Engaging Citizens with Mission Ocean and Waters

Nordlandsforskning

Table 19. Guiding questions for stakeholder mapping. Download the table here.

. Guiding questions for stakeholder mapping. 

What is the purpose of including citizens/stakeholders in my project?

Will citizens/stakeholders be affected by activities/the initiative/the project outcomes? 

Is citizen/stakeholder involvement necessary for goal obtainment because of their power position? 

Is citizen/stakeholder involvement necessary for goal obtainment of legitimations reasons? 

Is citizen/stakeholder involvement necessary because they represent means that contribute to solutions? 

Who defines the rules in relation to the given issue?

May some citizens/stakeholders obstruct the activity to be implemented? 

What is the citizens/stakeholder authority in terms of allocating rewards, recognition and sanctions?

Will some groups of citizens/stakeholders experience disadvantage if excluded from the engagement? 

Which relationships exist between the selected citizen/stakeholders?

What is the actor’s authority in terms of setting objectives and norms?

What is the actor’s authority in terms of allocating or denying resources to other actors?

What is the actor’s authority in terms of defining others’ tasks and responsibilities?

What is the actor’s authority in terms of controlling access to knowledge/information?

What is the actor’s authority in terms of allocating rewards, recognition and sanctions?

What is the actor’s authority in terms of structuring the participation in decision-making processes?

To what degree is the actor’s influence acquired through institutional position?

To what degree is the actor’s formal influence acquired by law and regulations?

To what degree is the actor’s Influence acquired through media/social media

To what degree are the actor’s interests coherent or conflictive with other actors’ interests?

What potential benefits and risks arise for her / him if the issue is addressed/the problem is solved?

What prior experience does the actor have on the problem/issue to be addressed?

Material and nonmaterial resources different actors possess or have control over: Knowledge, expertise, skills effectively address the issue/solve the problem?

Material and nonmaterial resources different actors possess or have control over: arises from learned skills and experience and is expressed in the ability to solve practical problems

Material and nonmaterial resources different actors possess or have control over: technology, effectively address the issue/solve the problem?

Material and nonmaterial resources different actors possess or have control over economy effectively address the issue/solve the problem?

Resources from communication and negotiating skills to grasp the crux of the issue and to communicate clearly and concisely, conveying a coherent message, persuading others and thereby asserting one‘s own interests.

What options exist to increase the actor’s interest and engagement, or to dismantle obstacles?

What resources relate to social categories of age?

What resources relate to social categories of gender?

Appendix 2: Additional tools to help planning evaluation and monitoring

Table 20. Guiding reflection questions for step 3 – Monitoring and assessing citizen engagement, to support the process of starting to consider what to evaluate.{{131}} Download the table here.

. Guiding reflection questions for step 3 – Monitoring and assessing citizen engagement, to support the process of starting to consider what to evaluate.

 Inspired by Durham E., Baker H., Smith M., Moore E. & Morgan V. (2014). The BiodivERsA Stakeholder Engagement Handbook. BiodivERsA, Paris (108 pp).

Step 3: Monitoring and assessing citizen engagement

Questions before and during start of project

Before start of the project. Related to the level or responsibility

How can we pinpoint exactly type and level of participation?

Before project start – several examples below

After project start – make changes if necessary

What is working well/not working well and why?

During project. For each citizen/stakeholder engagement activity, make detailed minutes that describes the process.

What is the actual impact of the process on the results?

What is the actual impact of the process on the participants? (do they feel empowered?)

Questions to evaluate outcome of your initiative

Questions to evaluate the process of your initiative

After the project end. To inform the general debate on Missions and participatory processes

Questions to include participants perspectives

You can use different types of tools to gather this information e.g., e-mail, survey or workshop.

What are the participants’ views on the outcome, process and impact?

For instance, coastal zone planning or waste disposal?

What type of problem are you dealing with?

What do you hope to obtain by including citizens in your project?

