Stepping Back Once in a While

Description

Stepping back once in a while is part of the Zapatista philosophy of “Preguntando Caminamos” (“We keep asking as we keep walking”). It values collective questioning, embodied experience, and evolving proposals according to emerging needs. Reflection is not an interruption of the process, but an integral part of it and essential to CCAs.

Typically, CCAs are evaluated using multi-dimensional frameworks that assess input (who participates), process (deliberative quality), output (recommendations), and outcome (policy and social impact). To complement this, different actors suggest shifting the focus of evaluation from reporting (as a product of external assessment for certain stakeholders) to a shared learning process. Periodic reflection enables participants to evaluate the appropriateness of the chosen path and methods. Reflective evaluation frameworks can support this process and help determine whether public deliberation contributes to socio-ecological transformations. These could be complemented with long-term tracking of policy uptake and indirect impacts, such as media coverage and civic mobilisation. Structured reflective evaluation strengthens both democratic legitimacy and practical effectiveness, leading to better comparability and learning between different CCAs**.**

How-To & Examples

Evaluation guidelines developed for CAs are the OECD Evaluation Guidelines which provides for general standards. The KNOCA Impact Evaluation Framework offers step-by step guidance tailored to CCAs to holistically assess how they drive policy, build capacity, and shift mindsets. It can be flexibly adapted to different contexts while preserving its comprehensive scope.

The CCA project unibz applied and extended the KNOCA Framework for the South Tyrolean Klimabürgerrat combining it with participant observation which provided the basis for the development of these pattern cards. Final Report (pp. 86–88 for a short version). The Assessing the Effectiveness of Climate Assemblies Framework (CLIMAS, 2024–2025) was a.o. tested at the CCA Catalonia. It centers deliberative impact (quality, inclusivity, emancipatory potential) alongside policy outcomes, and combines standardized indicators with contextual adaptability and longitudinal tracking.

Participatory Evaluation actively involves participants in defining criteria and assessing impact e.g. participants of theKlimabürgerrat reflected collectively during a final walk (“Preguntando caminamos”).

Evaluation standards are also needed for commissioning bodies. The proposals of the Klimabürgerrat South Tyrol, were officially reviewed and categorized (implemented, included in plans, feasible, not feasible, under review).

Literature & Sources

Demski,C., Capstick, S., Hessellund Beanland M. (2024): KNOCA Impact Evaluation Framework . KNOCA. e

Massadar Morel, A. P. (2018). Caminhar Preguntanto: A educacao autonoma Zapatista. Walk Asking: The Autonomous Zapatista Education. RevistAleph. https://doi.org/10.22409/revistaleph.v0i31.39282

OECD (2021), Evaluation Guidelines for Representative Deliberative Processes, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/10ccbfcb-en.

Skaržauskienė, A., Mačiulienė, M., Kovaitė, K., Šūmakaris, P., Kotrikla, A.M., Gulevičiūtė, G., Fameli, K., Polydoropoulou, A., & Balkė, R. (2025).Assessing the effectiveness of climate assemblies: framework for measuring deliberative impact. Frontiers in Climate.