The Citizens' Convention for Climate:
Two citizens' perspectives on the collective adventure  !

Agnès  C. and William  A. are citizens  ! They were randomly selected to participate in the Citizens' Convention for Climate . Along with 150 other participants, they proposed measures to achieve a reduction of at least 40% in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, while upholding social justice.
  The Res publica team supported them for eight months as facilitators to help them carry out their mission. We met with them after the Convention to gather their reflections on this unique experience.
  They shared a collective adventure, both together and individually. They share their experiences and insights to draw lessons that will benefit other citizens' assemblies !

How has the Citizens' Convention for Climate changed your perspective on climate issues  ? Why do you now want to share your newfound awareness  ?

Agnès  : Before, I felt like I was being careful by recycling, by reducing my waste and consumption. But with the Citizens' Convention, I realized I wasn't doing enough  : the situation is much more serious and urgent than we think  !

William  : There was a real eye-opener, something all the members of the Citizens' Convention are talking about  : the speeches by Valérie Masson-Delmotte and Laurence Tubiana during the first working session were a shock, a wake-up call to the urgent need to reduce our carbon footprint. But the awakening to the ecological transition isn't the same for everyone. At some point, you have to be receptive, take the time for information and debate. With what we've experienced, we understand that to get 66 million French people on board, there's no better way than through dialogue and debate. Climate education shouldn't just be for children. We also need to reach adults.

Agnès  : The French will take ownership of the climate issue by becoming informed  ! I wonder why Valérie Masson-Delmotte's interview wasn't broadcast on the 8 PM news  ! Everyone should have access to the quality and level of information we received. I also think we need to use all possible means of communication, at every level. Developing Citizens' Conventions at the local level is essential to be even closer to citizens and their everyday concerns.

William  : The roadmap we've defined is ambitious, it's commensurate with the challenge  : we mustn't deviate from it. On my own scale, I try to share my story as a member of the Citizens' Convention for Climate, because it's a way to raise awareness. At the local level, communities that share this awareness and the urgency to act intend to implement our measures. They can rely on the 150 citizens spread across the country  ! They can also organize local Citizens' Conventions and help disseminate information.

Can you tell us about some of the highlights of this convention? ?

Agnès: There was the moment when the carbon tax was put on the table and very vehemently rejected. It was good to finally discuss it, because it was a topic we had to address within our groups.
And then, at the end of the Convention, there was the vote proposing to put each measure to a referendum. For me, that was a dramatic moment  ! In fact, I left after the third measure, for which the citizens didn't vote to put it to a referendum. I didn't understand why the other citizens in the Convention didn't want our measures to be submitted to a referendum. In my opinion, we were there to highlight measures, to put them up for debate, but not to impose them on the government and the French people, whom we were supposed to listen to. That would have allowed us to open up the debate with the whole of society and contribute to raising awareness.

William: There was a session where we had to rank the emerging proposals in order of preference. The fight against urban sprawl, which was very important to me, seemed to have unanimous support in the "Housing" group, but since there were many other topics, it wasn't ranked among the priorities. We challenged the system and insisted on the need to include structural measures. The facilitator pointed out that similar and coherent proposals could be combined. A whole section of our work could have been lost at that point; fortunately, that wasn't the case, and this measure contributes to the strength of our work.

Do you believe you acted legitimately? ?

Agnès: I think we were legitimate because we responded to a mandate and we played by the rules. However, I've read studies published by researchers who say that the very fact that we had the option to refuse to participate skewed the representativeness. The very act of selecting people who could make themselves available to attend all the sessions may have prevented some employees from participating. So there are things to improve so that those selected by lot are supported and participate. That's also why, in my opinion, a referendum would have strengthened our legitimacy as citizens representative of the expectations of French society.

William: We were all very different from one another  ; I've rarely discussed anything with such a diverse group of people. But that doesn't change the fact that a multiple-choice referendum on our proposals would have allowed us to debate the issues we studied during the Convention. This would have reduced the gap when we presented our proposals. For example, people might be resistant to the comprehensive renovation, or to other things. Does that mean we lack legitimacy after all the work we've done  ?

How did you work within the Convention? ?

Agnès: Throughout the Citizens' Convention, we gained a wealth of knowledge on climate issues. We had a great deal of freedom and the opportunity to call upon all stakeholders in the ecological transition. There were no limits  : it was fascinating, especially since most of the stakeholders we contacted responded positively.
We also had access to experts on technical and legal matters, as well as fact-checkers to verify our initial impressions, answer questions, and obtain reliable data. Without all this support, we would never have succeeded. We drafted measures that can be incorporated directly into law! This was an impossible task for ordinary citizens: it required help to understand the issues and genuine collective intelligence among the 150 citizens to decipher them and choose a path forward together. None of us can claim to be experts! In the end, we only worked on climate for a year, but together we went much further…

William: Facilitation was essential. It had to involve a pedagogical process, and we had to organize the discussions of 150 French citizens, some of whom can be difficult to manage due to their personalities. We needed structure, a sense of closeness, intimacy, and trust. The facilitators were the glue and the catalyst for discussion: one of the keys to the Citizens' Convention's success. Submitting amendments to our proposals was also a real way to enrich the democratic process. Being able to add to the measures and vote on the amendments strengthened the process.

Agnès: There was a lot of criticism about the framework we provided, but in reality, since we formed our association, we've realized how difficult it is to have a dialogue without facilitators!
The important thing was to highlight and formulate the ideas that emerged somewhat haphazardly during the discussions. The facilitators knew how to ask the right questions to delve deeper into our thinking and helped us with a truly streamlined process. Working in small groups was also very effective.

