involve presentation: making the case for public engagement

Edward Andersson & Simon Burall, Involve

Making the business case

for public engagement

Pic

ture

CC

: So

me

right

s re

serv

ed B

y: m

conn

ors

“Nowadays people know the price of everything and the value of nothing.”

Oscar Wilde

Introduction

Pic

ture

CC

: So

me

right

s re

serv

ed B

y: m

conn

ors

• Registered Charity (nr. 1130568)• Focus: Public and stakeholder engagement• Works with: Central & local government.

Health organisations, NGOs and International Organisations•www.involve.org.uk

About

www.sciencewise-erc.org.uk 6

Sciencewise-Expert Resource Centre

Sciencewise Expert Resource Centre for Public Dialogue in Science and Technology (ERC)

Funded by the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS)

It aims to help policy makers commission and

use public dialogue to inform policy decisions in emerging areas of science and technology

Launched in 2008

To help improve policy-making in science and technology through the use of public dialogue and engagement

www.sciencewise-erc.org.uk

What public dialogue costs – in context

Nanodialogues project (2006) cost £240,000 and explored nanotechnology &upstream engagement over 26 months. Value of nano research in 2007 was estimated to be about $12 billion; and the value of nano-enabled products was estimated then to be around $50 billion

7

The scale of investment in dialogue projects is dwarfed by the scale of the policy fields that dialogue has influenced

www.sciencewise-erc.org.uk

What not doing public dialogue can cost

Overall, the costs of not doing public dialogue can far outweigh the costs of the dialogue. For example:

• public opposition can delay or entirely prevent continuing policy development, innovation and new technologies

• conflict and entrenched positions can result in the complete rejection of new technologies.

"If you think dialogue is expensive, try conflict”

8

Getting Started

Pic

ture

CC

: So

me

right

s re

serv

ed B

y: m

conn

ors

What we’ll cover

• Introduction • Questions and answers• Introducing the tool • Exercise • Plenary Disucssion

Examples of Engagement

• Science Policy Dialogue• Science Festival• Community Outreach• Community Jury • Co-creation of Research

Business Case

‘At the end of the day the most important question you need to tackle isn’t the ‘what’ but the ‘why’. You need to be able to articulate a compelling rationale for engagement that convinces your colleagues.’

Paul Younger -University of Newcastle

Research vs. Business caseResearch• Academic• Complete• Time consuming • Truth

Business case• Practical• Incomplete • As much time as

you have• Good enough

In short...

Understanding can be greatly enhanced but evidence will always be incomplete.

Plenary discussion

• Any questions?

• What are challenges of valuing engagement?

• What are benefits of valuing engagement?

Getting results

Pic

ture

CC

: So

me

right

s re

serv

ed B

y: m

conn

ors

Using the Involve Toolkit

Exercise

• In groups identify how you might value the costs and benefits of a particular engagement project using the tool.

• Ideally a ‘live’ project; however, it could also be a ‘dummy’ project.

Exercise

1. Define the focus and purpose2. Decide what to measure3. Complete the checklist and chart4. Analyse the results and ‘test’ with other

groups

Stage 1 - Scope the business case

• Decide how you will use the toolkit • Decide who your audiences are• Decide if monetary valuation is appropriate for

you

Costs that can be given a monetary value

Benefits that can be given a monetary value

Costs that cannot be expressed in monetary

terms

Benefits that cannot be expressed in monetary

terms

Stage 2 –Define focus and purpose

• Decide the focus for the business case• Clarify the intended purpose and outcomes• Consider possible comparator areas/ projects

Comparators

• Do nothing• Status Quo• Alternative engagement methods • Alternative means of achieving the benefits

Distributional impacts

• DEFRA and the Environment Agency (2005) estimated that around 5% of all permit applications took in excess of 500 hrs to process and 1% took over 1,000 hrs.

