38 – Quality of participatory processes and strengthening of citizen participation
Brief description of the commitment: in order to consolidate citizen participation in public policies, a governance mechanism will be established which will design and implement a plan aimed at strengthening such participation. This plan will include the definition of quality criteria applicable to different participatory areas and processes, it will promote their adoption, and seek to develop an ecosystem to measure citizen participation and the visibility of its effects, as well as the results of public policies.
In parallel, capacity building will be promoted in the teams responsible for coordinating and managing participation spaces, as well as the systematization and application of good practices that contribute to the ongoing improvements.
Likewise, the use of the digital environment will be promoted through the incorporation of the Digital Citizen Participation Platform. This initiative will intend to expand involvement opportunities, thus guaranteeing inclusive access for everyone, with special attention to vulnerable groups.
Asimismo, se fomentará el aprovechamiento del entorno digital mediante la incorporación de la Plataforma de Participación Ciudadana Digital. Esta iniciativa procurará ampliar las oportunidades de involucramiento, garantizando un acceso inclusivo para todas las personas, con especial atención a los grupos en situación de vulnerabilidad.
Finally, in the educational field, the revitalization of spaces for participation in the governance of university services inside the country will be promoted, recognizing their fundamental role in building an active and committed citizenry.
Organization leading the commitment: Agency for Electronic Government and Information Society (Agesic), National Institution for Human Rights and Ombudsman (INDDHH), University of the Republic (Udelar).
Supporting institution/organization: Intendencia de Canelones, Anong, IPRU, Universidad Centro Latinoamericano de Economía Humana (UCLAEH).
Responsible for the commitment: Daniel Mordecki, Executive Director of Agesic. Contact: direccion@agesic.gub.uy; Jimena Fernández, Director of the National Human Rights Institution. Contact: jfernandez@inddhh.gub.uy; Vice-Rector for Management, Udelar. Contact: prgestion@udelar.edu.uy
Technical Manager: Virginia Pardo, Information Society Area of Agesic. Contact: virginia.pardo@agesic.gub.uy ; Santiago Nuñez, Human Rights Institution. Contact: snunez@inddhh.gub.uy; Gabriel Kaplún, Udelar. Contact: gabriel.kaplun@fic.edu.uy
Actors:
Government: Executive Branch bodies that manage areas of citizen participation and develop participatory processes, second and third level of government through bodies that bring them together -Congress of Mayors, Plenary of Municipalities and National Decentralization Policy-.
Civil Society: Civil society organizations grouped in Anong, Honorary Advisory Council of Organized Civil Society of and for People with Disabilities (CAHD).
Academy: Udelar, Regional University Centers inside the country (CENURES).
Implementation period: September 2025 – June 2029.
Problem definition
What problem does the commitment intend to address?
The fundamental problem is the low level of citizen participation and consequently its low impact on the design and subsequent evaluation of public policies, particularly within the framework of the digital transformation of government and new ways of connecting with people.
Citizen participation is an essential component of modern democracies, as it allows citizens to influence public decision-making, strengthen institutional legitimacy, and promote transparency (Kaplún et al., 2024). In the digital context, this participation takes on new forms and possibilities, but it also faces structural and cultural challenges that require attention.
In Uruguay, according to the 2025 "Study on Institutionalized Citizen Participation," there is broad consensus on the importance of citizen participation in state decision-making: 9 out of 10 Uruguayans consider it as "very important" or "quite important." This assessment is also reflected in the high level of support for the existence of institutionalized spaces (86%).
However, effective participation is low: 8 out of 10 people report never having participated in these spaces.
In the case of the digital dimension, the same study reveals significant potential for deepening participatory processes. Among the main advantages are: greater reach, efficiency, and transparency; faster dissemination of information; the ability to manage large volumes of data; and reduced bureaucracy.
Despite this progress, digital participation also faces challenges, primarily those related to fundamental digital divides within the digital environment: gaps based on educational level and age, misinformation, loss of interpersonal connection, and limited visibility of existing platforms. It is worth noting that 82% of the population is unaware of the Citizen Participation Platform.
