Progress in Citizen Engagement and Digital Participation: Contributions from the TU Delft Citizen Voice Initiative

Progress in Citizen Engagement and Digital Participation: Contributions from the TU Delft Citizen Voice Initative First edition: Year 2025 Research: Citizen Voice Delft University of Technology Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment Text: Juliana Gonçalves Geertje Slingerland Selin Kubilay Manuel Garcia Alvarez Virginia Facciotto Jing Spaaij Isabella Jaramillo Diaz Daniella de Rijke Rodríguez Design: Virginia Facciotto How to cite: Gonçalves, J. E., Slingerland, G., Kubilay, S., Garcia Alvarez, M., Facciotto, V., Spaaij, J., Isabella, J. D., & de Rijke Rodríguez, D. (2025). Progress in Citizen Engagement and Digital Participation: Contributions from the TU Delft Citizen Voice Initiative. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16917910 Publication & Access: Driven by Citizen Voice’s strong commitment to open science and knowledge sharing, this report is published under an open access license to ensure accessibility. It is made publicly available through Citizen Voice’s digital platforms and institutional repositories, enabling broad dissemination across academic, policy, and community networks. This open publication model reflects Citizen Voice’s belief that knowledge, especially that which emerges from collaborative and participatory processes, should be freely available. The Citizen Voice team encourages academics, practitioners, community organisers, and students to engage with, critique, and build upon the ideas presented in this document. For any inquiries, please contact J.E.[email protected]. Progress in Citizen Engagement and Digital Participation: Contributions from the TU Delft Citizen Voice Initiative Contents Introduction 6 CHAPTER 1: About Citizen Voice 8 What is Citizen Voice? 10 The team 12 Our journey 14 Collaborations and funding 16 Research insights 17 CHAPTER 2: Projects 20 No one-size-fits-all 22 Goal 23 Research and process 23 Output 25 Citizen Mapping 28 Goal 29 Research and process 29 Output 30 UP2030 33 CIVILIAN 34 Goal 35 Research and process 35 Output 36 Citizens meet Climate 38 Goal 39 Research and process 40 Output 41 BIO-CiVo 44 Goal 45 Research and process 45 Output 46 Lentefeest 49 ParticipAIte 50 Goal and process 51 Output 52 Meeting Spatial Justice 58 Goal 59 Research and process 59 CHAPTER 3: Impact 62 Introduction 64 Citizen Voice launch event 65 Open access 67 Academic impact 68 In the media 72 CHAPTER 4: Ethical guidelines 74 Introduction 76 Ethical principles for citizen engagement surveys 76 Guidelines for survey creators 78 Guidelines for survey respondents 80 Final recommendations 81 Acknowledgments 82 References 84 Citizen Voice | 2025 Introduction 6 7 Introduction Debates about public participation and civic engagement urban governance have been evolving since the 50s and 60s, decades marked by significant social upheavals with various social movements emerging in cities during, influencing politics, civil rights, and cultural attitudes. One of the early thinkers in the field was Sherry Arnstein, whose seminal paper “A Ladder of Citizen Participation” (1969) laid the groundwork for understanding power dynamics within participation processes. Arnstein opens the paper by comparing citizen participation with eating spinach: “no one is against it in principle because it is good for you”. The reason why participation is deemed good in theory is because it is usually associated with democratic ideas, and generally no one thinks that democracy is not desirable. She then moves on to argue that the support for participation is reduced to “polite handclaps” when this principle is advocated by the “have-nots”. The have-nots being the ones excluded from planning, cutting across gender, class, and race. Another important contribution of this time was the concept of ‘the right to the city’, articulated by the French philosopher Henri Lefebvre (1968), emphasising the idea that all citizens have the right to produce and reproduce the city according to their needs and aspirations. Lefebvre highlights the importance of spatial politics and urges spatial scholars and practitioners to recognise the dynamic nature of spatial production and move beyond static views of space. This implies understanding space and the city as a continuous site of political struggle and social production. In this light, the right to the city is “a collective rather than an individual right since changing the city inevitably depends upon the exercise of a collective power over the processes of urbanisation” (Harvey, 2008). These critiques did not happen in a vacuum. They were prompted by and intertwined with social movements at the time and led to a real shift in planning from top-down to more collaborative and empowering models of participation. In the 70s, advocacy planning emerged (Paul Davidoff, 1965) emphasising the need for planners to advocate for the interests of marginalised and disenfranchised communities. This was followed by communicative planning (Healey, 1997; Innes, 1995) and deliberative planning (Forester, 1999), which further advanced participatory ideals through consensus-building, structured discourse, and deliberative practices. The formalisation of participatory ideals gained further momentum with initiatives such as the 1992 Local Agenda 21 at the Rio Earth Summit, promoting collaborative and communicative planning approaches. Around 2010, the United Nations began incorporating inclusive urbanisation as a core element of its sustainable development agenda, recognising cities as key actors in achieving global development objectives. Nowadays, the importance of creating inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable cities is enshrined as Goal 11 in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However, despite this rich history, the implementation of participatory processes remains uneven and frequently symbolic, often co-opted by technocratic agendas that frame participation as a depoliticised exercise. This technocratic framing can lead to the marginalisation of alternative voices and reinforce existing power structures rather than disrupt them (Gooch et al. 2015; Goncalves et al., 2024). Within complex and highly unequal spaces such as the city, engaging citizens and other local groups is by no means a trivial task. Urban decisionmakers, planners and designers require specific methodologies and tools to understand the diverse needs and aspirations of various groups and address the practical challenges and value conflicts that emerge from this complexity. From a citizen-perspective, too, innovative methods and approaches are necessary to enable citizens and communities to voice their opinions in ways that are appropriate to them, beyond conventional methods such as public hearings. This is linked to a relatively recent growing interest in the role of arts, rituals, and cultural practices in addressing the spiralling socio-ecological crises unfolding today and affecting people and communities worldwide (Gabrys & Yusoff, 2012; Fotaki et al., 2020; Machen et al., 2023; Berger et al., 2024). Contributions in this direction may help to contest existing power dynamics and create the conditions for real transformative interventions in the world (Yusoff & Gabrys, 2011; Paproki, 2020). Literature shows that digital participation tools can also support engagement processes, given their potential to enable remote participation and reach a large number of citizens (Kahila-Tani, Broberg, et al. 2016; Kahila-Tani, Kytta, and Geertman 2019). However, digital tools for citizen engagement are usually designed from a top-down expert perspective without considering how citizens interact with technology (Gooch et al. 2015; Biedermann et al. 2023), potentially deepening the digital divide and leading to adverse effects such as the rejection of technology altogether. Moreover, most digital tools available are generic, failing to address the specificity of particular contexts, target groups, and planning needs (Goncalves et al., 2025, forthcoming). Therefore, although opportunities brought about by digitalisation are promising, various challenges need to be addressed to ensure the inclusive and meaningful adoption of digital tools in urban decision-making (Goncalves et al., 2024). The TU Delft Citizen Voice Initiative emerged in 2021 as a bottom-up research group to engage critically with the issues described above, aiming to empower communities in urban planning and design through inclusive and meaningful participation and open data practices. This report documents the research and activities carried out by Citizen Voice between 2021 and 2025. It starts presenting the initiative, the team, and the journey so far. This is followed by an overview of the research projects developed during this period – ranging from qualitative studies to design and arts-based approaches, as well as communitybased and transdisciplinary research. It then reflects on the impact achieved and concludes with a set of ethical guidelines that emerged from these experiences, which respond to particular ethical challenges of working with communities and digital platforms. About Citizen Voice 1 This chapter introduces and describes the Citizen Voice initiative. It starts by explaining its mission, values, and the research method adopted in all projects. Following, it presents a summary of our journey from the start in 2021 to the present year 2025. Finally, it presents an overview of the key research findings collected by the initiative so far. Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 1 About Citizen Voice 10 11 What is Citizen Voice? Citizen Voice started in 2021 from the bottom and has grown organically until today, receiving support from various institutions within and outside TU Delft. Citizen Voice works with three core principles: 1. Inclusive and situated participation, 2. Creative and design-based methodologies, 3. Transdisciplinary and open research practices. We recognise participation as a deeply political endeavour and have a critical perspective on the power dynamics within participation processes. We also emphasise the importance of actionable insights and innovative tools and methods that support practitioners in the field and citizens in real life. This dual perspective is encapsulated in our unique critical action research. Over the past four years, we have been conducting research projects to understand how citizens and communities perceive their environment. We have developed digital tools, interactive prototypes, and art exhibitions to engage citizens and communities in complex topics such as climate change and urban biodiversity. Through this participatory research approach, we deepen the understanding of how citizens and communities perceive their environment and how they interact with technologies. We also engage critically with current trends in public participation and citizen engagement, including the increasing implementation of digital tools and artificial intelligence in urban governance, planning and design. By doing so, we seek to understand how technology shapes space and social relations in cities. Citizen Voice stands by the imperative that technology development needs to move away from the idea of one-size-fits-all towards a situated approach that considers the socio-spatial context in which technology is embedded. In addition to understanding technological trends, we also develop open software and ethical guidelines for transdisciplinary collaborations, aiming to counterbalance the increasing commodification of urban technologies and data and fostering healthy collaborative research environments. Highlights • Citizen Voice aims to empower communities by promoting inclusive and meaningful participation in urban planning and design. • Citizen Voice engages critically with technology and examines how digital tools shape urban spaces and social relations, advocating for situated approaches over one-sizefits-all solutions. • Citizen Voice uses creative, transdisciplinary methods to capture diverse perspectives often overlooked in traditional urban data. • Citizen Voice is committed to open science, ensuring all tools and knowledge are open-source to support democratic and just urban development. Research Approach Citizen Voice follows an iterative research approach grounded in the principles of Critical Action Research, a participatory and reflexive methodology that integrates action and inquiry to confront and transform power imbalances and injustices within specific social contexts. In our designbased projects, we built on repeated cycles of research, design, and testing. Each cycle begins with a research phase, which includes literature review, data collection, and a moment of critical reflection on the insights gathered. This phase also includes context analysis to ensure that social and spatial local aspects are considered in our design. The research phase is followed by a design phase, where we collaboratively prototype The meaning of our logo Our logo represents four people sharing one head, symbolizing collective thinking and unity. We believe it reflects the nature and values of our initiative, as we produce knowledge for the collective and tackle complex issues collaboratively. A key strength of Citizen Voice is its horizontal organization: we make decisions together, and every team member has a voice. CHAPTER 1 About Citizen Voice Research & Reflect Research & Reflect Design DesignTest Test Figure 1: Citizen Voice’s logo. Figure 2: Critical action research. new artifacts informed by research insights. In the testing phase, we expose our designs to citizens, inviting them to engage with the prototypes, gathering feedback that not only informs design improvements but also contributes to broader discussions about the local environment. This continuous, participatory loop enables us to progressively refine our designs while advancing our research and promoting meaningful and contextaware change. Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 1 About Citizen Voice 12 13 The team Citizen Voice consists of an interdisciplinary team at the intersection of urbanism, participatory design, and software development. We also constantly interact with urban stakeholders outside academia, including citizens and communities, policymakers, and practitioners, operating within a truly transdisciplinary environment. Juliana Gonçalves Founder and Project Lead Johanna Zehntner Research Assistant Jing Spaaij Research Assistant Gerdus van der Laarse Software Developer Geertje Slingerland Expert Participation Ioannis Ioannou Research Assistant Inger van Dok Research Assistant Carissa Champlin Expert Participation Daniella de Rijke Rodríguez Research Assistant Manuel Garcia Alvarez Software Engineer Trivik Verma Expert Data Science Isabella Jaramillo Diaz Research Assistant Virginia Facciotto Interface Designer Selin Kubilay Research Data Manager Claudiu Forgaci Expert Data Science Drew Harris Research Assistant Maria Gil Falcon Interface Designer Marc Haan Software Developer Yaren Aslan Software Developer Johannes Ijpma Software Developer Somdutta Sinha Software Developer Milou Mulder Research Assistant Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 1 About Citizen Voice 14 15 Our journey No one-size fits all (2022) is a multi-actor analysis examining various urban actors’ perspectives on public participation in the context of the growing integration of digital technologies in urban governance (Goncalves et al., 2024). (Page 22) 2021 2022 2023 Citizen Mapping (2022-2025) developed an open-source tool for citizen mapping. The tool enables various types of spatial and non-spatial questionnaires. This project was funded by the SPRING program under the Convergence Alliance and was integrated into the HE-UP2030. (Page 28) ParticipAIte (20222023) is an artscience installation, speculating how Artificial Intelligence (AI) can be embedded in public participation in the future to bring community values and local knowledge into urban decision making. The project was funded by the TU Delft Climate Action Program and the Resilient Delta Initiative. (Page 50) Citizen Voice was founded in 2021 2024 2025 The Citizens meet Climate (CmC) project (2023-2024) developed a digital participatory platform to empower citizens to take climate action. The project was funded by the TU Delft Climate Action Program. (Page 38) The Citizen Voices in Biodiversity (Bio-CiVo) project (2023-2024) developed a digital participatory platform to empower citizens to assess and design biodiversity scenarios. The project was funded by the Resilient Delta Initiative. (Page 44) The CIVILIAN project (2024-2025) developed a community dashboard that visualises citizens’ comments about their living environment, connecting to the Citizen Mapping tool. The project also consolidated the open software produced within Citizen Voice. CIVILIAN was funded by the Dutch Research Council (NWO). (Page 34) In 2024, Citizen Voice collaborated with the students of the Interactive Technology Design course at TU Delft. The students used CmC and Bio-CiVo as a starting point to design new participation tools. The Meeting Spatial Justice project (2025) explores how municipal actors perceive, reflect on, and engage with justice in local planning contexts. This project is part of the European UP2030 project. (Page 58) Over the past four years, Citizen Voice has been active in leading various research projects. Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 1 About Citizen Voice 16 17 Collaborations and funding Citizen Voice has received support from various organisations, including: • the TU Delft Digital Competence Center, • the SPRING program of the Convergence Alliance, • the TU Delft Climate Action Program, the Resilient Delta Initiative, • the Dutch Research Council (NWO - CIVILIAN project), • and Horizon Innovation Actions (grant agreement n°101096405). A Special Collaboration: TU Delft Digital Competence Centre The Digital Competence Centre (DCC) at TU Delft has been supporting the Citizen Voice initiative, particularly in the development and implementation of the Citizen Mapping Tool and in the CIVILIAN dashboard. They assisted in planning, designing and implementing software applications, securing funding for the development of our digital tools, and played a crucial role in ensuring our tools are open source and they adhere to the FAIR principles. DCC members acted as representatives of Citizen Voice during our collaborations with software developers. Their expertise has helped to better communicate our ambitions and needs to software developers that worked in the projects. With their help our digital toolset has been extended in number and in quality, and it has grown our ambitions to provide professional research tools for citizen participation. The collaboration with DCC emphasizes our commitment to open science and community-driven technological solutions. Research insights This chapter synthesises the main lessons learned from Citizen Voice projects and provides concrete recommendations for engaging citizens in climate action through digital technologies. Drawing from both project outcomes and the researchers’ experience in the initiative, the chapter also offers a reflection on the challenges of fostering citizen engagement in climate-related planning and design through open science. Climate communication Findings from across the Citizen Voice projects highlight the importance of effective climate communication in citizen engagement. They show that simplifying complex climate information is essential to make content accessible to diverse audiences. Approaches such as personas, storytelling, and relatable examples can help bridge the gap between expert knowledge and public understanding. Additionally, our research shows that most people struggle to connect short-term actions to long-term climate goals, revealing a need to clearly link individual efforts with broader environmental outcomes in platform communication. Furthermore, balancing pessimistic and realistic framings of climate change proved to be essential, as it can foster better citizen engagement. Moreover, arts and design-based methods emerged as vital tools in making abstract climate issues tangible and Figure 3: Juliana Gonçalves presenting our research insights during the Citizen Voice Launch Event. 17 “At the Digital Competence Center (DCC), we are proud to support the Citizen Voice initiative because of its commitment to the development of open source tools for advancing research on citizen participation. Our collaboration produced open science and community-driven solutions which reflect our dedication to advancing open, reproducible, and collaborative research practices that empower communities and foster innovation.” Selin Kubilay & Manuel Garcia Alvarez Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 2 Projects 30 3130 Figure 9: Participants testing the Citizen Mapping tool. tool. These insights emphasised the importance of adaptability and inclusivity in civic technology as well as flexibility and modularity in technology development. Building on this conceptual groundwork, a modular software architecture was designed with support from the TU Delft Digital Competence Centre (DCC). This modular approach allows new functionalities to be added incrementally, enabling the tool to evolve in response to emerging needs and specific project requirements. Software development was initiated by implementing core features first, Output The Citizen Mapping tool is an inclusive, web-based, open-source platform designed to gather qualitative, spatial information from citizens and local urban stakeholders. It creates a digital environment where residents can express their perceptions, needs, and insights about the places they live in, supporting more collaborative and equitable urban planning processes. Users can respond to conventional survey questions such ensuring alignment with the FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) data principles to promote transparency, reusability, and longterm sustainability. As the tool matured, development continued in an iterative way, guided by feedback from real-world use and integrated into additional research and community-based projects, such as UP2030 and CIVILIAN. This adaptive, needs-driven approach has allowed Citizen Mapping to grow into a flexible and extensible platform that remains responsive to a diversity of contexts and stakeholders. Figure 10: Main page of the Citizen Mapping tool. as multiple choice, as well as interact with maps by adding pins or drawing polygons, linking their feedback to specific locations. This tool is particularly suited for participatory planning sessions, whether conducted online or in person, as well as for community-led data collection efforts and remote stakeholder engagement. Its flexibility allows for tailoring engagement processes to different audiences and contexts, making it useful in both individual and group settings. By aligning participatory tasks with available technologies and the needs of stakeholders, the tool contributes to more meaningful and accessible citizen input. Beyond improving the quality and equity of participation, the Citizen Mapping tool also plays a strategic role in supporting climate action and socially just urban transitions. By amplifying the voices of vulnerable and underrepresented groups, it helps ensure that urban transformation and climate neutrality efforts reflect a broader range of lived experiences. As part of a larger ecosystem, it offers cities multiple pathways to design inclusive, tech-enabled engagement strategies. Designed to expand participation through digital accessibility and open communication, the tool provides a reusable framework that cities can adapt to their unique challenges. In doing so, it not only strengthens the connection between governments and citizens but also serves as a reference for best practices in inclusive, Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 2 Projects 32 33 Figure 11: Examples of questions on the Citizen Mapping tool. UP2030 participatory urban development. As the UP2030 official website explains, UP2030 aims to help cities achieve their climate neutrality goals by supporting the socio-technical transformations needed, using urban planning and design as key levers. The project will assist city stakeholders and local authorities in integrating climate neutrality into both everyday actions and long-term strategic decisions. A novel methodology, the 5UP approach, will be developed and applied through the co-creation and implementation of science-based yet practical tools and methods. Inclusive participation will be central throughout all phases of the project, ensuring that community needs are genuinely reflected in each city’s vision. Co-designed interventions will be crafted to maximise the delivery of cobenefits. In doing so, UP2030 will have a measurable positive effect on spatial justice in pilot cities and provide citizens the opportunity to actively engage in the transition through sustainable behaviour changes, positioning them as agents of change. The project also focuses on mainstreaming climate neutrality through urban planning and design as a means to enhance urban liveability. By connecting planning approaches to a broad range of social and environmental benefits, especially at the neighbourhood level, UP2030 will explore how prototyping at this scale can serve as a critical platform for innovation, reinvestment, and practical solutions. Insights gained will support scaling these efforts city-wide. To achieve broad urban impact, cities must go beyond technical solutions and pilot projects. UP2030 will equip local authorities to foster innovationready environments through a combination