Activities and initiatives that bring people together during a policy-making process differ widely according to who organizes the event and who is able to participate. Therefore, in developing a participatory activity, it is necessary to (i) identify stakeholders, (ii) understand their interrelationships, and (iii) define clear roles filled by each stakeholder group. 

• Who are the key stakeholders involved? 

A key aspect of the development of participatory activities is to map out and analyze the stakeholder ecosystem concerning the respective purpose of the activity, to identify the broad spectrum of actors involved. For this purpose, it is important to ask oneself who is involved with, affected by, and/or interested in the respective policy process. In answering this question, it will be possible to have a comprehensive understanding of who the key stakeholders are, and how they are related to the subject matter. This exercise will provide a basis to determine (i) who should host the activity, (ii) who should be included in the activity for it to achieve its goals, and (iii) which roles these stakeholders will have in the process.

• Who should host the activity? 

With the stakeholder map in hand, the next step on the development of a participatory activity is to determine who is better positioned to host the participatory process. This is a crucial step in devising an effective strategy to ensure its success, especially considering that the legitimacy of these actors can significantly impact the credibility of the process. In essence, it entails the assessment of the power dynamics between the stakeholders (Gaventa, 2006). The spectrum of power dynamics range from top-down to bottom-up processes:

1. Top-down: The process is initiated by a specific institution. Here, the central question revolves around how citizens are engaged in a policy-making process conducted by the institution. 
2. Bottom-up: The process is designed and driven by citizens, either independently or jointly with institutions, to influence or take part in the decision-making of a particular issue or cycle of public policy.

This spectrum of power dynamics offers a broad range of options for positioning participatory activities across personal, institutional, and collective levels. A particularly useful tool for defining these positions is the concept of Political Spaces.

Political Spaces are moments, actions, opportunities, and channels where people work together to influence decisions, discourses, and relationships that affect their lives and their interests (Stever, 2023). Each space has its own purpose and differing participation drivers to achieve its goal, including:

1. Closed Spaces: Convened by decision-makers. These are often traditional, formally mandated bodies. Participation is closed, restricted to elected politicians, bureaucrats, or hand-picked citizens.
2. Invited Spaces: Convened by decision-makers. These spaces often feature curated invitations.
3. Co-created Spaces: Convened and organized jointly by decision-makers and citizens. These spaces often feature open participation ranging from open-for-all to lottery selection.
4. Supported Spaces: Political spaces organized by citizens and grassroots actors with support from decision-makers. These spaces often feature open participation ranging from open-for-all to lottery selection.
5. Claimed Spaces: Political spaces independently organized by citizens, movements, and communities. These spaces often feature inclusive participation, but audiences may also be implicitly or explicitly restricted to members of a community.
   
   

We’ve organized dozens of cases from Participedia and Latinno according to the SDGs targeted to support you in finding references and inspirations.

• Who should be included in the activity to best achieve its purpose? 

With a clear understanding of the stakeholders, their power dynamics, and the political spaces involved in the participatory process, the next step is to determine who should participate. This decision should be guided by the principles most relevant to achieving the activity’s purpose, for example:

• Inclusivity: Provides a wide reach and diverse discussion through the participation of as many voices as possible in the conversation, including representatives from all stakeholder groups and with particular emphasis on those from underrepresented communities.
• Representation: Offers insight into the views of a community by considering its current composition. This includes the proportions of the population in various categories such as age, education, ethnicity, gender, and other relevant factors.
• Lived experience: Examines issues from the perspective of those directly involved, treating participants as subject-matter experts and drawing on their real-life experiences for valuable insights.
  
  

• What roles will these stakeholders have in the process?

Different individuals may have varied roles and responsibilities throughout the process. Recognizing where each participant stands in the development and execution of the consultative process is crucial to define expectations clearly and organize tasks efficiently. Here are some key roles to consider when organizing roles of a participatory process:

1. Hosts: Responsible for convening the participatory activity.
   
   
2. Organizers: Responsible for planning, executing, and managing the participatory activity. 
   
   
3. Facilitators: Responsible for guiding and managing the participatory activity, ensuring smooth communication and active participation among participants.

• MC and Animator (Lead facilitator): The main facilitator who leads the session, maintains the flow of the discussion, and ensures engagement from participants in the plenary.

• Conductor: A facilitator experienced with the context is responsible for overseeing the “run of show” of the activity and adapting as circumstances change (for example, if the food is late, how would the program change to accommodate a shift in the lunch break timing). This role may be combined with the lead facilitator role.

• Small Group Facilitators: Trained individuals responsible for leading specific portions of the activity within breakout groups.
  
  4. Participants: Individuals and/or groups of stakeholders included in the process through an invitation to actively take part in the participatory activity.
  
  5. Observers: Individuals tasked with observing the proceedings of the workshop without actively participating. They may provide feedback or insights afterward.

• Evaluation: Monitoring and studying the process independently to assess its effectiveness and impact.

• Audit: Providing transparent accountability of the process to ensure the integrity and the well-being of participants.

• General Public / Others: Participants who are not directly actively involved in the process but are permitted to observe the participatory activity.
  
  6. Other Roles:

• Developers of Information Materials: People in charge of creating informational materials such as presentations, handouts, and/or reports.

• Editors: Reviewing and refining inputs after each workshop to ensure clarity, accuracy, and coherence.
  
  

Additional Resources:

• Stever (2023). When bottom-up and top-down meet: The ADDIS process and the co-creation of the Nigeria Startup Act
• Gaventa (2006). Finding the Spaces for Change: A Power Analysis paper