• Total Place Report (2010) found 200 to 300 ‘chaotic’ families in Croydon; each cost public services around £250,000 per year

Stage 3 -Decide what to measure

• Identify what can be given a money value and what can't

• Identify who you need help from to obtain the data

• Identify where proxies might be appropriate

Benefits • Innovation and creativity• Avoiding conflict• Access to new resources• Development/maintenance• Better quality outcomes• Information and expertise• Increased public awareness• Sharing responsibility• Increased use• Staff morale

Non-monetary benefits

• Revealed preference (What people do)

• Stated preference (What people say)

– Willingness to pay– Willingness to accept

• Benefits transfer (What other people measured)

• Replacement Costs (What people would do instead)

Benefits Transfer (Portsmouth)

• Bin fires in area: 2006: 154 2008: 135• Each case of criminal damage ~ £856 • 4.29 crimes unreported per reported case. • Potential saving of £69,772.56 per year• Also non monetary benefits: increased

volunteering, levels of satisfaction

Replacement costs New resource Replacement costIncreased volunteer time The cost of providing the

service or activity using paid staff

New intelligence and information

The cost of gathering the same information using a market research company

New and improved relationships

The cost of building the same links through a PR and communications exercise

Increased public awareness of policies and services

The cost of achieving a similar level of awareness through campaigns or PR

Stage 4 Complete checklist & chart

• Understand your data and assumptions• Gather the data you need • Fill in the checklist and calculation chart• Use spreadsheets to track costs and benefits

Benefits - Increase trustMonetary value Measured by Non-monetary valueReduced spend on complaints

Staff work diaries/time sheets, complaints listings

Reported trust levels, people reporting feeling able to influence decisions

Benefits - Take difficult decisions Monetary value Measured by Non-monetary valueReduced conflict and reduced spend on legal challenges

Legal costs, staff work diaries/time sheets, complaints listings

Number of negative articles in press, survey results

Stage 5 -Analyse results

• Try out different methods of analysis, for example SROI, Cost benefit, Cost-effectiveness

• Understand the limitations of the data• Test results with colleagues

Example -Probability

Environment Agency aimed to build ownership/trust in flood defence schemes:

• Flood mitigation benefit= £35-40 million • Engagement= £2 million • To be cost effective in future probability of

success must increase by 5.7% (£2 m/£35m). • Engagement needs to change the result from

rejection to acceptance in 1 case in 20 to be worthwhile.

Stage 6 -Present the business case

• Select appropriate presentation format• Present the business case• Adapt to feedback

Communicating the result

• Use the business case to tell stories• Tailor your argument to fit your audience• Seeing is believing • Anecdotes can be powerful• Don’t forget the potential costs of non-

engagement• Theory of Change

Doncaster furniture recycling

Benefits to council• 488 tonnes of waste

diverted from landfill, saving approximately £20,000 in landfill tax payments.

Benefits to clients • 4000+ low-income

households received goods –estimated supplying same families with second-hand goods would have cost £140,000 with existing market prices.

Exercise

• In groups identify how you might value the costs and benefits of a particular engagement project using the tool.

• Ideally a ‘live’ project; however, it could also be a ‘dummy’ project.

Exercise

1. Define the focus and purpose2. Decide what to measure3. Complete the checklist and chart4. Analyse the results and ‘test’ with other

groups

Tallying the results

Pic

ture

CC

: So

me

right

s re

serv

ed B

y: m

conn

ors

Plenary• What did you discover?• Were there any unexpected results?• What will you do with these results?

Links 1

• Making the case for engagement guide: http://www.involve.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Making-the-Case-for-Public-Engagement.pdf

• Making the case –Excel sheet: http://www.involve.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Calculating-costs-and-benefits-with-comparator.xls

Links 2• Department of Health –Value of PPI:

http://healthandcare.dh.gov.uk/economic-case-for-ppi

• Democratic Society: Financial case white paper http://www.demsoc.org/static/Financial-Case-white-paper.pdf

• IDeA –Making the business case: http://www.idea.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?pageId=17455595

Links 3 • National Coordinating Centre -Embedding

Engagement Guide: http://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/support/self-assess

• Involve –True Costs of Participation: http://www.involve.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/True-Costs-Full-Report2.pdf

Links 4 • Sciencewise –Valuing Engagement Guide:

http://www.sciencewise-erc.org.uk/cms/evidence-counts-understanding-the-value-of-public-dialogue/?phpMyAdmin=oHPjaCSrPMAdI04AYEPthe913wb

• Sciencewise –Departmental Dialogue Index: http://www.sciencewise-erc.org.uk/cms/departmental-dialogue-index/?phpMyAdmin=oHPjaCSrPMAdI04AYEPthe913wb

“It is better to be roughly right than precisely wrong”

John Maynard Keynes

The tail endinvolveRoyal London House 22-25 Finsbury Square London EC2A 1DXt: 0 20 7920 6470e: edward@involve.org.uktwitter: ed_andersson

Pic

ture

CC

: So

me

right

s re

serv

ed B

y: m

conn

ors