of supportive policy frameworks, inclusive participation processes, behavioural change initiatives, capacity building within city departments, new governance models, and financial mechanisms. Ultimately, UP2030 will guide cities and their stakeholders to deliver on the core values of equity, resilience, climate neutrality, and sustainability. Figure 12: UP2030 (UP2030, n.d.). CHAPTER 2 Projects 35 CIVILIAN 2.3 Team members: Juliana Gonçalves Geertje Slingerland Manuel Garcia Alvarez Selin Kubilay Isabella Jaramillo Diaz Jing Spaaij Virginia Facciotto Goal Research and process Citizen engagement is crucial for building liveable cities and for achieving climate goals. Digital platforms can play a role in the process of involving citizens, but are generally not citizen-friendly: they are not attractive to citizens and require technical expertise to act on the information from the platform (NWO, n.d.). According to Citizen Voice research, one way to make digital participatory platforms more effective is to give “data back” to citizens (Goncalves et al., 2024). Returning data empowers citizens by increasing transparency, building trust, and making participation more meaningful. When citizens can access the outcomes of their contributions, compare perspectives, and see how decisions are made, they are more likely to stay engaged. This means platforms should not only collect input but also communicate results in clear, accessible formats (Goncalves The project started with the analysis of already existing spatial data dashboards that revealed that they are often overwhelming, difficult to navigate for non-experts, and fail to clearly communicate the relevance of the data presented. Many do not explain where the data comes from, how it is processed, or what the platform’s ownership and goals are. To address these issues, the new dashboard was designed with three core priorities: et al., 2024). CIVILIAN is a NWOfunded project aiming at giving data collected through spatial surveys back to citizens by means of a mapbased community dashboard. The dashboard is coupled with the Citizen Mapping tool and provides insights into how citizens experience their living environment. • Transparency: clearly communicating the source of the data, how it is processed, who owns the platform, and what its objectives are. • Accessibility: making the interface visually appealing, intuitive, and easy to understand for everyone • Relevance: showing citizens the value of their input by presenting data in a way that feels meaningful and relevant. Try the prototype! tinyurl.com/ CIVILIANprototype Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 2 Projects 36 37 By providing clear, understandable, and transparent information, the dashboard aims to make citizens feel heard, demonstrate that their contributions are valued, and encourage them to participate in future surveys. With these goals in mind, the platform was developed through two iterative prototyping and testing cycles. The design process focused on finding the right balance between clarity and visual appeal. This involved careful selection of colors, icons, and Output The dashboard, which we called “Community Voices Portal”, is structured into two main sections: Info section This section is located in the landing page of the dashboard and serves as the introduction to the platform. It explains the purpose of the dashboard, who owns it, how the data is processed, and invites users to either explore the map or contribute by filling out the Citizen Mapping tool survey. At the heart of this section is a custom illustration that metaphorically represents the journey of data, from collection and processing to the generation of new community projects. This visual is paired with concise and clear text that helps users understand Figure 13: Participants testing the CIVILIAN prototype. illustrations, combined with clear language and a simple, easy-tonavigate layout. As the dashboard is integrated with the Citizen Mapping tool, a significant part of the work involved ensuring that the spatial data collected through surveys was communicated accurately and without loss of spatial context. As a result, special attention was given to map design and map-based data visualization, ensuring that geospatial insights were both preserved and clearly presented. 36 Figure 14: Illustration for the info section of the CIVILIAN prototype. Figure 15: Data visualization section of the CIVILIAN prototype. not only what the dashboard offers but also the value of communitygenerated data. The goal is to make users feel informed, included, and encouraged to take a more active role in their community. Data visualization Upon entering the actual dashboard, users are first shown a brief privacy statement and code of conduct, emphasizing that the data displayed comes from fellow citizens and should be used in a non-harmful way. A short tutorial follows, guiding users through how to navigate the dashboard and interpret the different data types. The main feature is an interactive map that visualizes spatial data using a combination of colors and icons, each representing different topics. Users can toggle these layers on and off via the legend, tailoring the view to their interests. The data is represented in the form of points, lines, or areas. Some data points include citizen comments, which are indicated with text bubbleshaped icons. Hovering over these icons reveals the related note. All data displayed is fully anonymous, ensuring privacy while fostering openness and trust. Team members: Juliana Gonçalves Carissa Champlin Johanna Zehntner Virginia Facciotto Inger van Dok CHAPTER 2 Projects 39 Citizens meet Climate 2.4 Goal Figure 16: City from above with private areas highlighted (Base photo by Tom Rumble on Unsplash). 39 Try the prototype! tinyurl.com/ CitizensMClimate Prototype Climate change is increasingly affecting urban living environments. Severe storms, sinking groundwater tables, hotter summers and milder winters are already showing their effects on infrastructure, foundations of buildings, and citizens’ daily lives. In response to these climate impacts, cities have set ambitious climate targets, aiming to become climate-proof through various urban interventions. Many of these interventions require citizen support and participation, from the adoption of renewable energy to the greening of cities (e.g., roofs, backyards, etc.). Because a large part of the built environment is privately owned (about 60% in Dutch cities), the success of such initiatives depends on engaging citizens in climate action. Other strategies require people to change their behaviour and social norms. However, there is a general lack of climate risk awareness and uncertainty regarding citizens’ scope of action. Many citizens do not realise how climate risks relate to their daily lives, and many more are overwhelmed and do not know how to act in times of climate crisis. Digital climate action platforms have entered the portfolio of climate engagement strategies and have a great potential to reach larger numbers of citizens. However, existing platforms are ineffective and underutilised. This project explores the use of digital platforms to support climate engagement and develops a digital participatory platform to empower citizens to take climate action. Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 2 Projects 40 41 Research and process The project started by conducting a comparative analysis of 13 existing digital platforms for public participation and climate action that led to the identification of the most common design elements employed across these platforms and analysis of their intended purposes, such as fostering engagement, informing users, or guiding their actions. This research also highlighted the main challenges of existing platforms: they lack accessibility and navigation intuitiveness, failing to provide understandable and relatable climate information. Moreover, they do not provide space for citizen users to share experiences and ideas about climate impacts and/or actions and do not provide guidance on how to take action in the real world. At the same time, a literature review on participation processes and case studies was also conducted. This research led to the development of a six-point rubric, illustrating set of actionable design guidelines for creating effective civic platforms focused on climate. This rubric was iteratively refined over the course of the project thanks to the integration of later research findings. The six points include: • Informing citizens and valuing their knowledge • Balancing negative and positive framings in communication • Providing locally, temporally, and personally relevant perspectives • Providing tools to take both individual and collective action • Providing clear, reliable, and open scientific data • Including appealing and engaging elements Having the guidelines and the problems as a foundation, the next step of the process consisted of ideating and iteratively prototyping a new digital platform aimed at empowering citizens to take climate action. The platform would have to address all identified problems and meet all rubric criteria. The design process followed three prototypingtesting cycles with a user-centred approach, from low-fidelity paper interfaces to a refined, high-fidelity digital prototype in Figma. Each iteration focused on exploring the effectiveness of the engagement strategies and in motivating citizens, the preferred tone of voice and content style, and the general accessibility and usability of the interface. 