The impact area is about whether participation strengthens the individual’s democratic competencies through increased knowledge, self-confidence, empowerment and agency.

Democratic participation requires skills and experiences. They don’t come naturally, but grow when they are used, like a muscle that gets stronger the more it is exercised. When people participate, they develop knowledge, courage and agency, which in turn increases their desire and ability to take part in democracy.

Together, these dimensions show whether participation develops people’s ability to take an active part in democracy.

Self-confidence
Confidence that you have something to contribute to a democratic conversation or process and the courage to do so, even when you disagree. It involves the belief that you can influence society and that someone is listening.

Taking on new perspectives
Ability to relate curiously, openly and critically to the opinions and experiences of others through active listening and probing questions.

Knowledge
Knowledge of where and how to participate to create democratic change and understanding of social issues and relevant topics.

Action
The ability and willingness to translate knowledge and confidence into concrete engagement, either through participation in activities, changed behavior or clear intentions to act.

The impact area is about looking for whether attitudes are formed, expressed and developed in a process.

A healthy democracy is built on the fact that conversations and activities can influence attitudes. Not by making them the same, but by clarifying and creating more nuances.

When people talk to each other, attitudes have the opportunity to move, be tested and understand themselves in new ways. Therefore, attitude formation is closely related to the form and quality of the conversation.

This assesses whether democratic participation allows for opinions to become clear and develop.

Attitude visibility
The degree to which participants’ attitudes become visible and understandable to each other and to relevant decision makers.

Attitude development
The extent to which participants’ attitudes change or become more nuanced as a result of participation. This doesn’t necessarily mean that they change direction, but that they gain more perspectives and become more reflective.

Taken together, these dimensions show whether democratic participation creates a breeding ground for reflection, understanding and opinion formation.

The impact area is about participation building trust between people, with decision makers and with the system.

Trust is the basis for cooperation, dialog and for people to invest time and energy in finding common solutions. A society with a high level of trust is more cohesive because people believe that most people want the common good and respect the democratic rules of the game.

Together, these dimensions show whether participation creates or strengthens the trust that makes democratic communities and decisions possible.

Trust between participants
Trust that other participants in a democratic initiative or community adhere to democratic values such as listening, showing respect and seeking common solutions.

Trust in the people
Trust that the wider population respects the decisions of democracy and is loyal to the values that hold democracy together.

Trust in politicians and leadership
Trust that politicians, boards and leaders are competent and act in the interest of citizens, even when they encounter disagreement. It’s also about them seeking to solve society’s problems rather than looking after their own interests.

Trust in the political system
Trust that political institutions serve society and citizens, follow the law and treat everyone impartially.

The Impact area is about the impact of democratic participation on decisions and the public agenda.

In a well-functioning democracy, citizen participation must be able to influence the decisions that affect their lives. This applies to associations, local communities and politics in general.

Influence is therefore about the extent to which participation has consequences for public debate, media agendas and concrete decisions.

This assesses whether participation contributes to putting new topics on the agenda and whether decisions are influenced by the experiences and perspectives brought by participation.

Agenda setting
The extent to which the initiative raises awareness of a topic or issue in the public debate. This can be in an organization, in a local community or in society as a whole.

Decision footprint
The degree to which a democratic activity is taken up in a decision space, influences the outcome of a decision or leads to entirely new decisions that would otherwise not have been made.

Together, these dimensions show whether democratic participation has a real impact on societal conversations and decisions.

The impact area is about democratic participation making a lasting impression on societal structures, conversations and practices.

A strong democracy creates results that go beyond the individual meeting or project. When people participate, it can influence how we talk about an issue, how we organize around it and how we do things.

It assesses whether participation creates long-lasting effects in community conversations, methods and practices.

Community trail
Whether the initiative becomes visible to others, spreads to new contexts, inspires similar initiatives or leads to participants and organizers taking methods and ideas further.

Linguistic clues
Whether participation affects the way we talk about a topic and changes the understanding of the problem or the perceived possible solutions.

