It was quite a laborious process since we had to write, print and distribute several thousand copies within a neighborhood, so that people could read and respond to the information.

### What were the limitations? Why did you change your method recently?

It was a laborious process both for the administration and for the citizens who wanted to participate in the survey. But what kept us from changing the method for these consultations was the important digital divide in Woluwe-Saint-Pierre because we have a population whose average age is quite old. Nevertheless, we wanted to test and see if citizen participation could not evolve and be done online for neighborhood topics.

### What have you put in place to simplify these consultation methods?

We innovated by offering citizens the opportunity to complete an online survey. To ensure that only residents of the neighborhoods concerned could respond, we used our platform, Fluicity, which allows them to include a condition of access to the questionnaire, depending on their place of residence. By indicating a street in the neighborhood, they could answer the survey; otherwise they were redirected directly to the end of the questionnaire without the possibility of answering.The platform also allowed us to elaborate a more complete questionnaire with more general, more open questions than those we used before.

Afterwards, we had to inform and communicate about the survey with a simple circular distributed in all the boxes. The novelty was the QR code that led citizens directly to the online survey. For this first experiment, we gave citizens the possibility to send us the questionnaire by e-mail or post. Then, we only had to export the results of the online questionnaire, add the few answers received by mail before sending it to the research department. In the end, this facilitated both participation and data processing!

> Before, we could easily take more than 3 days to process the responses. Now, we took less than a day."

### What were the results of this first consultation?

We received almost all the responses online! This confirmed to us that this barrier that is the digital bill, is less and less. It also saved us time and resources to analyze the results. We received more responses than in our previous surveys on average: more than 10% of the neighborhood responded. It's easier to take your phone, scan a QR code and enter the survey to answer... than to start going to the reply slip, photocopy it, send it back. We realize that we could afford this type of procedure more often. We don't have to make sure every time; the possibility to answer in every way by every means. Sometimes it is not necessary.

[Access the video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wd5l3Gm074k)

### Would you recommend using Fluicity? And, will you continue to use it in this way?

Yes, it's a tool that needs to be appropriated, not only at my level, but at all levels of the municipality. I think that, very clearly, it can meet this need and it would allow us to do it in a regular and more efficient way in the collection of results and participation... and clearly I recommend it.

> Fluicity has given us a certain regularity in the way we organize the surveys within the population.

### Any final words?

Overall, what I like about Fluicity is that you can feel the will to adapt and evolve according to the communities. On several occasions, I said to myself that it would be good to talk about filtering, QR codes, and many other needs that you have adapted to. It's really a strength to listen and improve your tool based on the user experience.




Arthur Del Marmol, head of the firm in charge of mobility and digital transition.

Before using Fluicity, how did you organize your neighborhood surveys?

We u

Five years ago, the commune of Woluwé-Saint-Pierre in Brussels launched its citizen participation platform. An innovative decision at the time, which has since been extended to many municipalities in Belgium and Europe.

Today, Arthur Del Marmol, cabinet manager in charge of mobility and digital transition, tells us about their latest online consultation on Fluicity: a survey targeted at a neighbourhood.


Organize a digital survey in a neighborhood


The summer vacations are approaching, an opportunity to take stock of the mid-term review for 2022 and to present the new features that await you for the second half of the year.

## Simple and efficient

The year 2021 has been rich in new features. It was marked by a complete redesign of the dashboard, many new customization options and multiple improvements to the user experience.

We started 2022 with new ideas, plenty of motivation, and two main goals in mind: **simplify administration** on the one hand, **facilitate participation** on the other.

In a word: simplicity!

