Practices for Online Public Involvement (2019)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

1 The purpose of this synthesis is to provide the current state of practice for online public involvement (OPI) tools used by state Departments of Transportation (DOTs) and to identify additional areas of research needed based on information gathered from a litera- ture review and survey of state DOTs. The research team composed of staff from the Public Outreach and Engagement Team (POET) at the Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center (VTC) at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, performed the research and wrote the components of this report. An online survey instrument consisting of 48 questions, which included both closed and open-ended questions, was emailed to all 50 state DOTs to gather information about their OPI practices. Topics covered in the survey included the use and types of online tools, guidelines and procedures for using OPI, challenges and benefits of using OPI, organizational staffing needed to implement online involvement, interpretation and use of feedback from online tools, and reasons for not using online involvement if that was applicable. Survey responses were received from 43 out of 50 state DOTs for a response rate of 86%. Follow-up interviews were conducted in April 2018 with five state DOTs that had responded to the online survey to provide further detail and perspective on the strategies used when implementing OPI and barriers to use of OPI. While OPI was defined at the beginning of the survey as a two-way process of incor- porating interests and concerns of the public into problem solving or decision-making which is facilitated through internet-based tools (International Association for Public Par- ticipation, 2014), there was not a clear distinction between how DOTs defined or inter- preted one-way communication and two-way involvement based on the survey responses. Furthermore, there appears to be limited research on state DOTs’ use of OPI, and much of the research emphasizes how governments and public agencies have adopted social media as their form of digital communication rather than examining a broader set of online tools and platforms that are currently available to gather feedback and input from the public. The review of the literature on OPI revealed a few key themes: • Social media is a highly studied form of online public participation, and there are key differences in how social media is used by the transportation sectors for information dissemination and two-way dialogue. • While social media is a well-utilized tool, it may be more effective when combined with offline or traditional public involvement rather than as a stand-alone tool. • Interactive digital platforms (also known as Web 2.0) can lead to improved digital communication between agencies and stakeholders; however, many public entities are reluctant to use all components of digital communication. • Interactive web presence can improve agency accountability and transparency, allowing more people to be involved in the decision-making process and providing a platform for increased accountability. S U M M A R Y Practices for Online Public Involvement

2 Practices for Online Public Involvement • Public agencies can improve their reach and increase participation with the use of online or web-based applications and platforms, as they reach more people and are increasingly popular forms of technology. Analytics available through OPI platforms can also help agencies better understand who is participating. Both the surveys from the 43 DOTs that responded and the interviews from five DOTs generated the following results about OPI practices, categorized into seven key themes: 1. Support for OPI: DOTs cited public demand, transparency, and the desire to reach a broader audience as reasons for implementing OPI. DOTs have been prompted to use OPI methods due to the influence of other DOTs and support from upper management. 2. OPI Policies and Procedures: The majority of DOTs use some form of a public involve- ment plan (PIP), and OPI is included in most agency-wide PIPs. While social media is a commonly used tool, not all states have policies or procedures to specifically guide the use of OPI. 3. Types of Tools and Approaches: Though the survey instructed respondents to describe OPI strategies that create two-way interactions between the DOT and the public, many of the responses touched on one-way information dissemination. Websites and social media are the most commonly used online tools, while electronic surveys, informational videos, and digital newsletters were also reported by a number of DOTs. 4. Challenges, Benefits, and Measuring Effectiveness: DOTs most commonly cited technology issues—such as lack of internet access and poor connectivity for residents—as the biggest challenges to OPI, while staff inexperience and budget constraints also limit its implementation. DOTs have successfully used OPI to reach more people, particularly those who may not normally participate in traditional face-to-face involvement. DOTs most commonly use metrics available through web hosting and social media platforms, such as page views, clicks, and “likes,” to measure OPI methods’ effectiveness. 5. OPI Staff and Organizational Structure: DOTs differ in the staff who manage OPI and social media. In some cases, it may be the responsibility of the public involvement or commu- nications department. In other cases, both may be responsible. Staffing responsibility and designation may also be influenced by the size of the DOT and overall staffing resources. 6. OPI Feedback Management: Specific tools developed for OPI can generate a larger quantity of public feedback compared with traditional face-to-face involvement. Some of these tools include specially designed and customized analytics and can efficiently summarize results for easy communication with other DOT departments. 7. DOTs Not Using OPI: Those DOTs surveyed that have not yet implemented OPI methods indicated the lack of staff training, the need to meet federal and state requirements for public involvement, and experiencing technical issues as the primary reasons for not using OPI. Resulting from the literature review as well as the survey and interviews from the state DOTs on online involvement practices, the following topics were identified for further study: • Variations in defining OPI • Identifying best practices in OPI • Management and use of social media comments from the public • Staffing and other resource impacts on use and quality of OPI • Effectively combining online and in-person involvement • Public preferences for OPI methods • Quality of input from OPI • Integrating input from OPI into decision-making • Interpretation of state and federal requirements and legal implications related to OPI • Understanding representation of affected population