Another dimension of the problem is the role of the State and the public's perception of it. The majority (70%) believe that the state does "little" or "no" encouragement regarding citizen participation and that their opinions are not incorporated into public decisions (60%), an aspect that has a negative impact on their motivation to participate.
What are the causes of the problem?
The absence of a solid ecosystem, with consensual governance and adoption of uniform standard criteria are some of the reasons identified, as well as a set of dispersed efforts in different public institutions with different degrees of development and adoption of good participation practices.
Opportunities for citizen participation have declined in the country. The first national survey of citizen participation opportunities in 2017 reported more than 900, while the updated Citizen Participation Catalog in 2022 registered fewer than 500.
Furthermore, the aforementioned study has identified the main disincentives regarding participation reported by individuals, and the main ones are associated with institutional weaknesses:
Distrust in the effectiveness of institutional mechanisms.
Excessive bureaucracy, long waiting times and lack of response.
Perception of partisan political influence.
Regarding digital participation, the perceived inhibitors to the adoption of the Platform were:
Limited training and technical support on the strategic use of the platform.
Perception of the tool as a merely formal instrument and not useful for influencing real decisions.
Lack of full accessibility for all people with disabilities (technological, cognitive, communicational).
Weak institutional culture of digital participation, and of promoting processes with broad criteria of transparency and accountability.
Insufficient promotion and visibility of the platform and its participatory functionalities.
Additionally, in the spaces that are currently functioning, there are difficulties related to the lack of specific and cross-cutting guidelines, as well as the training and specialization of the technical teams that drive and promote these institutionalized spaces and environments. As an example, the process of the Honorary Advisory Council of Organized Civil Society for and by People with Disabilities stands out. In 2024, this council incorporated the Citizen Participation Platform as a tool to facilitate meetings and participation by the Council, yet its use has been limited by both its members and the general public. This prevents it from consolidating as an effective channel for exercising the rights established by the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).
Description of the commitment
What has been done so far to solve the problem?
The Uruguayan government has been developing and implementing institutionalized citizen participation mechanisms at different levels of government-national, departmental, and municipal-to improve the identification of needs, citizen oversight, and influence on public policy formulation. These mechanisms have provided an opportunity to enrich public policy management and decision-making processes, allowing public organizations to incorporate the knowledge, experiences, and perspectives of diverse social actors. Today, the catalog of institutionalized participation mechanisms includes more than 400 initiatives promoted by public institutions.
The Uruguayan government has also made progress in developing digital platforms aimed at deepening citizen participation, such as the Digital Citizen Participation Platform launched in 2019—based on the Decidim project—with the goal of enabling all citizens to participate in the various processes of designing and creating public policies. These days, public institutions have begun using the platform to create public policies with an open government approach, fostering national dialogues.
A baseline study of knowledge and perception of citizen participation in Uruguay has been developed.
However, as detailed in the problem description, despite all the efforts made, gaps in access, lack of knowledge and appreciation of the available mechanisms persist, limiting the transformative potential of these tools.
What solution does it propose?
It is proposed to develop a set of actions:
To establish a governance mechanism that allows for the design and implementation of a plan aimed at strengthening this participation.
To define and agree upon quality criteria applicable to the different areas and participatory processes, and promote their adoption.
To implement a training and experience exchange program that strengthens the capacities of the teams that manage spaces for participation.
To develop guidelines and best practices to integrate the open government approach, ensuring the replicability and sustainability of the model at the national and subnational levels, seeking the adaptation of participatory processes with an inclusive and transparent approach.
To develop a measurement ecosystem for citizen participation that allows for monitoring strategic management indicators and the outcomes of different policies, with special attention to the participation of people from vulnerable social groups. Within this framework, the Civil Society Participation Index will be expanded, adapting it to diverse territorial and social contexts, and strengthening its scope as a diagnostic and planning tool.
To implement an adoption plan for the Digital Platform for Citizen Participation, including communication, training, and accessibility and usability improvements. Specifically, a plan will be designed to strengthen the strategic use of this platform by the Honorary Advisory Council of Organized Civil Society for and by People with Disabilities, promoting digital empowerment and the direct influence of this group on public policy.