40 Figure 17: Participants testing the first version of the CmC prototype. Output Citizens meet Climate is a digital participatory platform which empowers citizens to take climate action. The platform achieves climate empowerment by: 1. Informing citizens about current and future climate risks through personalised storytelling. 2. Connecting citizens and community initiatives, creating a sense of community. 3. Listening to citizens’ experiences and linking them to existing opportunities of individual and collective action in their city. Personalization and storytelling At the beginning of the journey, citizens select an avatar that best represents them. Each avatar represents different everyday concerns, climate awareness levels, and the ability to take climate action. The avatar guides the users on the platform through a climate story that connects climate impacts to everyday life in the present and the future, seeking a balance between a realistic and hopeful framing of the climate crisis. This feature increases the feeling of personal identification, which is essential to raising awareness about climate change while avoiding climate anxiety. Figure 18: Personalization and storytelling elements in the CmC prototype. Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 2 Projects 42 43 Reflection on climate data The avatar’s journey exposes citizens to climate data, such as the intensity and frequency of heat waves. Data are presented in relation to the avatar’s experience with climate impacts in the urban environment, creating a concrete connection between scientific data and personal experiences. Sharing opinions with others Throughout the journey, citizens are invited to share with other users and with the municipality their experiences and perceptions about climate impacts. This feature helps build climate literacy and awareness as citizens acknowledge the impacts of climate change on their living environment. Users can also see the opinions and perceptions of fellow citizens, creating a sense of community. Motivation and action At the end of the journey, citizens are invited to select a climate action initiative to help their avatar address a climate impact in the climate story. This feature presents citizens with various climate action options, individual and collective, without forcing them to take action. The CmC prototype has been tested at various moments, receiving positive feedback. Users appreciate avatar and storytelling as well as the story timeline with present and future climate impacts. Questions about platform ownership have been raised, indicating the importance of embedding participatory tools meaningfully in decision-making processes to avoid tokenism. Since our project cannot ensure commitment to participation processes, we focus on creating opportunities for action and connections with public initiatives, and private organisations. Figure 19: Reflection on climate data elements in the CmC prototype. Figure 20: Sharing opinions with others elements in the CmC prototype. Figure 21: Motivation and action elements in the CmC prototype. CHAPTER 2 Projects 45 BIO-CiVo 2.5 Team members: Juliana Gonçalves Geertje Slingerland Isabella Jaramillo Diaz Jing Spaaij Maria Gil Falcon Inger van Dok Anja Overdiek Mike Duijn Goal Research and process As the climate crisis deepens, the importance of biodiversity is increasingly being recognised. Large municipalities such as Rotterdam and The Hague have already implemented monitoring plans and measures to strengthen biodiversity. However, these measures often do not receive public support as citizens perceive biodiversity as complex, boring, and distant from their daily life, with an equivocal understanding that improving biodiversity is the same as increasing common greenery. Yet, citizens’ efforts are needed for an integrated approach to biodiversity because roughly 60% of the urban environment is privately owned. This project takes individual and community concerns of citizens as an entry point to discuss biodiversity. It explores how map-based tools can represent citizen concerns related to local biodiversity scenarios. The research develops and studies a mapbased prototype with which citizens can explore how biodiversity relates to their values and interests, to then create their own local biodiversity scenarios. This project adopted a researchthrough-design approach embedded in a participatory process to design and test interactive interfaces for citizen engagement in biodiversity action. Oud-Mathenesse was selected as the case study neighbourhood, due to the existing research network and ongoing greening activities there. The project activities were organised in three work packages (WP): • WP1 aimed at providing a prototype for scenario evaluation. The focus of this package was on interfaces for citizen interaction with a proposed biodiversity scenario. Here, we looked for the most suitable spatial scale for such interaction. • WP2 aimed at providing a prototype for scenario building. To support citizens in the challenging task Try the prototypes! tinyurl.com/ BioCiVoBuild tinyurl.com/ BioCiVoEvaluate CHAPTER 2 Projects Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 2 Projects 46 47 Output BIO-CiVo led to the following outputs: • Design of two digital Figma prototypes, high-fidelity, to evaluate and build local biodiversity scenarios. • Dissemination of project and user testing of prototypes during TU Delft Dies week, AMS Scientific Conference, Citizen Science Lunch, Lentefeest, and TU Delft Climate Action Festival. • Organisation of local community festival “Lentefeest” in collaboration with citizen organisation Mathenesse aan de Maas (MaM). Figure 22: Participants testing the first version of the BIO-CiVo prototype. Citizen Voice | 2025 of creating their own scenarios, elements that stir or hinder scenario building were identified. This package also leveraged on the findings from WP1 about scale. • WP3 aimed at providing guidelines for the integration of the prototypes developed in WP1 and 2 into participatory approaches to biodiversity action, following the BULL framework (Slingerland, Overdiek, 2023). Both prototypes were developed in iterative cycles and tested at various stages, with students, researchers and finally the community in OudMathenesse. As a final step, the BIOCiVo prototype was tested during the Lentefeest, a community festival organised as part of the project. The prototype was made available on a Figma interactive prototype to continue support in planning biodiversity collective efforts after the research. Figure 23: Personalization and storytelling elements in the BIO-CiVo prototype. Figure 24: Clear and accessible information elements in the BIO-CiVo prototype. Personalization and storytelling The first part of the prototype is a personality test where users find out which of the 10 selected Rotterdam species (plants or animals) match their personality. The chosen species then describes the current biodiversity threats in the neighbourhood. Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 2 Projects 48 49 Figure 25: Designing their own scenario elements in the BIO-CiVo prototype. Clear and accessible information In the second part, users explore two biodiversity scenarios: a concretebased public square and a grey building façade. They are accompanied by their “personality specie”. Through multiple layers, including a layer of grass or hydroponics (for the concrete square and building façade, respectively), a layer of non-edible plans, a layer of edible plans, and a layer of people/recreational activities users can explore the biodiversity scenarios from multiple perspectives. These layers aim to illustrate different ‘types’ of green. Each layer has a set of indicators that create a biodiversity score (Biodiversity Thermometer), including water usage, maintenance, multifunctional space usage, heat stress, and construction cost. The layers fit on top of each other, creating a full biodiversity scenario. Partial scenarios can also be assessed by combinations of 2 or 3 layers. Sharing opinions Finally, the last part of the prototype asks users to evaluate the scenario. Users first evaluate the value of the current situation (i.e., the concrete square and the grey building facade) by giving it a score between 1 and 5. Then, they describe what activities they imagine they would do here if this place were in their neighbourhood. They are also asked to rank the layers by importance, choose which layers to implement, and evaluate how valuable each layer is to their neighbourhood. A box for suggestions is also provided. Designing their own scenarios As a next step, users are guided to the second prototype, where they can start creating their own biodiversity scenario. They are also offered the opportunity to connect with local initiatives for biodiversity, to start implementing an existing or a new scenario. The scenario designing happens in an abstract environment and uses the same design elements (layers and thermometer) to create and give some feedback on the design. This scenario can then be evaluated by other users as explained before. Figure 26: Sharing opinions elements in the BIO-CiVo prototype. Lentefeest As the culminating public moment of the BIO-CiVo project, the Lentefeest (Spring Festival) held on May 25th, 2024, in Serumpark (Oud-Mathenesse, Rotterdam) offered an ideal setting to engage directly with residents in a festive, informal atmosphere. Co-organised by student assistants from the Citizen Voice team and local residents from the citizen organisation Mathenesse aan de Maas (MaM), the event served both as a celebration of local culture and a testbed for the final version of the biodiversity prototype. Approximately 150 visitors attended the festival, which featured 23 booths, including ten showcasing green initiatives, a diverse food program prepared by residents, and live performances by local bands. This setting enabled easy access to participate in the testing and meaningful interaction with the prototype. During the preparation, feedback from a local resident helped contextualise the scenarios and inform important adjustments to the prototype. At the festival, visitors from all ages explored the tools and engaged in conversations about biodiversity. The presence of Mayor Aboutaleb, who engaged with various booths and initiatives, further validated the relevance of local voices in shaping biodiversity policy. Through this setting, the Lentefeest illustrated how biodiversity can be brought closer to people’s everyday concerns and neighbourhood dynamics. 49 Figure 27: Pictures from the Lentefeest. Impact 3 This chapter presents Citizen Voice’s commitment to create a wide range of positive impact. Through events, open-source practices, research, and public engagement, we work to create processes that are transparent, trustworthy, and adaptable, ensuring that participation not only informs better decisions but also strengthens communities and civic trust. Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 3 Impact 64 65 When citizens and communities speak, share, and act, cities become more just, vibrant, and resilient. We therefore stand for decisions grounded in lived experience, where the knowledge of residents guides policies, plans, and designs. We embrace digital tools to expand participation and open the door to new voices, ensuring inclusivity in every step, but remain critical of their impacts and limitations. We commit to creating processes that are open, transparent, and accountable, where every voice can be heard, and where resources serve those who need them most. Above all, we believe that participation builds trust, and trust builds communities. Local perspectives help ensure that planning and design remains sensitive to environmental, cultural, and social contexts. By involving residents directly, decision-makers gain access to invaluable on-the-ground insights, leading to decisions and designs that are more relevant and responsive to real community needs. Participation also strengthens accountability and transparency, ensuring that resources are allocated more effectively and that public services respond to the lived realities of communities. This process also enhances legitimacy and acceptance, as people are more likely to support and trust policies they have helped shape. At the same time, inclusive processes build civic engagement and trust, inspiring citizens to remain active in public life. Working together fosters a sense of solidarity and shared identity, while also empowering individuals with new skills and knowledge about how to influence change. We therefore strive to create a wide range of positive impacts that extend far beyond selected projects and outputs. This includes outreach efforts and open repositories as well as academic and media presence. Citizen Voice launch event Introduction In April 2025, we hosted our first major event, bringing together over 50 academics, practitioners, and students from diverse disciplines. Together, we explored questions at the intersections of citizen and community engagement in planning and design, digital participation technologies and open science, and transdisciplinary and participatory research. The event also featured an interactive exhibition, where participants had the opportunity to engage with our digital prototypes and a mini-version of the ParticipAIte installation. The workshop fostered rich discussions on barriers, enablers, and emerging trends in these areas, culminating in a collective position paper: “Citizen Voice in Action: Insights on Public Participation, Digital Technologies, and Transdisciplinarity in Urban Research and Practice.” Beyond the formal outcomes, the event was celebrated for its warm, collegial atmosphere and the depth of dialogue it inspired. Participants valued the opportunity to connect across fields, and students especially expressed enthusiasm for the themes, noting how rarely such perspectives are addressed in current curricula. The energy and ideas shared during the day continue to fuel ongoing collaborations and inspire new approaches to participatory urban research and practice. CHAPTER 3 Impact Figure 38: Citizen Voice Launch Event. Figure 37: Citizen Voice Launch Event. 6464 CHAPTER 3 Impact Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 3 Impact 66 67 Links to our materials Open access Our mission to create meaningful societal impact is inseparable from our commitment to open access. We believe that knowledge, tools, and data should be shared widely so they can be built upon, adapted, and applied in diverse contexts beyond our own work. To ensure transparency and reproducibility, we maintain an open GitHub repository containing the source code of our tools. This allows researchers, practitioners, and community members to inspect, reuse, and improve our solutions, fostering collective innovation. Complementing our code repository, we use Zenodo to host and share other outputs of our work, such as reports, academic outputs, and supporting materials. Zenodo provides persistent identifiers (DOIs) to ensure long-term accessibility and citability, enabling others to reference and integrate our contributions into their own projects. Through these open access practices, we aim not only to advance our own research goals but also to empower others to address challenges, adapt our methods, and amplify impact across disciplines and sectors. Zenodo: https://zenodo. org/communities/ tudelftcitizenvoice Github: https://github.com/ Citizens-Collective Figure 39: Groups discussing at the Citizen Voice launch event. Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 3 Impact 68 69 Academic impact Event: Climate Action Festival On June 10th, the TU Delft Climate Action Programme held its first Climate Action Festival, bringing together over 100 researchers, innovators, and environmental enthusiasts. The event was a great success, promoting collaboration and inspiring sustainable action. Citizen Voice was present with a demonstrator, presenting our tools and insights into how to engage citizens in urban climate action. Event: TU Delft Science Day The Science Day is the day when the TU Delft Campus transforms into one large world of discovery. Every year, we welcome thousands of visitors and explore the fascinating world of science and technology together. Citizen Voice participated in the 2025 edition Workshop: Digital Engagement in Times of Climate Crisis The workshop was informed by insights from the CmC and BioCiVo projects. Approximately 20 attendees explored our prototypes and contributed their own experiences with tools, methods, and platforms related to citizen science, community engagement, and biodiversity initiatives. These insights were crucial in both projects to advance our understanding of how people engage with technology. Presentation: Citizen Voices in Climate Action: The role of interface design in digital engagement @ Reinventing the City AMS conference 2024 This presentation shared preliminary results from the CmC and BioCiVo projects, focusing on citizen Figure 40: Citizen Voice at Climate Action Festival and TU Delft Science Day. Figure 42: Drawings made by children at the TU Delft Science Day. engagement in climate action. Taking a user-centred approach to analyse over ten digital platforms, we explored the research question of what supports or hinders citizens from participation in climate action. From this analysis, we developed design guidelines across four themes: awareness and framing, supporting individual and collective action, effective use of data, and clear navigation and visuals. These guidelines were used in the prototypes developed in CmC and BioCiVo. The presentation can be found on Citizen Voice’s Zenodo folder. Workshop: I’m not a human sensor! @ Reinventing the City AMS conference 2024 The workshop drew on the CmC and BioCiVo projects. Around 15 participants had the opportunity to engage with 6868 CHAPTER 3 ImpactCHAPTER 3 Impact Figure 41: Poster of the ‘Digital Engagement in Times of Climate Crisis’ workshop. 69 Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 3 Impact 70 71 our prototypes and share examples of tools, approaches, and platforms they had used in citizen science, participation, and biodiversity projects. Together, we mapped existing platforms, discussed their applications in citizen science processes, identified common challenges, and brainstormed potential solutions. Figure 43: Citizen Voice’s workshop at Reinventing the City AMS conference. Figure 44: Citizen Voice at Reinventing the City AMS conference. Paper: No-one-size-fits-all Gonçalves, J. E., Ioannou, I., & Verma, T. (2024). No one-size-fits-all: Multi-actor perspectives on public participation and digital participatory platforms. Philosophical Transactions A, 382(2285), 20240111. 10.1098/rsta.2024.0111 MSc thesis: Urban Voices Ioannou, I. (2022). Urban Voices. Citizen Voice: An innovative Open-source Map-based tool for effective public participation. https://resolver.tudelft. nl/uuid:4a44c02e-57a1-4e26-8e53b942c5dd9ecf 7070 Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 3 Impact 72 73 2023 2024 In the media Figure 45: Bruno the bench at Dutch Design Week 2023. 2023 2024 CityClimate meets CreativeCoding October 2023, Hamburg Three-day excursion of the intersections of art, science and climate data featured international and Hamburg-based art works, projects, workshops, serious games and experiments. The ParticipAIte project was exhibited in this event. www.citysciencelab.hamburg/projects/ccmcc DREAM.DISCOVER.DESIGN. October 2023, Eindhoven Exhibition curated by TU Delft - Industrial Design Engineering at Dutch Design Week 2023. Bruno the bench (part of the ParticipAIte project) was exhibited in this event. www.tudelft.nl/en/2023/io/november/ dreamdiscoverdesign 7272 Digital tools foster citizen engagement on urban climate action Interview by Citizen Science, TU Delft Juliana Gonçalves and Geertje Slingerland discuss the opportunities and limitations of using digital technologies for citizen engagement. www.tudelft.nl/en/citizen-science/blog/digitaltools-foster-citizen-engagement-on-urbanclimate-action Figure 46: CityClimate meets CreativeCoding Festival. Giving citizens a voice in local biodiversity Interview by Research Stories, TU Delft Our team reflects on the process and insights from the BIO-CiVo project, which focuses on understanding how citizens engage with urban biodiversity through the use of digital tools. www.tudelft.nl/en/architecture-and-the-builtenvironment/research/research-stories/givingcitizens-a-voice-in-local-biodiversity Citizens meet Climate: Empowering Citizens in Climate Action Featured in Design United, 4TU CmC was featured in the magazine that enhances the innovative strength of the Dutch creative industry by bridging the gap between design research and the design community. www.4tu.nl/du/projects/Citizens-meet-ClimateEmpowering-Citizens-in-Climate-Action/ 73 Ethical guidelines 4 This chapter details our approach to ethics and our ethical guidelines. Including ethical principles for creating engagement surveys and suggestions for survey creators and respondents. Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 4 Ethical guidelines 76 77 Introduction Ethical principles for citizen engagement surveys Purpose The development of ethical guidelines for citizen engagement surveys is essential to ensure integrity, respect, and fairness in participatory urban planning processes. Surveys serve as key instruments for gathering the voices of diverse communities, and ethical considerations must guide their design and implementation. These guidelines are especially relevant when working with digital tools, which present both opportunities and challenges in maintaining trust, equity, and privacy. Context: growing importance of participatory urban planning Participatory urban planning is becoming increasingly central to the These are normative values that should guide all aspects of the survey process, whether you’re designing, deploying, or analyzing. “What core ethical values should we uphold when engaging citizens?” Ethical principles are the foundation of responsible citizen engagement, especially in contexts involving data collection, digital tools, and participatory decision-making. These guidelines are important because they help safeguard the dignity, rights, and voices of individuals who contribute to design of inclusive and sustainable cities. It empowers citizens to meaningfully influence decisions about their environments. However, the quality of participation depends on ethical, transparent, and thoughtful engagement practices. While digital technologies have broadened the reach and flexibility of participatory tools, they have also introduced new ethical challenges related to accessibility, data ownership, and equitable inclusion. The ethical principles outlined in this document have been developed through the ongoing work of the Citizen Voice initiative, which has identified key factors necessary for maintaining ethical integrity in participatory processes. planning processes. They ensure that participation is not only effective but also fair and respectful. These principles are intended for researchers, practitioners, city officials, designers, and anyone involved in conducting or facilitating engagement surveys. Whether you are designing, deploying, or analyzing a survey, these high-level, normative values serve as a compass to guide ethical choices and uphold public trust in participatory processes. Transparency • Clearly explain why you are involving people and what decisions will be made. • Show how the process works, step by step, in a way everyone can understand. • Don’t just involve people as a formality. Show them how their opinions actually influence decisions. Informed consent and privacy • Tell participants what data you collect, why you collect it, and what will happen with it. • Let people join anonymously if possible. • Allow them to leave at any time without negative consequences. • Be clear about who owns the data and if it will be shared or published. Inclusivity and accessibility • Use simple, inclusive language and different formats like audio, video, or pictures. • Provide translations, accessible designs, and technical support for everyone. • Think about digital skills and physical or mental disabilities when designing your tools and activities. • Reduce barriers by offering things like childcare, transport help, flexible meeting times, or trusted community contacts. Trust and reciprocity • Work with local community leaders or organisations who can connect you with people. • Always communicate back to participants what decisions were made and how their input helped, in clear language. • Engage in continuous cycles: inform people, gather their input, reflect on it, adapt your plans, and keep them updated. Open knowledge sharing • Share your methods, tools, and findings so others can learn and build on your work. • This avoids repeating the same work and encourages new ideas and solutions. • Use open-source platforms whenever you can, to keep the process transparent and collaborative. Ethical oversight • Researchers must follow their university’s ethics guidelines. • Collaborators from other organisations should check with their own ethics committees. • Treat ethics as an ongoing and reflective process, not just a form to fill out. 77 Figure 47: Material from a workshop. Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 4 Ethical guidelines 78 79 Guidelines for survey creators These are concrete, practical instructions tailored to the different stages of building and conducting a survey. They answer the question: “What should I do, step by step, to ensure the survey is ethically sound?” Before designing the survey • Co-Define Goals: Collaborate with community partners to define the survey’s purpose, scope, and expectations. Ensure alignment on whether the aim of participation is democratic engagement or problem-solving. Engage in clear communication, trust, and transparency from the outset to build mutual understanding and accountability. • Design for Equity: Apply universal design principles that accommodate diverse levels of education, language proficiency, and access to technology. Participation should be relevant to the everyday lives of citizens and tailored to the specific context and needs of the groups involved. Consider both formal and informal communication styles to reduce risks of exclusion or stigmatization. • Anticipate Risks: Identify and address power imbalances that may affect participation. Recognize the potential harms, including the risks of stigmatization, and plan to mitigate them through inclusive processes and moderation/ facilitation strategies that ensure all voices are heard. • Plan for Compensation: Acknowledge and fairly compensate the time, knowledge, and lived experiences of participants, especially those from marginalized communities. Be transparent about the basis of compensation, recognizing the tension between extrinsic and intrinsic motivations. • Establish Feedback Mechanisms: Design the survey with built-in feedback loops to communicate outcomes clearly and maintain engagement over time. Emphasize responsiveness and continuity as ongoing commitments. Where possible, develop new partnerships and support local networks to sustain dialogue beyond the survey period. During survey deployment • Support Participation: Provide both human and technological assistance to ensure accessibility for all participants. Consider the use of moderators or facilitators to guide participation, reduce misunderstandings, and foster a welcoming environment, especially in settings with varying levels of familiarity with digital tools. • Ensure Anonymity Options: Offer the ability for respondents to remain anonymous and clarify how their data will be handled. Address expectation management by setting clear boundaries for privacy, influence, and use of information. • Communicate Clearly: Explain the survey’s purpose, estimated time commitment, and voluntary nature in plain, inclusive language. Aim for clear communication, transparency, and trust-building to foster confidence in the process. Consider the tone, formal or informal, depending on the context, to avoid alienating any groups. • Respond to Concerns: Provide timely responses to participant questions or issues during the survey. Actively monitor participation levels and flag possible challenges such as technical access barriers or feelings of exclusion. Recognize that being included is not the same as feeling genuinely engaged or influential in the process. • Promote Inclusiveness: Use a mix of digital and physical participation modes where possible. Ensure the process accommodates different levels of tech access and comfort, recognizing contextual needs and use cases. Leverage top-down and bottom-up approaches to avoid power imbalances. After the survey • Close the Feedback Loop: Publish results in accessible, plain-language formats that reach the participants and wider public. Share not only what was said but how it influenced decisions, maintaining continuity and responsiveness. Reaffirm transparency by making clear how feedback shaped actions. • Document Impact: Clearly state how the findings shaped outcomes. Link this process back to the multi-dimensional assessment of effectiveness, capturing both outcomes and how inclusive or engaging the process was. This ensures public participation is seen as meaningful, not symbolic. • Store Data Responsibly: Ensure data is securely stored and anonymized before any form of sharing or analysis. Respect privacy and institutional commitments to ethical stewardship of community knowledge. • Reflect and Learn: Conduct internal reviews to assess what worked and what didn’t. Evaluate both the process and the outcomes, and update your practices accordingly. Build and share a knowledge base that supports a more equitable playing field in future participatory work. Practical guidelines: • You are a guest; always be respectful. • Introduce yourself as a student (students are generally seen as approachable). • Manage expectations: explain clearly the purpose of your street interviews. • Think carefully about your words to avoid stigmatizing anyone. • If people don’t want to participate, don’t take it personally. Stay polite and thank them for their time. 79 Figure 48: User test. Citizen Voice | 2025 CHAPTER 4 Ethical guidelines 80 81 Guidelines for survey respondents These are recommendations designed to help individuals understand their rights and responsibilities when participating in a survey. They answer the question: “What should I know and do to participate ethically, safely, and meaningfully in a citizen engagement survey?” Before participating • Understand the Survey Purpose: Know what the survey aims to achieve, what topics it will cover, and how your responses will be used. A good process will share clear and transparent communication upfront. Look for information about who is conducting the survey and what decisions it may inform. • Clarify Your Rights: You have the right to participate voluntarily, decline to answer any question, and exit the survey at any time. Ensure you understand how your anonymity and confidentiality will be protected. • Assess Relevance to Your Life: Surveys should aim to connect to the everyday experiences of citizens. If something feels disconnected or unclear, you are encouraged to seek clarification before beginning. During participation • Engage Authentically: Provide honest, thoughtful responses. Feeling included is not just about being asked, it’s about knowing your voice matters. Your lived experience can shape better decisions. • Ask for Help If Needed: If a question is confusing, too technical, or not accessible to you (e.g. due to language or format), ask for clarification or assistance. Effective surveys often have moderators or facilitators who can help. • Know You Have Influence: Participation should not feel symbolic. Ethical surveys aim to ensure inclusiveness and create opportunities for you to influence the process, not just complete a form. After participation • Stay Informed: You can ask how your input contributed to the final results. Feedback loops, where findings are shared with participants, are a sign of respect and accountability in public participation. • Give Feedback: Your experience matters. Sharing what worked and what didn’t helps make future surveys more inclusive, accessible, and engaging. Some organizations also review the process to learn and improve. • Look for Outcomes: Watch for how the results of the survey are shared or used. Surveys committed to transparency, responsiveness, and continuity will show how your voice contributed to change. Final recommendations 1 Embed Ethics Early and Often: Ethical engagement must begin at the design stage and evolve continuously. 2 Value Citizen Contributions: Compensate time and insights, and show respect for all participants. 3 Build Ethical Infrastructure: Develop flexible ethics protocols that accommodatAe digital and experimental approaches. 5 Recognize Diverse Stakeholders: Include voices often left out of traditional processes, especially “silent stakeholders” like nature or future generations. 6 Design Beyond Compliance: View ethical engagement not as a box-checking task but as a deeply relational, long-term process. 4 Train Practitioners: Invest in education and training around participatory methods, especially digital and inclusive tools.