When we as citizens feel helpless to interject in the questionable actions of decision-makers, the cracks in democracy are laid clear. But what if there was a way to put power back in the hands of the electorate? Citizens’ assemblies are designed to give people a stronger voice, says democracy scholar Marjan Ehsassi. She walks us through what they are and how to put one together in your city.
Decision-makers in the Californian city of Petaluma, USA, were in a stalemate. The fate of a stretch of land which once housed Sonoma-Marin Fairgrounds was up for debate. No one seemed to agree what would be best for the community, and so it went on for years.
Then, in 2022, the city council hosted a citizens’ assembly. It brought together 36 local residents – all selected at random – to discuss what they thought should happen.
Until then, shots had been called by politicians, but this shift towards direct democracy handed people the power. Facilitated by nonpartisan nonprofit Healthy Democracy, attendees met for approximately 100 hours where they heard from local stakeholders and various experts, then deliberated the situation. Finally, they reported their decision to the council.
As of 2025, the grounds are in use again for public enjoyment. The annual fair and speedway races have returned, but in addition it offers a local farmers’ market, community facilities, routes for active mobility, and accessible green spaces.
To the outside observer, this appears to be a good outcome – which would be correct. But to Democracy scholar and Executive Director of the Federation for Innovation and Democracy North America (FIDE – North America), Marjan Ehsassi, it’s not so much the use of the land that’s worth celebrating, but the process.
Electoral Dysfunction
For many years, Marjan worked in international development with institutions like the World Bank, the National Democratic Institute, and the American Bar Association.
Then came Donald Trump’s first term as president, which our CityChanger believes demonstrated a reckless approach to governance and undermined America’s stance on the international arena. “I really could not justify going around the world strengthening democratic institutions elsewhere when it seemed like ours really needed attention,” she tells us.
This prompted her to step back from a career in international governance and enrol in the School of Advanced International Studies doctoral programme at Johns Hopkins University in her home city of Washington, DC.
Her thesis asks why citizens in developed democracies are so disengaged from their political institutions and “are there platforms out there that, once you participate in with them, you want to actually be more involved in politics?”
These are pertinent questions. To many people, whether on the right or left of the political spectrum, democracy is sacred and its foundations unquestionable, yet voter turnout is consistently poor. In a bumper year for elections globally, 2024 saw an average of only 61% of eligible voters head to the polls. Now, too, it seems that young people are so disillusioned with what they perceive to be the failures of democracy that they’re willing to entertain the idea of authoritarian leadership.
How did we get here?
Seeing the need to preserve deliberative democracy – giving citizens a real voice in political discussions – Marjan’s research uncovered that the main challenge undermining democratic systems is “voice insecurity”.
Disrupting Democracy
In her work with FIDE – North America, which launched in April 2024, Marjan speaks to representatives at all scales of American politics and has found that our “electeds” have long since forgotten the importance of connecting with citizens.
Believe it or not, the sixteenth president of the United States of America, Abraham Lincoln had public office hours.
Whatever the reason – from pressures of the job to threats of terrorism – meaningful enagement like that rarely exists now, and so people don’t feel heard.
When the public then sees the influence of lobbyists and interest groups yet feels their own interests are ignored, that relationship frays further, posing the question of whether the democratic system is any longer fit for purpose.
A Voice of Longing
Marjan wants to give people back their voice. Or, rather, she wants councils and governments to give people a say on the issues that matter to them, but these institutions need help to do so.
People are really searching for a meaningful and consequential voice.
It’s a passion that cuts deep for our CityChanger. Growing up in Iran, she was only twelve years old when, in 1979, her mother explained that the revolution would give people back their Seda, or voice.
After the uprising, though, the regime became increasingly suppressive and instead worked to quieten those voices, especially of women.
In her book Activated Citizenship, Marjan recalls how she was considered too outspoken in class discussions by the morality police and as a result refused entry to Iran’s state universities. “[E]ven my relatively faint and limited voice was unacceptable,” she writes.
Fortunately, some people won’t be silenced. This experience taught Marjan the importance of being heard by those who govern, and she believes citizens’ assemblies are the way to do it.
