Innovating the Innovation? Participant-led Spaces in Young Citizens’ Assemblies

What happens when participants in a Citizens’ Assembly have the opportunity not only to take part, but to shape the process as it unfolds? How does this change the process, the participants themselves, and the ongoing legacy of the CA? In this article, Task Force members from the Young Citizens’ Assembly on Pollinators share learnings from their unique experiences at the heart of a democratic innovation.

Citizen Assemblies are meant to create opportunities for citizens to contribute to policymaking. The main task envisioned for citizens is to learn, deliberate and develop recommendations, and as such, assembly members rarely contribute to the assembly design, implementation and follow-up. There are a growing number of exceptions – some youth and children assemblies have been co-designed with participants to ensure the process meets the needs of young people, whilst in permanent assemblies, members steer some aspects of the process, selecting the topic, and taking decisions as to how the Assembly should be run, or monitoring follow-up.

In this article we share our insights from working within an Assembly that aimed to both meet young people’s needs and strengthen collective agency. We share our experiences as participants and organiser on the role and contribution of Task Forces to enhancing agency, functionality and relationality of Citizens’ Assemblies.

The Young Citizens Assembly on Pollinators (YCAP) aimed to provide young people across Europe with an opportunity for more direct involvement in EU policymaking on environmental issues. The Assembly gathered 100 young people from across all EU countries, selected by democratic lottery to represent the diversity of the EU youth population. During three in-person weekends and two online sessions, Assembly members learned about the issue and biodiversity governance mechanisms from experts, discussed different perspectives with stakeholders, and exchanged with EU officials on the existing policies.

In addition to the mandate to develop policy recommendations, YCAP also had an exploratory dimension. As part of a wider pilot project initiated by the European Parliament and implemented by the European Commission with the support of practitioners Missions Publiques and IFOK, it aimed to explore conditions and modalities for a possible EU-level permanent mechanism of youth engagement on biodiversity.

To do this, the YCAP experimented with the Assembly format: beyond the usual small group deliberations and plenary meetings, YCAP also included participant-led co-creation spaces focused on the process itself, rather than the topic. These so-called Task Forces (TFs) consisted of volunteering members of the Assembly and explored several aspects: communication, artistic expression, follow up and methodology monitoring. With almost a third of Assembly members participating, TFs worked mostly independently, with targeted support from the methodology team, meeting in-between the sessions, and with regular updates to the entire Assembly.

For the organisers, there were two rationales for initiating the TFs. The first was to strengthen selected functions of the Assembly, with the idea that the Communication TF could improve peer-targeted outreach, eventually increasing impact and improving transparency, while the Art TF could help access the topic from new angles, deepening emotional connection and supporting communication efforts. The Monitoring TF could enhance the process by providing ongoing methodological feedback about participant’s experiences and suggestions. Last but not least, the Follow-up TF could set the stage for later political outreach by making participants co-owners of the follow-up. It could also support the transition to a permanent mechanism, fostering both the uptake of the policy recommendations and the continuity of the process itself.

The second rationale was perhaps more radical – to see how and to what extent young people could develop ownership over different aspects of the process. This aim was connected to the possibility of exploring a permanent mechanism that could be an independent space owned by young people. In the months since the CA concluded, we have been reflecting on how these initial expectations and rationales mapped onto TF participants’ and wider Assembly members’ perspectives and experiences. Below we discuss the interlocking roles that TFs played in YCAP, using quotes from TF members to highlight the emerging themes.

The more we were 'on stage', the more it felt like ours.

While the organisers’ initial aims were confirmed by participants, the aspects of autonomy, agency and ownership proved to be especially valuable. For instance, one of the most important moments for those on the Monitoring TF was when they were deciding on the voting procedure for approving recommendations – which was something that visibly impacted the shape of the process in one of its core aspects. In addition to actively shaping the process, the TFs were given enough space and autonomy to self-organise and work together, strengthening a sense of agency and collective leadership.

A strong sense of trust and responsibility quickly developed.