### Simplify the task of administrators

In line with the redesign of the management and monitoring interface started in 2021 (the famous "Dashboard"!), we have gone even further in 2022 to assist you in the administration of your space by adding :

- an interface allowing you to [**configure your space independently**](https://fluicity-doc.notion.site/Personnaliser-votre-page-d-accueil-894914a7a90f40db87ec0618e258954d). The cover image, the texts of the "About" page, the links to your social networks, etc. It's all there!
- a user management interface including [**an invitation module**](https://fluicity-doc.notion.site/Inviter-des-utilisateurs-769ba80e3ba142e6917a3f4189c8e540) **!** And the possibility to distribute a **QR code** leading to your consultations to simplify access to your space.
- A suite of tools allowing you to process more efficiently the proposals resulting from your consultations. A [**messaging**](https://fluicity-doc.notion.site/Ecrire-un-message-priv-dd2b893b190145049181d34e8558c062) with the authors, [**private notes**](https://fluicity-doc.notion.site/crire-une-note-priv-e-771dca49a0c340fd8a0d07b5d87fcbf5) between processors and [**assignment for proposals**](https://fluicity-doc.notion.site/Attribuer-une-contribution-242552fbbb8741e09cb208e39972b21f).

![](/images/2.png)

Tools for administrators: the proposal for which Mila is responsible, gives rise to exchanges visible only to the administrators of the consultation_.

### ... and participants

The simplification of participation has been a permanent project for Fluicity and has once again been at the heart of our work. In addition to numerous improvements to the user experience (simplifying registration, highlighting the main actions, etc.), at the beginning of the year we deployed :

- several features to make it easier to participate in **events** organized by your institution. Simplified access to Zoom, Jitsi or Teams type **online events**, **registration** or even **adding to the calendar**.
- a new "view" of the type "carousel" for calls for proposals, currently being tested. It allows **maximizing interactions, especially votes**, on existing proposals.

![](/images/3.jpg)

The new "carousel" view simplifies the flow of proposals and encourages reaction_.

## And now? We take (almost) the same and start again!

After having told you that simplicity was an obsession for Fluicity, we have to prove it to you! For this second semester of 2022, the program will be... **simplify participation** on one hand, **facilitate administration** on the other hand!

But as a bonus, we've got a third exciting project for you: **better understand and target your users**.

Let's go!

### More inclusive methods

Encouraging "online" participation is great.

To do so, we are planning several projects, including a tool that will allow you to offer multilingual consultations more easily.

But encouraging participation "at all" is even better!

To do this, we want to help you to **better manage "mixed" consultations, organized both** **online and in person**. They allow for more inclusiveness by reaching profiles that are far from digital, for example. Our first two tracks?

- To be able to **integrate paper submission forms** into the platform.
- To allow **reconciling online and paper votes**.

![](/images/6.png)

### Customized consultation

To make you even more autonomous and efficient, and to save you a lot of back and forth with the users, we want to continue to improve your administration interface. How can we do this? By giving you the possibility to **configure more finely the deposit forms, manage the security options or choose the display modes** (map, list, carousel) yourself.

No need to go through our support team anymore! With so much autonomy, we're almost afraid that our support team will get bored. They'll send you postcards from the beach 🏖

![](/images/5.png)

### Knock, knock, knock... Who's there?

To better target your consultations, but also to be able to legitimize them, we want to help you understand who your users are. That's why we've included this third block in our roadmap for the second half of the year. Gender, neighborhood, age, department, etc. you will soon know everything about your audience (in compliance with the RGPD of course!).

- Your dashboard already allows you to visualize the distribution of users by age, city, socio-professional category and gender. We now want to allow you to **comparison these data with real data**, provided by INSEE, StatBel or by yourself. Thus, you will be able to **estimate the representativeness of your audience** with regard to the target population. You will then be able to better direct your communication efforts, for example, choose the themes of your consultations more judiciously or estimate the need to organize a physical consultation.
- And to go even further, we want to offer you the possibility to **integrate your own "dimensions", typically a notion of neighborhood**, into this set of data collected from users. The goal? To be able to understand who is participating and direct those users to the news or consultations that are relevant.

![](/images/4.png)

You have seen it, the program is loaded. And still, we didn't tell you about some "red threads" with sweet names: RGAA (accessibility), RGPD (data protection) and EcoIndex (eco-responsible design). So we... we're back at it!

Do not hesitate to send your feedback, suggestions, to your project manager.

**And have a good summer!**




The summer vacations are approaching, an opportunity to take stock of the mid-term review for 2022 and to present the new features that await you for the secon

2022, a mid-term review!