Citizens’ Assemblies Explained
Citizens’ assemblies aren’t a panacea, Marjan admits, but can be “a strong and necessary complement to our current democracies”.
This is not about replacing the current system of representative democracy but approaching it in a way that better meets societal needs. To that end, citizens’ assemblies are intended to be a more accurate representative sampling of citizenry than are a handful of elected leaders.
By inviting members of the public to consult on public issues or a public problem, we automatically expand the range of perspectives and knowledge that feed into the formation of solutions. Each member’s input is shaped by their unique lived experiences.
While a flat hierarchy in theory, distinctive roles are still relevant. Marjan’s doctoral research was on government-championed citizens’ assemblies – those that work top-down. A disengaged electorate needs the authorities to take the initiative and create a framework whereby the public and governments get to sit at the table and reform policy together.
Making Citizens’ Assemblies Work
Looking at examples like Petaluma, we can be forgiven for assuming this is simple.
Contrary to assumptions about participation, a successful citizens’ assembly is about more than getting a bunch of folks together to talk about an issue. Without good design and thoughtful structures, we are setting up to fail.
To ensure this doesn’t happen, our CityChanger helpfully explains her three-point guidance and “four non-negotiables” for workable citizens’ assemblies.
1. Define the Problem
Quite often the mistake governments make at all scales – local, regional, State, or national – is not sufficiently grasping or communicating the issue they want to address.
Before venturing into the brave new world of citizens’ assemblies, initiators should be ready to succinctly present what the problem is that they want the group to address.
We don’t spend enough time really understanding what that problem is and how we might be able to connect it with policy impact.
2. Democratic Lottery
Theoretically, representative sampling populates each citizens’ assembly with a diverse decision-making jury covering a spectrum of viewpoints.
The FIDE – Europe website states that a random draw from the electoral register is one of the fairest ways to pick participants.
It isn’t perfect, Marjan admits. There are times when some socio-economic and cultural variables are not represented either because of the limited number of participants, or because of self-selection bias. We also need to do a better job of keeping participants in the room by removing barriers to participation such as childcare, transportation costs, and good translation, she adds.
“Some people are going to respond to the letter or to the email or to the call because they’re generally more involved or they care about the issue.” Distrust towards governments will cause other selected citizens to sit it out. But Marjan also knows of people who have never voted and jumped at the chance to have an input.
3. Four Non-Negotiables of Engagement
With the problem and people in place, it’s time to get cracking, but planning sessions too requires considered steps.
a) Information
The first session should be dedicated to learning. It’s up to facilitators to bring participants up to speed free from political bias: what’s the issue, who are the stakeholders, what are the blockage points, is there a budget, etc?
Wherever possible, stakeholders and relevant experts should be invited to present their angles and give “exposure to balanced viewpoints”, upon which deliberation will be based.
Bombarded with this “curation of evidence”, people may need time to digest and reflect and find knowledge gaps. “It’s only when you start deliberating that you might need more information.” Opportunities to “request additional speakers” should be made available in subsequent sessions.
b) Deliberation
Equipped with the right information, attendees can debate among themselves and begin to formulate their recommendations. Someone needs to coordinate deliberations, and they should be knowledgeable and experienced facilitators. Marjan has seen inconsistent facilitation hamper every citizens’ assembly she’s been involved in.
c) Writing
At the end of the process, attendees make their recommendations. These are submitted to the relevant political body for consideration along with a minority report.
But who should be responsible for the writing?
In 2022/23, Marjan was appointed as one of four guarantors supporting the French citizens convention on the end of life – a citizens’ assembly – in Paris which struggled with exactly this question.
Finding a balance is tricky. On the one hand, “you want the proposals to be well justified and actionable,” Marjan explains, which “you don’t always see” if facilitators aren’t involved. On the other hand, “the more we talk about creating expertise in an area, the more you’re removing it from the hands of the people”.
Eventually, the panel asked the 184 attendees for their opinion who were “immediately keen” for an editorial review.
Citizens want their recommendations and final report to be the best possible work that they can produce.
