Policy Impact of the French Citizens’ Convention for the Climate: Untangling the Fate of the Citizens’ Recommendations

‍

‘Policy Impact of the French Citizens’ Convention for the Climate: Untangling the Fate of the Citizens’ Recommendations’, offers an independent analysis of the fate of the Convention’s recommendations. How many recommendations have been adopted – and out of those, how many were modified or only partially implemented? Previous research on participatory processes suggests that too often public authorities ‘cherrypick’ recommendations, selectively implementing those proposals from citizens that, for example, reflect existing government policy and strategy. Is this what happened with the Citizens’ Convention on the Climate Change?

‍

This Briefing authored by Alina Averchenkova, Arnaud Koehl and Graham Smith, provides evidence that policy impact has been more significant than generally assumed. Twenty percent of recommendations have been implemented, with another 51 percent implemented in a modified form. The study shows that the government has been selective in prioritising recommendations based on incentives rather than regulation and has been more responsive to those recommendations that were more detailed. Evidence suggests that the citizens’ played an agenda - setting role – a number of its recommendations were not part of the established political debate before the Convention began its work.

‍

This study was originally commissioned by the European Climate Foundation to understand the longer-term policy impact of the French Citizens’ Convention for the Climate. It is different from other KNOCA Briefings, but we decided it was important to publish in this format so that it has wider readership. The findings are relevant to anyone interested in the policy impact of climate assemblies, in particular the French Convention which remains a subject of intense contention.

‍

‍