Define your goals, objectives and expected results, for different parts within your project. (see participation goals in 

Map your participants to define the different relevant actors you need to provide different types of input, at different levels of participation.

 (page 14) and use the participant mapping template below (

After mapping your participants, consider who might be left behind? Why? And is it appropriate to try to overcome these barriers of engagement? If so, how?

If activities have a high level of complexity in terms of engagement, you may divide them into sub-problems with corresponding sub-activities

This will allow stakeholder identification and engagement at sub-activity level.

Place activities in a timeline. Do some activities depend on the implementation of other activities?

At what stage should citizens be engaged in my project? Consider barriers, including stakeholder fatigue and external demands on their time.

Are the methods selected appropriate? (see Part 

How will you know if planned engagement and methods are working well?

Think about essential metrics early – will you evaluate this qualitatively or quantitatively?

What is the desired impact of the engagement process on project results?

How will you evaluate this? You can use different types of tools to gather this information e.g., e-mail, survey or workshop.

What is the desired impact of engagement for participants?

How can you learn through the project, review and adapt methods / approaches / participants?

Table 2. Participant mapping template. Based on source: EmpowerUs project: https://empowerus-project.eu/ Download the table here.

. Participant mapping template. Based on source: EmpowerUs project: 

(knowledge / experience & reflections / co-production and responsibility)

(inform, consult, involve, collaborate or empower)

Where in project do you need participation?

Table 3. Participation level decision-making matrix. Download the table here.

. Participation level decision-making matrix.

Newsletters, flyers, campaigns, websites, social media etc. (traditional ocean literacy)

Future scenarios , Semi-structured interviews , Walking interviews , Participatory mapping 

Future scenarios , Participatory mapping 

Citizens’ Assemblies , Future scenarios , Participatory mapping , Ocean literacy

Citizens’ Assemblies , Future scenarios ,  Ocean literacy

Table 4. Citizen/Stakeholder engagement evaluation table. A citizen/stakeholder engagement evaluation table that is useful at the outset to plan a strategy for a project/initiative. Download the table here.

. Citizen/Stakeholder engagement evaluation table. A citizen/stakeholder engagement evaluation table that is useful at the outset to plan a strategy for a project/initiative. 

Table 5. Expected outcomes by 2025 (1st phase) and by 2030 (2nd phase) of Mission Ocean & Waters with respect to citizen participation.{{23}} 

. Expected outcomes by 2025 (1st phase) and by 2030 (2nd phase) of Mission Ocean & Waters with respect to citizen participation.

 Source: European Commission. Implementation Plan for Mission Ocean & Waters.

Tried and applied deliberative democracy mechanisms and social innovation practices for the co-design and co-implementation of solutions for the restoration of the aquatic environment. 

Developed and piloted frameworks and processes for participatory governance and deliberative democracy, including an EU-wide network of assemblies to enable effective citizen and stakeholder involvement in the lighthouses. 

Up-scaled the European Research Area funded pilot citizen science campaign ‘Plastic Pirates – Go Europe’ together with further Member States. 

Involved the European solidarity corps in restoration projects. 

Promoted apps allowing citizens to collect data and observations and will promote (digital) data collection and participatory research involving citizens for the monitoring and restoration of ocean and waters; the collected data will be harmonised and made publicly available through the Digital Twin Ocean, EMODnet and/or the Copernicus Marine Service. 

Provided knowledge and methodological frameworks to support the revision of the International Ocean Governance agenda. 

All European citizens have the opportunity to engage in the preservation and restoration of oceans and waters through participative means, volunteering and citizen science. 

All European citizens are empowered to be actors in the preservation and restoration of oceans and waters through social innovation, awareness raising, education and training. 

Promoted EU-wide annual ocean literacy campaigns, in cooperation with the EU4Ocean Coalition to strengthen public awareness and overcome the emotional disconnect with the ocean and waters. 