Together, these dimensions show whether democratic participation leaves lasting impressions and changes the way society thinks and acts.

The impact area is about the extent of participation and how participation is perceived by those who participate.

Democracy is legitimized by citizens actually participating in events, communities and processes. For this to happen, participation must be perceived as both meaningful and possible.

This area should also provide a picture of the scope of participation, to describe the method and the connection between it and the impact.

This assesses how many people participate, how they participate and how they experience participation.

Scope
The extent of participation in an activity or community measured as the number of participants and the time they invest, including how often and for how long they participate.

Accessibility
The extent to which citizens feel they have the opportunity to participate and whether there are barriers that prevent them from doing so.

Meaningfulness
The importance and relevance that participants attach to their participation. It includes the experience of being able to influence the content, feeling a sense of community, understanding the purpose and finding valuable meaning in participating.

The impact area is about the quality of the conversations that take place when people participate in democratic communities.

A good democracy is based on people being able to talk and work together to find solutions that go beyond their own interests. This requires conversations to be respectful, open and informed – and that it’s possible to agree despite differing views.

This assesses whether the participation includes conversations that are open, equal and based on knowledge and respect, and whether the conversations in a process contribute to dialog, learning and shared understanding.

Equal access
The extent to which participants have the opportunity to be heard, express their views and access relevant information.

Knowledge base
Whether an initiative is based on a relevant and balanced information base and whether participants have access to multiple viewpoints and sources.

Reasoned argumentation
Whether participants justify their views based on their own experience, knowledge or facts instead of simply stating opinions without arguments.

Respect for counter-arguments
The extent to which participants meet disagreement with curiosity, respect and openness and recognize disagreement as a democratic value.

Compromise seeking
Whether participants try to include different points of view in decisions and find solutions that benefit the most people.

The impact area is about how those who participate reflect the population of the area in which the process takes place.

In a democracy, not everyone participates all the time, so it’s important that those who do participate can represent those who do not. It’s not only about participants being perceived as representative and fair in relation to the population as a whole, but also the extent to which they reflect demographics and attitudes.

It assesses whether the participants in an activity or organization represent the population in terms of demographics, values and perceptions.

Together, these dimensions show whether an initiative succeeded in representing the desired legitimacy.

Descriptive representation
Whether the participant group reflects the population in terms of demographics such as age, gender, background and education.

Substantive representation
Whether participants express the spectrum of attitudes, values and views of the population they represent.

Underrepresentation
Whether the initiative deliberately includes groups that are normally excluded from democratic participation and whether they actually get a voice.

Perceived representation
Whether participants are perceived as legitimate representatives of those they speak on behalf of and how they understand their role.

The impact area is about whether it creates a sense of belonging to a community or group and whether it contributes to

In a well-functioning democracy, people know where to go with their frustrations and have a sense of unity with others to find solutions. This is the opposite of loneliness and powerlessness, which can be a breeding ground for polarization.

This assesses whether participation creates new communities, strengthens relationships and increases the sense of belonging.

Belonging
About participation provides a sense of belonging in a community where you are seen, heard and valued.

New connections
Whether participation leads to new relationships between people or groups that otherwise would not have met.

New communities
Whether participation leads to new communities or organizations or participants joining existing communities.

Increased cohesion
If the community is perceived as more empowered because participants feel a shared responsibility for problems and solutions.

Impact is about how organizations and communities develop their ability to create and sustain democratic participation.

A well-functioning democracy requires strong organizations that can bring citizens together, create engagement and build capacity over time. Organizational resources create stability and empowerment.

This assesses whether organizations through their initiatives are becoming stronger, getting more active and better able to support participation.

Active participation
Whether more people become active in the organization or take more responsibility as a result of the initiative.

Capacity building
Whether the organization gets more resources, better skills or new methods to create democratic participation.

Organizational sustainability
About the initiative strengthens the organization’s ability to continue the work and attract new participants over time.

Together, these dimensions show whether organizations become more robust and empowered through their democratic work.