If the writing of the final report is led by facilitators, Marjan recommends that we at least include parts – such as the manifesto or the introduction – written by assembly members.
d) Accountability
Failure of climate assemblies – which function the same as citizens’ assemblies but with a focus on climate issues – to impact policy have shown that changing regulations and laws is complicated and can be challenging.
To make any of this worthwhile – and to ensure people don’t grow as weary of citizens’ assemblies as they have with traditional democracy – governments must have a genuine plan to follow up on citizens’ recommendations.
Points to consider include:
- At the start, shortlisting issues that the authorities can genuinely “move the needle” on and hand attendees the power to choose from this the theme of their assembly
- Communicating clearly when attendees can expect to hear any responses
- When that time comes, officials must say which of the proposed measures they’re adopting or, if not, why not. Marjan hopes that, at some point, people will also have the option to appeal government’s decisions.
“People are really, really smart and they don’t want to be manipulated. If you make certain promises that you don’t deliver on, then not only will trust not improve, but we see that trust can also decrease and that doesn’t serve anyone’s interest.”
Seven Buckets of Impact
When it works, it really works!
In the States, Marjan repeatedly hears critics complain that citizens’ assemblies aren’t having more impact on policy, but she says it’s shortsighted to only think in these terms.
There are, in fact, what our CityChanger calls “seven buckets” of impact which we can measure when the process has been successful:
- Assembly members learn about coalition building and develop their collective problem-solving muscles as a result of open debate
- Representatives from diverse and marginalised communities feel included in that public-political debate. In Petaluma, for example, 100% of panellists reported that they were exposed to new perspectives and better understood the issues involved as a result of the process
- Individuals feel “that their place in democracy matters” and leave empowered by having their civic voice heard
- Attendees begin to independently seek to learn more about politics and government, and seek information from reliable, unbiased sources
- Laws, regulations, and “policies start reflecting people’s preferences” rather than, as many fear, “to serve the interests of big corporations and lobbies”
- A sense of belonging and community healing occurs
- Trust in authorities – or government legitimacy – is increased or gradually restored
Impacts in Action
These are not just pipedreams; they actually occur.
FIDE – North America supported an electoral reform citizens’ assembly in Yukon, Canada. Based on survey responses, baseline trust in the province’s government jumped up from around 30% to 60%, which was an important outcome for the electeds. The organisation is now actively supporting citizens’ assemblies across North America such as in Victoria-Saanich in Canada, and Millcreek, Boulder (Colorado), and Raleigh (North Carolina) in the USA.
Over in France, out of 150 attendees from the first French Citizens’ Convention on the Climate, Marjan understands that 10 people went on to run in local election campaigns. “They felt so empowered by that experience that they wanted to become an elected representative. I think that’s phenomenal.”
Acknowledging Limits
This can be a double-edged sword, as thoughts turn to scaling up.
Marjan says we need to be cautious about moving citizens’ assemblies online and involving thousands of delegates. “As my colleague, Yves Dejaeghere puts it,” Marjan tells us, “It is actually the slowness and the smallness of citizens’ assemblies that make them such a strong, robust compliment to representative democracy.”
There’s a magic that happens when people are in a room together; bonds are formed as they stay in the same hotels, share meals, walk in groups on site visits, etc. “All of these really increase that sense of cohesion.”
If our aim is to develop connection and reestablish trust in democracy, then facilitating the feel-good sensation we get from being involved in a citizen’s assembly may turn out to be one of our most powerful aids, even if that means self-imposing limitations.
“It’s supposed to be fun to be involved in your democracy. I think that is something that we don’t talk about enough. Exercises in engagement with government should excite people and make them enthusiastic for more.”
Further Information
For a more detailed exploration of citizens’ assemblies, check out Marjan’s book Activated Citizenship.
FIDE – North America, like the original European equivalent, provides technical guidance on citizens’ assemblies and, in Marjan’s words, “sort of holds the hands of implementers along the process”. Visit their website for reference guides and case studies that outline definitions and practical frameworks.
You can also learn more about citizens’ assemblies on The CityChangers Podcast.