Did you feel you were being used as a tool?

William: I immediately wanted to participate in this Convention, supported by close friends and family, but I also took the implication that by doing so I was "collaborating" with the government rather badly. In my opinion, when the opportunity to be heard arises, you can't refuse it. However, I've always wanted the public to avoid conflating the government and the 150 members: we are independent. I contributed my own thoughts, without being manipulated. I was able to put forward what I wanted.
For example, the proposal to submit a reversibility plan when applying for a building permit ended up being put forward by the Minister. It was included in the bill. It's a fantastic feeling! Future buildings will have to prove their reversibility before they are built. It's official, based on my personal reflections which we debated and enriched with the 150. That said, journalists prefer to dwell on the frictions that may exist between citizens and the government, rather than highlighting small victories like this one!

Agnès: I had that impression at the beginning, yes. An underlying feeling among the 150 citizens that encouraged caution. The speakers were also warning us about it. In a politically complicated period, with the Yellow Vest crisis, some were wary of the organization and the facilitators. For me, we were all in the same boat, and we needed to trust each other to make it happen.

How have you embraced your role as citizens, between the time you were selected by lot and today?

William: Initially, there was curiosity. Like many French people, my trust in the political system is low. Politics no longer interested me because in the last elections, I felt my vote was stolen. I think democracy needs to evolve to be more attentive to its founding principle, which is the well-being of all citizens.
Today, I feel like a citizen again, more than ever. The role of spokesperson motivates me greatly, and I continue to fulfill it. I'm one of the Convention members with the most followers on Twitter, probably because I started communicating right from the beginning. I know I'm under a lot of scrutiny, especially from government ministries, but I continue to share my feelings, my doubts, and my convictions.

How did you work with the government and parliament after the Convention?

William: We formed an association, Les 150, because we believed we were capable of supporting our work. This association has become a key partner for the Ministry of Ecology and the other ministries responsible for ensuring the continuity of the work. Some citizens have also contacted members of parliament. As a result, we've been working for two years now, even though the climate crisis demands swift action.
We've also encountered all the pitfalls of politics: promises, so we've been wary from the start. My position has been to believe that the government and then the members of parliament wanted to do the right thing. Because if they aren't ambitious, it will do them more harm than good. But when you see that we're still trying to save Peugeot and Renault, when we know we need to change… Let's just say, we still sense a strong desire on the part of large corporations to whisper in the ministers' ears. We're still living in this absurdity of infinite growth. That's no longer the case for me personally.

Agnès: After the Convention, during the drafting of the bill, I don't feel I was truly able to participate in the debates and defend our measures. I feel we were invited as spectators, and that we didn't really have a say. That's why I think the bill falls far short of the objectives we set for ourselves. It's even further from meeting the European targets of at least a 55% reduction.
Regarding the association "Les 150," of which I am Treasurer, we are committed to ensuring continuity and reiterating the content of our work. We are doing this despite personal organizational constraints. About thirty active members of "Les 150" manage to dedicate their time to the project.

How did you approach the media?

Agnès : Initially, we were protected within the Convention because we had the choice of whether or not to answer journalists' questions. Later, I regretted the media spotlight on certain measures, such as the 110 km/h speed limit on highways or the 28-hour work week. The disagreements these measures raise interest journalists! But these measures were brought into the media without any explanation. People didn't understand how reducing the speed limit to 110 km/h on highways could actually reduce greenhouse gas emissions… Furthermore, I'm surprised that the financing measures are discussed so little. In any case, no one has ever asked me about them!

William : The media are nitpicking, but they did take an interest in the Convention and contributed to its reputation. For our part, we wrote press releases and an opinion piece on comprehensive renovation, for example. You can find @150 on Twitter. This hasn't always been picked up by the media: perhaps we haven't quite mastered all the intricacies yet?!

Has the Convention had an impact on public action, on certain companies, and on the associative environment?

William: We felt public support. Personally, people came to see me to discuss things in person or on Twitter. We also received calls from large corporations who know that public opinion will eventually converge, but I remain wary of their intentions. The activists, for their part, were initially critical of us because 150 citizens who had nothing to do with the issue were giving their opinions and we were being listened to. When you bring something new out of nowhere, it raises questions among the more committed activists! But they then understood that we were listening to them and that we could also represent their ideas.
Regarding our public action, I think the Convention had an impact because the outcome wasn't predetermined. The rejection of the carbon tax by the 150 is a case in point. We also see it in the government's reaction to our work; I think they didn't expect us to go this far, and that raises questions and fuels the public debate.
We can therefore say that the deliberative democracy we have experienced can help decision-makers, especially if they commit to a truly "no-filter" approach. But ultimately, even if not everything is adopted, we still have the feeling that we have made progress!

Agnès: Initially, we wondered why this Convention wasn't generating much interest. Then, little by little, the media and the French public became interested. The pandemic, which triggered a wake-up call about the state of our society, may have played a role. In my opinion, it proves that we need to change our lifestyles.
The fact that our measures were included in the recovery plan raised awareness of the importance of the Citizens' Convention for Climate. Even if the bill doesn't go far enough in my view, we are still seeing that companies and stakeholders are taking action based on our work… I also have the impression that some are less afraid to go further because they have realized, through us, that society is more ready than it seems. In any case, companies will be forced to change the way they work and produce, so we need to prepare for the change in advance. Otherwise, the change will be difficult to overcome.
But be careful, it's not just others who need to adapt! On an individual level, everyone can take action. Little by little, the 150 participants share their experiences and set an example for those around them and for other countries. In my professional life, I've helped my employer change. Actions are essential at all levels!