
Fluicity counts among its clients a hundred public actors, many of which are based outside national borders, such as the Brussels Region, the Walloon Region, the Ministry of Water in Morocco, and the City of Cape Town in South Africa. As for EFALIA, it achieves 50% of its turnover in the public sector in France, with over 80 departmental councils and about fifty municipalities to its credit.

With this acquisition, EFALIA continues its external growth strategy and expands its international presence, especially in Belgium where Fluicity is based (Brussels).

> "Fluicity's online platform is a natural complement to our user relationship management solution for our institutional clients. At a time when governments and public organizations must reinvent themselves to offer their constituents innovative tools for democratic participation, this new addition provides real added value to our e-Gov offering,"

declares Pascal Charrier, CEO of EFALIA.

> "Moreover, Fluicity's ability to convince a large community for export fits perfectly with our international growth strategy."

Let's recall that EFALIA, which currently has over 2,500 clients worldwide with a turnover of 18M €, has acquired 7 companies over the past six years.

> "EFALIA will enable us to strengthen our development capabilities, including internationally. We are very motivated to join such a robust, socially committed structure that's already active in e-governance,"

concludes Julie de Pimodan, Co-founder and CEO of Fluicity.

### About Fluicity

Fluicity is a SaaS software for engagement, collective intelligence, and decision support. Its white-label platform has enabled the deployment of more than 2,000 citizen consultations in about a hundred local authorities in France and around the world. Active since 2015, Fluicity has raised around 3M EUR from public and private investors in France and Belgium. The startup has won numerous awards in innovation competitions (e.g., MIT Award, BPI Innovation Contest) and quickly positioned itself as one of the pioneering structures of Civic tech in Europe, notably allowing the creation of the Association of European Civic Tech (ACTE-Europe). Certified as a Social Enterprise of Social Utility (ESUS) since 2019, this committed startup has set itself the mission of promoting more open and sustainable decision-making modes in 21st-century organizations. [https://get.flui.city](https://get.flui.city)

### About EFALIA

EFALIA is a French publisher, expert in document and process dematerialization, simplifying the administrative management of over 2,500 clients and 150,000 users daily. The EFALIA software suite covers the entire spectrum of dematerialization: source dematerialization (GRU/GRC), information flow capture, document and content management (ECM), interactive document composition (CCM), business process management (BPM), electronic signature, and certified digital safe. It thus addresses all the digitalization issues of SMEs, ETIs, and public organizations.

To provide the best for its clients, EFALIA invests more than 25% of its turnover in R&D each year. It also has a robust financial structure and a partner investor, BNP Paribas Development, to support its growth, including internationally. [www.efalia.com](https://chat.openai.com/c/www.efalia.com)




Fluicity counts among its clients a hundred public actors, many of which are based outside national borders, such as the Brussels Region, the Walloon Region, t

#### EFALIA, the publisher of a modular content management software suite that includes a user relationship management solution dedicated to public performance, announces the acquisition of Fluicity, which itself is a publisher of a SaaS platform for citizen consultation and a recognized actor in the Civictech ecosystem. This development underscores EFALIA's ambition to strengthen its presence in the public sector, including internationally.

EFALIA Acquires Civictech Pioneer Fluicity, Bolstering International Presence in e-Governance

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

## Why did you choose Fluicity to support your parliamentary work? 

I am currently serving my second term. During the second term, we know that we need to engage more in participatory democracy, not just as a buzzword but with concrete actions. It was a campaign commitment because we understand that appearing before voters every five years, while democratic and important, is not sufficient. We need to have a strong connection with the community.

Naturally, I already have a strong connection with elected officials. I have thirty-two municipalities in my constituency, and I often meet with them. I am a former mayor of the town of Les Houches, so the relationship with elected officials was evident to me.

Then we have social media. The problem with social media is that it often amplifies extremes. It does not represent the majority of people, and what we wanted was something balanced, where we could have meaningful debates. Although social media is very useful for disseminating information, it is not an exceptional tool for participatory democracy.

That's why we were looking for a product. The Fluicity platform attracted us because it has a friendly team and the technical aspects seemed good to us. It is also within the budget range of a Member of Parliament.

## Does this platform work equally well for a municipality or a constituency? 

Implementing it at a national level is more challenging, but at the municipal level, it is truly relevant. I don't understand why there are still municipalities that do not have this tool for all their projects.

However, it takes time, it's not mandatory, and we may face some backlash, so we should not be afraid of dialogue. I believe that the main obstacle, at least for some municipalities, is that they lack trust and may not necessarily want to engage in discussions with the public. When they do, they often do the bare minimum to keep it as sanitized as possible. In my constituency, we are not afraid of dialogue, and although we often don't agree, that's how we move forward.

How will you use the platform at the constituency level? We wanted something that would be representative of the constituency, involving people who hold moderate views, not just extremes on either side. That's why we implemented this platform.

We use it in two ways: with broad, open questions for everyone, and a citizen council through which we directly involve people in parliamentary work. Initially, we aimed to have between fifty and a hundred people enrolled in this citizen council, and today we have over two hundred registered on the platform.

The next step is to actively engage this Citizen Council with dedicated time on the platform and physical meetings to complement it.

## What exactly does this Citizen Council entail? 

The idea is to anticipate what will come up in the National Assembly and to foster broader debates by bringing in experts on the respective subjects. We might even consider voting on certain proposals to guide my voting in the Assembly. Although my vote remains a personal one, I will genuinely take the Citizen Council into account, and if I don't, I will explain why.

We have a local focus and a national focus. At the national level, participants will work on bills, drafting amendments, and interventions in committees, for example, during government question sessions. At the local level, we may have written questions and address local issues, such as air quality or hospitals, through inquiries to local authorities.

How did you promote this platform to the citizens in your constituency? We used various communication tools: word of mouth, a successful social media campaign for registrations, a launch meeting, and a dedicated pamphlet that was sent to 57,000 households. The pamphlet was our primary tool for launching the Citizen Council. The press has also supported our initiative because having such a well-established and functioning platform is truly innovative.

When we look at the statistics on our platform, we can clearly see spikes in visits and registrations when there is media coverage or leaflet distribution. We aimed for 50 to 100 registrations in the citizen council, and we have far exceeded those goals. We are very pleased with the results, and we believe this approach is essential.

## What advice would you give to elected officials for implementing an online participatory democracy platform? 

Either commit fully to it or don't do it at all. Because when you do it just a little, for example, by holding a public meeting once a year, people will attend with a lot of dissatisfaction, and it may lead to the cessation of public meetings or unpleasant experiences. Similarly, on social media, there are so many discontented individuals who come to disrupt things with their comments, making it difficult to manage.

When you have a consistent engagement throughout the year and genuinely give people the opportunity to speak, discuss, and exchange ideas through a dedicated tool, you shift from a very negative environment to a positive one where we can build things together.

For more information on the experiences of public actors in online citizen consultation, please visit [this link.](https://get.flui.city/en/testimonials)

Why did you choose Fluicity to support your parliamentary work?

I am currently serving my second term. During the second term, we know that we need to engage m

Xavier Roseren, Member of Parliament for Haute-Savoie, has chosen the citizen participation platform Fluicity to consult the residents of his constituency on the work carried out at the Assembly. He explains what the Citizen Council is and what he expects from it.

Appearing before voters every five years is not enough

## 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.


Blog

All the news, tips and backstage of Fluicity