We have formed an ad hoc working group of people across different roles and functions across the University with a passion for meaningful engagement in and with research to move this forward. However, we hope this can be the start of a wider, ongoing dialogue that shapes future activity.

The latest part of this programme NHS@75 is further developing the archive and understandings of its potential reach and use through a series of co-produced artworks with local communities in Manchester, engagement workshops and interviews.

Established in December 2021, this MSIG provides a supportive community of social researchers from across the UK who are interested in, or carry out, research using collaborative approaches, participatory methods or a co-design approach. Our organisers meet monthly to develop their focus and understanding of these methodological approaches. Our strength is in being a group of cross-sector, mixed-level, social researchers at different stages of our careers.

We focus on the practicalities of using and developing our research methods. The monthly meetings allow members to share their practice and/or seek advice from others. In addition, we identify annual priorities and organise events that are free and open to all.

The MSIG is organised by a group of social researchers committed to these methods. The activities, events and resources that are created and delivered are free and open to everybody interested in these approaches.

The National Centre for Research Methods is funded by the ESRC, and is made up of three hub institutions; the Universities of Southampton, Manchester and Edinburgh. This MSIG is facilitated by NCRM's Senior Engagement Manager Ali Hanbury who is based at UoM.

• Advice: Supporting Partnerships

• Guide: Working with Local Communities

• Toolkit: The Partnership Cycle

• Report: Taking stock of Engaged Learning: How universities are supporting community-based and service-learning

• Report: Lessons from the Enhancing Place-based Partnerships in Public Engagement programme (EPPE) programme

The central question addressed in Arnstein's work is the nature of citizen participation and its relevance to contemporary societal needs. Her fundamental assertion is that citizen participation is synonymous with citizen power. It signifies the reconfiguration of power structures to include those who have historically been excluded from political and economic decision-making processes. In essence, citizen participation is a strategy that enables marginalised citizens to play a deliberate role in shaping information sharing, goal setting, resource allocation, programme operation, and the distribution of benefits. It empowers them to advocate for significant social reforms that grant them a stake in the benefits of a prosperous society. 

Arnstein distinguishes between superficial participation and genuine empowerment, emphasising that meaningful participation is contingent on the redistribution of power. Mere participation rituals, devoid of real influence, maintain the status quo.  

Her typology encompasses eight levels of participation, ranging from manipulation and therapy to authentic citizen control:  

1. Manipulation: At this level, participation is a superficial façade. Power holders employ tactics to control and manipulate citizens' involvement, often with the aim of garnering support for predetermined decisions. Citizens' input is neither valued nor genuinely considered. 

2. Therapy: Similar to manipulation, therapy involves non-participation that masquerades as engagement. In this case, power holders offer token opportunities for citizens to participate, often framed as a form of "therapy" to educate or cure participants. These initiatives typically serve the interests of the powerful, rather than empowering citizens. 

3. Informing: In this level, citizens are informed about policies, programmes, and decisions, but it predominantly involves a one-way flow of information from authorities to citizens. There is no mechanism for feedback, negotiation, or influence, and the power dynamics remain largely unchanged. 

4. Consultation: Consultation represents a tokenistic form of participation where citizens may express their views, but the powerful have no obligation to act on them. The emphasis is on soliciting citizens' opinions, but there is no guarantee that their input will shape decisions or policies. 

5. Placation: This level of participation allows citizens to offer advice, but power holders retain the final say in decisions. Placation strategies aim to provide the appearance of inclusion while ensuring that the powerful maintain control over outcomes. 

6. Partnership: Partnership involves citizens negotiating with power holders and having the ability to engage in trade-offs. It represents a higher degree of citizen influence and allows for meaningful interactions between both groups. Organised power bases and resources are often essential for effective partnerships. 

7. Delegated Power: At this level, citizens obtain a significant say in decision-making processes. They may hold seats or positions of influence within the power structure and have a meaningful role in shaping policies and programs. 

8. Citizen Control: The highest level of participation, citizen control, entails the empowerment of citizens to make decisions and have full managerial power. Citizens govern policies, assets, and services and ensure accountability of programmes to the community. This level of participation is marked by self-governance. 

Nevertheless, Arnstein acknowledges that both the powerless and the powerful are not monolithic entities. They are characterised by diverse perspectives, competing interests, and fragmented subgroups. Her typology does not delve into the challenges associated with establishing representative and accountable citizen groups, which are essential for meaningful participation. 

The typology serves as a compelling reminder of the vital role of citizen participation in democratic systems. It highlights the need for a more profound examination of the obstacles preventing meaningful engagement. Arnstein's framework can guide efforts to evaluate the success of citizen participation initiatives and their impact on power dynamics and local governance. 

Arnstein's typology of citizen participation has significant implications for understanding citizen engagement within the context of devolution and local democracy. It highlights the importance of shifting power to include marginalised citizens, moving beyond tokenism, and promoting genuine citizen control.