In the midst of all the smaller reasons to be cheerful that we blog every day, this week saw some major developments. Germany has finally committed to phasing out coal production entirely by 2038, providing €40bn for redeploying workers.

It’s a risk for Germany as there is a real chance that, with nuclear power also being phased out, they will run out of electricity. Yet they are going ahead, believing they can reshape demand to meet the new supply. Whether that will be through conservation programmes or leaps forward in green energy production is an ongoing question.

Compare that to Australia’s continued incalcitrance.

Meantime, in France, President Macron has committed to standing by the findings of a Citizens Assembly on climate change. Here is how our friends at Involve describe it:

The Convention Citoyenne pour le Climat is a deliberative process comparable to a Citizens’ Assembly. It was commissioned by the French President, Emmanuel Macron in April 2019 to answer the following question:

How to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in France by at least 40% (in relations to 1990’s levels) by 2030, in the spirit of social justice?

Unlike most Citizens’ Assemblies, the Convention has been given real power. In April 2019, Emmanuel Macron committed to ‘not filter’ any recommendations coming out of the process. Measures generated by the Convention are to be enacted either through a national referendum, parliamentary vote or directly turned into executive orders.

But as with most things, the devil is in the detail. During his visit at the Convention on Friday 10th January, Emmanuel Macron clarified what he meant exactly by ‘no filter’ because it has constitutional implications. For all the nuances around the ‘no filter’ aspect, have a look at this thread on Twitter.

We think this is the first time any national deliberative event has been given such powers.

In short, the Convention has teeth. This is not just another consultative process, but real deliberative democracy with a mandate from the top to write policy.”

Although Citizens Assemblies on ‘climate and ecological justice’ is the third demand of Extinction Rebellion, there is no guarantee it will lead to the sort of outcomes Rebels clearly want – such as a commitment to going carbon neutral by 2025.

No-one can ignore the backlash against stricter diesel regulations by the gilet jaunes over 2019. This may be Macron’s strategy for avoiding blame for either the success or failure of the environmental commitments made at COP, in Paris or Madrid. For once, it is the people in the spotlight.

At the same time, in the UK, a similar but significantly different experiment is beginning – the UK Citizens Assembly on Climate Change. Taking place over four weekends rather than seven, this will be a purely advisory exercise. The government in interested in what the people think and any ideas they may put forward. But there is no question of changing the current policy of aiming to meet the targets by 2050.

Many would say it’s merely cosmetic – an attempt by the government to make the claim that they are responding to the growing demands of the people. On the one hand, to do more to reach our climate targets. On the other to upgrade democracy – give the people a voice! But without teeth or the time frame recommended by scientists in the IPPC report, it’s subterfuge.

Worse than that, from a government that hasn’t shied away from using Facebook data to manipulate people’s emotions during elections, is this simply more data gathering? More insights into what drives people, or what new narratives are possible?

Yet Involve – who are running the Assembly – believe a consultative role offers plenty of scope for democratic self-development. As Director Sarah Allen says:

“The focus is on how the UK achieves net zero. We will get people to look at trade-offs. They can’t say: 'we want net zero' then vote for doing nothing about it.'

She continued: “The Irish assembly was an incredibly useful tool for decision-makers – we are very optimistic that the UK climate change assembly will be useful too.”

One of the project’s leaders is Lorraine Whitmarsh, professor of environmental psychology at Cardiff University.

“It’s very exciting - we haven’t done anything on this level before,” she told BBC News. “It’s huge, and the recruitment (of members) has to be gold standard."

Ms Whitmarsh explained: “There will be sceptics who don’t even believe climate change is caused by humans. But even they may want to consider evidence that some climate polices (such as active transport) will have health benefits attached.

“There will be other people who are very worried about climate change – but they may turn out to be unwilling to take on some of the financial consequences involved.

“It’s going to be really interesting.”

It could well be that the most interesting outcomes will be the ripple effect of hearing and sharing the experiences of the 110 people taking part.

What was it like to become an active citizen, ready to listen to conflicting pieces of evidence about an issue that has risen to the top of our anxiety agenda? How did it feel, in real time, to hear from others with very different perspectives but nevertheless ‘in there with you’ giving up their time in service to a greater cause?

Where was the authority in the room? If you changed your views in the course of the Assembly, why and how? How did it feel by the end of the exercise – satisfying or frustrating?

There’s lots to be said for this kind of crucible for democracy. While at the same time, it remains possible that the exercise is a sham and will only disillusion people more.

In the meantime, what do the rest of us do? One of the weaknesses of the Citizens’ Assembly, as a substantial development in democratic practice, is that it involves so few people directly.

For some that is a blessed relief: they are happy to get on with their lives and leave the decision making to others. Others don’t even think they have a choice. Every hour of the day is already accounted for and the idea of becoming active citizens is a luxury they can’t afford.

Even so, there is plenty of evidence that there is a healthy general appetite for more participation. A government-sponsored, civil-society organised event called Innovating Local Democracy will take place in Manchester next week. Over two days participants will discuss – or maybe listen to mostly – many of the new initiatives that have arisen over the past couple of years to involve more people.

It’s a great list, many of whom you will have read about on the Daily Alternative from Participatory City in Barking and Dagenham to tech-oriented solutions like My Society.

This is a huge development from past events of this kind. The afternoons are very practice oriented - although the speakers may not be front-line actors themselves. For example, on Monday afternoon, there’s a session called “I’ve announced a climate emergency, now what?”, with Professor Graham Smith, Professor of Politics, Westminster University and Peter Bryant, Director, Shared Future CIC.

The feel is still a little trickle-down, as the ideas fall. To rectify that, there are ‘unconference’ sessions – an hour a day – to crowdsource from the audience what may be occurring outside of the umbrella that the establishment is offering here. It will be interesting to see how much of the unconference still stays within the civil society bubble, however rich and interesting. Or whether something genuinely alternative gets voted onto the schedule.

In another zone, A/UK’s work with the XR Future Democracy Hub has uncovered a new energy for community engagement. Some of the young activists are putting together new tools of inclusion, dialogue and narrative building, and applying them to more sensitively designed People’s Assemblies. These gatherings of people might, say these youth, lead to the capacity for more reclaiming of local councils, in thestyle of Flatpack Democracy. This will help to accelerate the important work highlighted by cities and towns declaring a Climate Emergency across the world, including the UK.

The depth of conversation we find in XR is always impressive. They’re not just well aware of the power of people to make change happen. But they also consider the ways we can fall short of our goals.

What’s crucial is the way they partner with what the young XR’s called (in a recent meeting) the ‘womb energy’ of the Citizen Action Networks that we promote. That’s a good description. CANs are indeed intended to ‘listen first’, heal divides, connect with solutions already available and generate new ones, in each specific place they operate.

We have found that change proves to be slow when outside of top-down ways of mobilizing in a town or city dominate. Without paying attention to the specific terrain, or to the needs, wants and ingenuity of the people living there, transformation is near impossible.

Yet urgency, even impatience, is part of the mix in these milieux. It would be easy for civic practitioners to relax a little, observing that so much is going on. But until we hit an entirely new mark, where all these efforts come into some sort of alignment to cause what Karen O’Brien describes as a “quantum shift” in outcomes, we should be wary of feeling we are doing enough.

Alternative Editorial: Democracy Is Buzzing