Launched regular citizen science campaigns as a part of novel participatory research initiatives to increase the reach, quality and impact of scientific initiatives and boost the environmental awareness of the participants. 

Table 6. Post-Normal Science: Key Concepts for Citizen Engagement

. Post-Normal Science: Key Concepts for Citizen Engagement

A ‘social actor’ or simple ‘actor’ is a term used to describe a person (or organisation) who plays a role in the process / problem of interest.

Emphasises the non-specialist, non-elite nature of the individuals in question. This creates some distinction from the sometimes-overlapping term stakeholder

Many versions of citizens’ assemblies exist, but it could generally be described as a body of randomly selected citizens that deliberate, and in some cases vote, on one or several issues that have implications at the citizen level.

Refers to a broad set of activities involving people in public processes related to Mission Ocean & Waters.

Promotes collaboration between non-professionals and scientists in a two-way process. Citizens can engage from co-design through data collection to result interpretation. Scientists gain capacity; citizens gain knowledge and recognition.

Refers to geographically or socially linked groups of citizens, used in place-based contexts.

A group of people who share a concern or passion about a topic and deepen their knowledge by interacting regularly. Activities include mutual learning, co-creation, and best practice exchange. Less structured than a network and may reflect more diverse perspectives.

Table 7. Guiding reflection questions for preparing for citizen engagement.{{60}} Download the table here.

. Guiding reflection questions for preparing for citizen engagement.

 Questions adapted from Zimmermann and Maennling (2007), and Durham E., Baker H., Smith M., Moore E. & Morgan V. (2014). The BiodivERsA Stakeholder Engagement Handbook. BiodivERsA, Paris (108 pp)

A problem with uncertainty that can be reduced / minimized, and where agreement and consensus on norms and decisions are achievable. Any uncertainty can usually be described through objective and quantifiable measures. Here, normal scientific risk analysis can be sufficient, for example, forecasting for waves and levels of toxins in mussels. 

Map your participants, to define the different relevant actors you need to provide different types of input, at different levels of participation.

See Figure 7 and use the participant mapping template below (

) to guide this. More detailed stakeholder mapping tools are available in 

Table 8. Participant mapping template. Based on source: EmpowerUs project: https://empowerus-project.eu/ Download the table here.

A problem with uncertainty that cannot be predicted or controlled, there are significant knowledge gaps, and a situation where there is often no consensus and little agreement on norms, standards or the likely decisions that need to be made. Simple probabilistic risk analysis or standard statistical methods are not able to fill all the knowledge gaps. For example, climate change impacts such as sea level rise and associated consequences including coastal erosion. 

Table 9. Participation level decision making matrix. (Source: project PREP4BLUE).  Download the table here.

A renewed concern with the authenticity of democracy – the degree to which democratic control is substantive rather than symbolic and engaged by competent citizens.

. Participation level decision making matrix. 

Citizens’ Assemblies , Future scenarios,  Ocean literacy

The principles of participation are typically illustrated as a ladder which describe a spectrum of engagement depths, and their corresponding levels of citizen power related to a decision that needs to be made (Figure 2 Citizen participation spectrum, page 14). In the ladder, increasing levels of engagement means greater citizen power. At the top of the ladder, citizens have the power to define the problem, develop the solution and the process to get there.

Table 10. Citizen/Stakeholder engagement evaluation table. Download the table here.

. Citizen/Stakeholder engagement evaluation table. 

A foundational value of the UN SDGs, requiring that discrimination and inequality be addressed. Ensures appropriate opportunities for all to participate.

Table 11. Example of a table for evaluating outcomes in Mission Ocean & Waters initiatives

. Example of a table for evaluating outcomes in Mission Ocean & Waters initiatives

Goals/purpose of your Mission initiative

Important assumptions for your initiative

To better inform stakeholders and the general public 

https://unsdg.un.org/2030-agenda/universal-values/leave-no-one-behind

Questionnaires and interviews with participants before and after the process 

That both the awareness and willingness to engage are as a result of the engagement activity, rather than any other factors. 

