What are the seven types of community participation
Community participation—it's one of those phrases people throw around without really thinking about what it means. But at its core, it's how regular folks get involved in decisions that actually affect their neighborhoods, their health, their lives. There's this framework, seven distinct types, that helps make sense of it all. Sherry Arnstein came up with the original idea back in 1969, calling it the "Ladder of Citizen Participation." Others have tweaked it since, but the basic categories still hold up. If you're trying to design engagement that's actually ethical and effective, understanding these rungs isn't optional—it's essential.
What are the seven types of community participation?
So here's how it breaks down. These seven types stack up like a ladder, each rung meaning more citizen power than the last. You've got Manipulation, Therapy, Informing, Consultation, Placation, Partnership, and finally Citizen Control. The first three? Basically non-participation or just going through the motions. The last four actually mean something real.
| Level | Type | Description | Degree of Power |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Manipulation | Citizens are placed on advisory committees or boards to "educate" them or engineer their support. Powerholders control the agenda and. | Non-Participation |
| 2 | Therapy | Citizens are involved in group activities that focus on changing their own attitudes or behaviors, rather than addressing the root causes of problems. | Non-Participation |
| 3 | Informing | Citizens are told about decisions that have already been made. This is a one-way flow of information with no opportunity for feedback. | Tokenism |
| 4 | Consultation | Citizens are asked for their opinions through surveys, public meetings, or hearings. However, there is no guarantee that their input will be used. | Tokenism |
| 5 | Placation | A small number of citizens are placed on decision-making bodies, but the powerholders still hold the majority and can override their votes. | Tokenism |
| 6 | Partnership | Power is redistributed through negotiation. Citizens and powerholders share planning and decision-making responsibilitiestd> | Citizen Power |
| 7 | Citizen Control | Citizens have full managerial power over a program or institution. They control policy, personnel, and budgeting. | Citizen Power |
What is the difference between tokenism and genuine participation?
Tokenism is basically a cheap trick. You make people feel heard but their opinions don't actually matter. The feedback's collected, maybe even typed up nicely. Then nothing happens with it. Genuine participation? That's when authority actually transfers—real power moves into community hands. Think about it this way: a town holds a public hearing, everyone speaks their mind, but the final plan looks exactly like what was drawn up before anyone said a word. That's Consultation, textbook tokenism. Now imagine the community co-designing the project alongside the agency, or better yet, running the whole thing themselves. That's Partnership or Citizen Control. The real tell is simple: can the community's input change the outcome?
How can a community move from consultation to partnership?
Getting from Level 4 to Level 6 ain't automatic. It takes deliberate work, a real shift in who holds the cards. Here's what that usually looks like:
- Establishing formal agreements: A memorandum of understanding that outlines shared decision-making roles.
- Building community capacity: Providing training and resources so community members can participate as equals.
- Creating joint committees: Ensuring equal representation from both the agency and the community on steering committees.
- Committing to transparency: Sharing all data, budgets, and constraints openly so that negotiations are based on facts.
- Using conflict resolution mechanisms: Agreeing on how disputes will be resolved before they arise.
Checklist for evaluating your community participation project
- Are we sharing information before decisions are made (Informing) or after?
- Do we have a mechanism to collect and document community feedback?
- Is there a clear process for how community input will be used or rejected?
- Do community members have a vote on the final decision?
- Are we providing resources (e.g., childcare, translation, stipends) to enable participation?
- Have we defined what level of participation we are aiming for (e.g., Partnership vs. Consultation)?
Frequently Asked Questions
Why is "Therapy" considered a type of participation?
Therapy's on the ladder because it involves people in groups, sure. But the real goal? "Curing" them of their bad feelings about whatever project's coming down the pike. It's non-participation dressed up as help. Treats citizens like patients, not partners.
Is "Informing" always bad?
Not at all. Informing is actually necessary—you can't get started without it. The trouble starts when it's the only thing you do. Useful engagement layers it with real stuff, like consultation or actual partnership.
Can a project use multiple types of participation simultaneously?
Yeah, absolutely. A city could inform folks about a new park plan, consult them on what features they want, and partner with a neighborhood group to handle ongoing programming. The trick is being straight about which type applies to which decision.
Who created the seven types of community participation?
That was Sherry Arnstein, back in 1969. Her article "A Ladder of Citizen Participation" in the Journal of the American Planning Association originally had eight rungs—"Delegated Power" was an extra one. But these seven are what everybody talks about now.
What is the most effective type of participation for long-term change?
Partnership and Citizen Control usually win for lasting, fair outcomes. But honestly, it depends. Resources, context, and whether the people in charge are willing to let go of some authority all matter a ton.
Short Summary
- Seven Types Defined: The seven types are Manipulation, Therapy, Informing, Consultation, Placation, Partnership, and Citizen Control, ranging from non-participation to full citizen power.
- Tokenism vs. Power: The first three types (Manipulation, Therapy, Informing) and Consultation/Placation are forms of tokenism; only Partnership and Citizen Control represent genuine power.
- Practical Application: Use the checklist to assess your project's current level of participation and identify steps to move toward partnership or citizen control.
- Key Insight: Honesty about the level of participation is critical. Claiming partnership while practicing consultation erodes trust and community relationships.