**The city of Les Sables d'Olonne has just finalized an unprecedented consultation on the future of a statue in the public space. An innovative approach, mixing physical and digital participation while measuring representativeness, thanks to an identity verification and anonymization technology.**

**_Interview with Yann Yves Biffe, DGA of Les Sables d'Olonne_**

**_Interview with Julie de Pimodan, Co-founder and CEO of Fluicity_**

**Could you introduce yourself?**

I am the deputy general manager in charge of services to the population. This covers the fields of education, sports, culture and user relations.

**Why did you launch this citizen consultation in Sables d'Olonne?**

We had already thought about it in the past, but we had never been fully convinced by the existing digital systems, notably because of the question of the qualification of participation. Historically, we were more interested in physical devices than digital ones, but thanks to a very successful physical consultation on a land development project, the elected officials have evolved in the idea of taking the pulse of the population more regularly. Initially, for this vote, which had the objective of determining the future of a statue in the public space, we had imagined a consultation based on the electoral list, but then we discarded the principle in order to start with something broader to give the possibility to people who are not registered (second homes) to vote. This led us to a terrain that was ultimately a little further away from the strict electoral procedure, but always keeping this desire to qualify the participation.

**What do you mean by a qualified participation?**

For us, qualifying participation means being able to verify who participates. There is no such thing as good or bad participatory democracy: all layers of opinion are relevant, from year-round residents to people on vacation. What is important for us is to define what we want to measure and stick to it. In the context of this consultation, it was the Sables d'Olonne in the broadest sense. From that point on, we had to be able to certify that the people who participated met this definition and not any interest or pressure groups. We therefore selected Fluicity, a solution that allowed us to control the identity of the participants, while respecting their anonymity.

**How did the citizens react to this consultation, what were the benefits for the Commune?**

Many citizens came to thank us for having been able to give their opinion under these conditions. At the same time, this consultation gave us a basis for the city's position on the subject in question, namely the future of a statue on the public domain.

In terms of volume, we only really collected the opinions of 4,000 people, which is low compared to the population of the city, but very satisfactory compared to other participation mechanisms.

From the point of view of representativeness, the population of Les Sables-d'Olonne is relatively old and this was reflected in the results of the consultation: the most represented population is between 71 and 81 years old and 55% voted at the ballot box and 45% on the Internet. This was relatively surprising, but it proves that there was no generational barrier to internet voting.

Internally, this consultation has allowed us to really commit the elected officials to the principle of regularly consulting the population. So we have already set the next consultation for November of this year, the theme still to be defined.

**What was the innovation of this device?**

Our goal was not to innovate for the sake of innovating, but to get a result. However, we were pioneers in two aspects:

- Ensuring the qualification of the participation, while assuming to put barriers to entry for identity verification. **Fluicity allowed us to verify the identity of the voters, to ensure their anonymity, but also to check that there were no duplicates with the voters in the polling station.**
- To offer residents the possibility to vote in parallel polling stations.

> **Fluicity allowed us to verify the identity of the voters, to ensure their anonymity, but also to verify that there were no duplicates with the voters in the polling station.**

**How did you experience the operational implementation of such a system, what would you recommend to municipalities wishing to launch such a project?**

It was relatively simple, and thanks to our service provider, we didn't need a lot of human resources for the digital part. On the physical part, it required a bit of organization, but compared to a classic election system, it was quite light. Concerning the choice of the mode of consultation, I think that all the options are good, but that one must make a choice and stick to it. If we opt for a very open consultation, we can hope for a nice volume of contributions, but the analysis and interpretation will perhaps be more complex. On the other hand, if you want to control with identity documents, you have to know from the start that this will lower the participation rate, but that each answer will have a real value. So it's a political choice that needs to be made at the outset, and you need to be clear internally about what that means. My second piece of advice would be to couple the internet consultation with the physical consultation. This double approach was really appreciated by the inhabitants who said that we were thinking of everyone.




The city of Les Sables d'Olonne has just finalized an unprecedented consultation on the future of a statue in the public space. An innovative approach, mixing 

Blog

All the news, tips and backstage of Fluicity