Public Participation: More than a Method?; Comment on “Harnessing the Potential to Quantify Public Preferences for Healthcare Priorities through Citizens’ Juries”

Document Type : Commentary


1 Faculty of Health, Social Care and Education, St George’s, University of London and Kingston University, London, UK

2 Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK

3 University of Warwick, London, UK

4 University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa


While it is important to support the development of methods for public participation, we argue that this should not be at the expense of a broader consideration of the role of public participation. We suggest that a rights based approach provides a framework for developing more meaningful approaches that move beyond public participation as synonymous with consultation to value the contribution of lay knowledge to the governance of health systems and health research.


Main Subjects

  1. Whitty J, Burton P, Kendall E, Ratcliffe J, Wilson A, Littlejohns P, et al. Harnessing the potential to quantify public preferences for healthcare priorities through citizens’ juries. Int J Health Policy Manag 2014; 3: 57–62. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2014.61
  2. Evans D. Patient and public involvement in research in the English NHS: A documentary analysis of the complex interplay of evidence and policy. Evid Policy 2014; 10: 361-77. doi: 10.1332/174426413x662770
  3. Mockford C, Staniszewska S, Griffiths F, Herron-Marx S. The impact of patient and public involvement on UK NHS health care: a systematic review. International Journal for Quality in Health Care 2012; 24: 28-38. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzr066
  4. Oliver SR, Rees RW, Clarke-Jones L, Milne R, Oakley AR, Gabbay J, et al. A multidimensional conceptual framework for analysing public involvement in health services research. Health Expect 2008; 11: 7284. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00476.x
  5. Arnstein AR. A Ladder of Citizen Participation. J Am Inst Plann 1969; 35: 16-24. doi: 10.1080/01944366908977225
  6. Wilsdon J, Wynne B, Stilgoe J. The Public Value of Science: Or how to ensure that science really matters. London: Demos; 2005.
  7. Cooke B, Kothari U. Participation: The New Tyranny? London: Zed Books; 2001.
  8. Mosse D. ‘People’s knowledge’, participation and patronage: operations and representations in rural development. In: Cooke B, Kothari U, editors. Participation: The New Tyranny? London: Zed Books; 2001. p. 16-35.
  9. Wynne B. May the sheep safely graze? A reflexive view of the expert-lay knowledge divide. In:  Lash S, Szerszynski B, Wynne B, editors. Risk, Environment and Modernity: Towards a New Ecology. London: Sage; 1996. p. 44-83.
  10. United Nations (UN). United nations declaration of human rights [internet]. 1948. Available  from.
  11. United Nations (UN). International covenant on economic, social and cultural rights [internet]. New York: United Nations; 1966. Available from:
  12. United Nations (UN). Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (UNCESCR), General Comment 14 (Twenty-second session, The right to the highest attainable standard of health. UN Document E/C.12/2000/4. Geneva: United Nations; 2002.
  13. Yamin AE. Beyond compassion: the central role of accountability in applying a human rights framework to health. Health Hum Rights 2008; 10: 1-20.
  14. Potts H. Participation and the Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health. Human Righs Centre, University of Essex; 2008.
  15. Potts H. Accountability and the Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health. Human Rights Centre, University of Essex; 2008.
  16. Yamin AE. Suffering and Powerlessness: The Significance of Promoting Participation in Rights-Based Approaches to Health. Health Hum Rights 2009; 11: 5-22. doi: 10.2307/40285214
  17. Bovens M. Two concepts of accountability: accountability as a virtue and as a mechanism. West Eur Polit 2010; 33: 946-67. doi: 10.1080/01402382.2010.486119
  18. Cleary SM. Resources, attitudes and culture: an understanding of the factors that influence the functioning of accountability mechanisms in primary health care settings. BMC Health Serv Res 2013; 13: 320. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-13-320