The Perils of Participation: The Effect of Participation Messages on Citizens’ Policy Support

While scholars have found several benefits to citizens, government, and society resulting from participatory policy processes, other research suggests that citizens are apathetic and uninterested in participating in policy-making. Also, in some cases, knowing that similar others participated in making a decision can decrease support for the result. The current research attempts to determine whether knowledge that similar citizens participated in public transportation policymaking or elites designed a transit policy affects support for the policy as well as general support for the policy process. Results from a survey experiment suggest that who participates matters. Citizens do not want “people like them” developing public transportation policies. These findings pose implications for the promotion of participatory processes. Introduction Transit agencies face increasing requirements to engage the public in strategic planning. In 2007, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) proposed a new circular on Environmental Justice (FTA C 4702.1A) that provided guidance on promoting inclusive public participation. The circular stated, “An agency’s public participation strategy shall offer early and continuous opportunities for the public to be involved in the identification of social, economic, and environmental impacts of Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 15, No. 2, 2012 138 proposed transportation decisions” (U.S. Department of Transportation 2007: 21). Additionally, 23 CFR 450.210 mandated that recipients of federal transportation funds have public participation plans that engage the public in long-range, strategic transportation planning (Michigan Department of Transportation 2010). Without such public participation, transit agencies are ineligible for federal funding. As transit professionals seek to implement participatory processes, understanding the effect of the messages used to educate the public that these engagement efforts occurred becomes important for later public support of resulting transit policies. Aside from receiving federal funding, involving citizens in transportation planning may have several positive effects. First, citizen engagement upholds democratic ideals that “[e]very citizen should have an equal chance to influence government policy” by allowing people an opportunity to voice their opinions (Prothro and Grigg 1960: 282). Second, public participation can improve policy-making (Fishkin 1995). Specifically, discussion can improve decision-making by combining participants’ information and enlarging the range of arguments for or against a given policy (Rawls 1971). Third, citizen participation in democratic processes may lead to a more informed citizenry, individual empowerment, constructive communication, and actualization of desired outcomes (Irvin and Stansbury 2004). Furthermore, the benefits of increased citizen involvement in decision-making may extend beyond the participants and policymakers to the broader society. In particular, “[i]f citizens realize that a particular policy was based on deliberation, they will consider the policy to be more legitimate” (Irvin and Stansbury 2004; Ely 1980: 181). Additionally, civic engagement can increase trust in government (Keele 2007; Putnam 1995) or institutions (Beierle 1999). Just having the perception that participation occurred, as opposed to being an actual participant, can create positive outcomes. For example, Tyler et al. (1985) found, in an experiment where subjects responded to written scenarios about a city council, that respondents reacted more favorably when the council solicited public input. Thus, merely knowing that other citizens participated directly in designing a policy may result in more satisfaction with policy outcomes and trust in government (Kweit and Kweit 2007). Although participation in democratic processes may have several positive outcomes, other research suggests that engaging the masses in politics may not be an effective strategy because people simply do not wish to be involved.1 Some scholars suggest that many people do not and prefer not to think about politics on a daily basis (Hibbing and Theiss-Morse 2002).