In the educational sphere, the aim is to promote the revitalization of spaces for participation in the governance of university services in the interior of the country, linking the academic agenda with territorial development and citizen engagement. Simultaneously, a strategy will be implemented to adopt an open government approach, fostering practices of transparency, collaboration, and participation in subnational governments.
What results do we want to achieve by implementing this commitment?
The main result of this commitment is to contribute directly to the increase in institutionalized citizen participation of people in general and of specific population groups in particular - such as the case of disability.
Another outcome will be the development of knowledge about institutionalized citizen participation.
To improve both the promotion and management of participation in public organizations, as well as the interest and effective demand in groups with specific sociodemographic characteristics.
In the educational field, it is expected to improve and expand the participation of university and non-university actors in the university governance structure.
The set of measures will also allow for the expansion of spaces for institutionalized citizen participation.
Commitment analysis
How will the commitment promote transparency?
Transparency will be promoted, in part, by strengthening the availability, visibility, and traceability of citizen participation mechanisms at the national and territorial levels. To this end, a standardized procedure will be established to document and publish deliberative processes, their outcomes, and the effective use of public input in decision-making. The adoption of an open government approach will also be promoted among key institutional actors, fostering active practices of transparency and accountability, and proactively publishing relevant data to facilitate social oversight. The digital participation platform will be enhanced to ensure its accessibility to all.
How will the commitment help foster accountability?
To ensure accountability, a system of indicators will be developed and refined to periodically evaluate the effectiveness, inclusivity, and representativeness of citizen participation mechanisms. The data collected will be integrated into accessible public reports, providing citizens and social organizations with concrete input to demand improvements or transformations in institutional processes. Furthermore, deliberative spaces for feedback between citizens and government will be included, where progress, obstacles, and results achieved can be presented. Strengthening the capacities of officials responsible for these spaces will be key to guaranteeing active listening practices, effective response, and institutional commitment.
How will the commitment improve citizen participation in defining, implementing, and monitoring solutions?
Citizen participation will be promoted through a strategy that expands opportunities for advocacy, especially for historically excluded groups such as people with disabilities. Awareness campaigns, training on rights, and independent use of the Digital Citizen Participation Platform will be implemented. At the local level, specific plans will be designed to revitalize spaces for university and subnational participation, integrating local agendas and strengthening the link between citizens and public decision-making. Likewise, the role of Advisory Councils will be consolidated as permanent channels for dialogue, representation, and policy proposals from organized civil society.
Milestone | Milestone description | Expected results | Completion date | Leading Institution |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Governance mechanism and agreed strengthening plan. | Citizen Participation Working Group made up of leading public institutions in Citizen Participation, Academia and Civil Society organizations. Agreed strengthening plan achieving at least the following results:
Adoption plan for the digital citizen participation platform developed. | June 2029 | Agesic |
2 | Evolved ecosystem for measuring participation (quality and effectiveness of citizen participation in Uruguay). | New measurement of the Institutionalized Citizen Participation Study Civil society participation index, evolved and with an expanded scope of application. | June 2027 | Agesic |
3 | Plan to strengthen the strategic use of the Citizen Participation Platform by the Honorary Advisory Council of Organized Civil Society of and for People with Disabilities (CAHD). | Participatory diagnosis on current use and barriers of the Platform. Strengthening plan and communication strategy validated and disseminated. Training and technical support plan for the strategic use of the platform to the CADH. Civil society organizations trained and using the platform. Accessibility and usability improvements implemented. | July 2027 | National Institution for Human Rights and Ombudsman. |
4 | Revitalizing the participation of society in university governance in the interior of the country. | Evaluation of current participation mechanisms Improvement plan built in together with inland communities Integrated digital tools that facilitate more inclusive, accessible, and continuous participation. | December 2028 | University of the Republic |
5 | Model for the adoption of an open government approach in subnational governments and the executive branch. | Model for applying the open government approach in subnational governments (Mapping of participatory areas convened by the government at the subnational level and visualization of existing ones, performance and quality indicators, integration of digital tools, study of local participation among others) Pilot in the Departmental Government of Canelones. Seminar with Departmental Governments. Open government approach model for executive branch agencies. | May 2028 to December 2028 | Agesic, Canelones Municipality, Open Government Group |