Willingness to participate in the future 

Questionnaires and interviews after the process, and follow-up interviews at a later date 

Table 12. Table for evaluating citizen engagement at different stages of your project, with example applications

. Table for evaluating citizen engagement at different stages of your project, with example applications

How are citizens involved in your initiative?

Eg: Knowledge-based policy making process, e.g. engaging fishers in contributing data for fisheries management 

Mission Ocean & Waters (‘the Mission’)

Eg: A context outside policy-making, such as local habitat or species restoration projects

. The Mission aims to, within the target of 2030, protect and restore the health of our ocean and waters through research and innovation, citizen engagement and blue investments.

A named group of entities concerned with a topic. Networks persist over time, even as members change. They connect individuals, institutions, and projects with shared objectives.

Participation may entail a range of involvement, for example, from differing levels of communication (i.e., receiving information or voicing opinions), to directly impacting how we need to consider the risks involved, both for those participating and for the project’s outcomes a research process unfolds or what the outcomes are. While the avenues for participation vary in function and intensity, it is a widespread agreement that participation should grant a greater degree of power to citizens.

Guiding questions used to prepare for the Us: Sea of Sounds immersive virtual reality project, Norway

 Excerpts taken from the PREP4BLUE Pilot Action Report produced by Michal Lovecky from the Go360 s.r.o., and republished here with permission.

Applies in situations where facts are uncertain, values are in dispute, stakes are high, and decisions are urgent. Public participation is essential for solving such problems and ensuring processes are credible and legitimate

Table 13. Guiding questions used by the Us: Sea of Sounds project to develop their project plan, utilising tools provide in Table 1 / Table 7 of the PREP4BLUE toolbox.

. Guiding questions used by the Us: Sea of Sounds project to develop their project plan, utilising tools provide in 

Organised interests such as NGOs, businesses, or authorities. Distinct from citizens unless otherwise noted.

Engaging citizens in raising awareness of underwater noise pollution and its impact on marine life through VR.

Complex & Uncertainty (multiple stakeholders, ecological, and social impacts).

Increase public awareness, promote marine stewardship, and gather experiential feedback.

Define what type of input you will need in order to succeed 

Co-production and reflection (citizen feedback, stakeholder expertise).

Scientists, development team, local volunteers, cultural institutions, local businesses, the general public, and international visitors.

What level of participation do you aim for?

Involve & Collaborate; Active participation in feedback, co-design, and public engagement.

Place activities in a timeline. Do some activities depend on the implementation of other activities? At what stage should citizens be engaged in my project?

A tool we provide to you to help you to visualise the ‘steps of participation’ and assess when it is most appropriate to inform, consult or empower citizens (see Figure 3).

Mainly during the main event, with some input during prototyping (weeks 2-4) and post-event feedback (weeks 6-7).

Interactive participation, with citizens co-designing and providing feedback on marine conservation efforts.

A balance between experiential engagement through VR and reflective participation via interviews and workshops.

How can we pinpoint exact type and level of participation?

On-site semi-structured interviews, observation of emergent behavior, feedback collection.

Qualitative methods: semi-structured interviews, observation, and feedback forms worked but were constrained by time.

Playtesting and VR feedback loops were successful; however, limited time and high demand restricted in-depth post-experience discussions.

Feedback directly informed rapid VR iterations during the event, improving user experience.

Participants felt more informed and engaged but lacked time for deeper reflection due to queues for the post-VR exposure. The presentation followed by the workshop worked better in this.

Table 14. Evaluation of the outcomes of the Us: Sea of Sounds against their Mission Ocean & Waters objectives, using the template provided in Table 11.

. Evaluation of the outcomes of the Us: Sea of Sounds against their Mission Ocean & Waters objectives, using the template provided 

To better inform stakeholders and the public

Number of participants; Increased awareness and understanding

Issues that are difficult to solve with scientific evidence or knowledge alone, due to the many interconnected, interdependent social problems that make finding a single solution impossible.

Pre- and post-event interviews; workshop discussions

That awareness changes are due to the engagement, not external factors

Promote co-design and active participation

Number of participants involved in co-design activities

That participants feel their contributions are valued

Empower participants for future engagements

Continued engagement is directly linked to the project’s activities

Table 15. Basic evaluation of citizen engagement at different stages of the Sea Synergy Oyster Project, Ireland, adapted from Table 12 of the toolbox.

. Basic evaluation of citizen engagement at different stages of the Sea Synergy Oyster Project, Ireland, adapted from 

Table 16. A participant engagement evaluation table was useful at the outset of the Sea Synergy Oyster Project to plan a strategy through which to assess the success of the project (based on Table 10 of this toolbox)

. A participant engagement evaluation table was useful at the outset of the Sea Synergy Oyster Project to plan a strategy through which to assess the success of the project (based on 

What the community knew on the topic before VS after our showcase event.

What the community thinks of the project and what shape they want it to take in the future. 

World Café discussion and Feedback forms

The world café discussion will be conducted after showcasing key finding of project and feedback forms will be handed out at the event and sent digitally and responses will be anonymous.

Open casual environment for discussion and ability to give feedback or share concerns anonymously

Conducting discussion after talk sharing key findings will mean people are sharing opinions on a project they have a better understanding of. Feedback forms being both digital and physical make them more accessible. 

Figure 12. Mapping participant needs and engagement across the Sustainable Coastal Futures Project, adapting Table 1 / Table 7 of the PREP4BLUE toolbox

. Mapping participant needs and engagement across the Sustainable Coastal Futures Project, adapting Table 1 / Table 7 of the PREP4BLUE toolbox

Table 17. Example of a table used to monitor and analyse how fishers (stakeholders) has been included in stock assessment through the establishment of The Norwegian Reference Fleet. For more details, see Bjørkan (2011).

. Example of a table used to monitor and analyse how fishers (stakeholders) has been included in stock assessment through the establishment of The Norwegian Reference Fleet. For more details, see Bjørkan (2011).

Table 18. Overview of Organisations Supporting Citizens’ Assemblies (CAs) Across Europe

. Overview of Organisations Supporting Citizens’ Assemblies (CAs) Across Europe

Advises Bundestag; links to democratic innovation policy

[e.g. FIDE – Forum für demokratische Entwicklung]

Works with Länder-level government and policy units

Interfaces with ministries and EU Mission projects

Step 3: Monitoring and assessing citizen engagement	Questions before and during start of project	Comments
	What type of participation is our aim?	Before start of project. Reflect on Table 1 / Table 7 For evaluating, see Table 10, Table 11, Table 12
	What depth of participation do we want?	Before start of the project. Related to the level or responsibility
	How can we pinpoint exactly type and level of participation?	Before project start – several examples below
	Are the methods selected appropriate?	After project start – make changes if necessary
	What is working well/not working well and why?	During project. For each citizen/stakeholder engagement activity, make detailed minutes that describes the process.
	What is the actual impact of the process on the results?	During project and after the project end
	What is the actual impact of the process on the participants? (do they feel empowered?)	During project and after the project end
	Questions to evaluate outcome of your initiative	Comments
	Did we meet our aims and objectives?	Refer to your answers in Table
	Questions to evaluate the process of your initiative	Comments
	Were the methods selected appropriate?	During project and after the project end
	What worked well and why?	During project and after the project end
	What did not work well and why?	During project and after the project end
	What are the lessons learned?	After the project end. To inform the general debate on Missions and participatory processes
	Questions to include participants perspectives	Comment
	Did we meet their aims and expectations?	You can use different types of tools to gather this information e.g., e-mail, survey or workshop.
	What are the participants’ views on the outcome, process and impact?	You can use different types of tools to gather this information e.g., e-mail, survey or workshop.