Participants also raised a distinct and valuable lesson from the TFs that had not featured in initial expectations – the relational dimension of TFs. These spaces facilitated bonding, trust, collaboration and belonging beyond the groups that developed more naturally around shared languages or opinions. They created a different space for meaningful contribution that was linked to pre-existing interests and skills, rather than to the topic, allowing for the recognition of participants with their passions, expressivity and identities. This proved to be a crucial element of inclusivity in a deliberative process that otherwise depended so much on rational argumentation and verbal expression – something for which deliberation is criticised.

The Follow-up TF gave us the strongest feeling of relevance and self-efficacy and creating real impact after the Assembly ended.

Participants’ accounts also identified a role at the intersection of the TF’s functional, relational and autonomy aspects. TFs provided an alternative space of deliberation and learning by creating a safe and supportive environment where participants could exchange ideas with people who had different perspectives and experiences 'by the way', and not as their main purpose. While functional to improving deliberation, this aspect of TFs was dependent on relational aspects. It became the space of discussion fully owned by participants, increasing their autonomy. In parallel, especially the Follow-up TF allowed for hands-on learning about governance processes and institutions that was useful in core deliberations.

Based on our experiences, we developed a set of recommendations for the future use of Task Forces in Citizens’ Assemblies.

While it is still uncertain whether the Assembly will continue as a permanent, institutionalised process, this experience demonstrated the enormous potential of participant-led spaces within (youth) assemblies. By giving participants autonomy and empowering them to act independently, the TFs functioned as a seed for follow‑up activities of participants after the Assembly itself closed.

Notably, some TF members have remained active well after the Assembly formally concluded. Rather than acting as individual advocates, they have formed a self-organised group that blends the functions of follow‑up and communication TFs, carrying forward YCAP’s mission through advocacy and outreach efforts, including active social media presence on Instagram and Linktree.

Volunteer members received training in advocacy and communication, and attended workshops on project development and funding for pollinator‑related initiatives, equipping them for continued work beyond the formal process. They embraced opportunities to participate in several events and conferences, while also reaching out individually to local authorities, politicians, civil society organisations and journalists to advance the assembly’s initiatives. Despite the lack of a dedicated budget and a designated coordinator, and the need to balance YCAP activities with other responsibilities, the participants remain committed. They hold regular group meetings to build a framework for their ongoing work, sharing updates and tracking activities, refining the Assembly’s mission, vision and long‑term communication strategy. Together, these efforts form the core of YCAP’s continued advocacy and activism.

This illustrates how TFs could serve as a foundation for lasting civic action beyond the typical lifespan of a Citizens’ Assembly. To strengthen this potential, design of assemblies should take into consideration not just the functional roles of participant-led spaces, but also their relational aspects and their potential in supporting autonomy and agency of participants. We conclude with the words of the Monitoring TF reflecting on their experience:

In the end, what was perhaps most surprising was that we were simply around 100 young people who arrived in Brussels without a clearly defined purpose beyond participating in the Assembly, and yet through task forces we ended up building meaningful collaborations, working towards a common goal, and creating a space where our ideas and contributions could genuinely make a difference. This transformation from groups of strangers (task forces) into a united community of engaged young people was one of the most valuable and unexpected outcomes of the entire experience.

About the Authors

Alicja Gniadzik is a postgraduate of the University of Warsaw’s Corporate Communication programme, with a background in organic agriculture and several years of involvement in youth representation, community engagement and international cooperation. During YCAP, she was a member of the Task Force on Monitoring.

Daniel Köberl studied logistics and supply chain management and is now active as a young entrepreneur. During the YCAP he led the Task Force on Monitoring.

Ruth S. Pasquín works as a lawyer in Barcelona, specialising in family and employment law, with a background in labour rights. She is particularly interested in social and environment rights and civic participation. During YCAP, she was part of the Task Force on Monitoring.

Mateusz Tokarski works as a policy analyst at the Joint Research Centre, supporting the work of the Competence Centre on Participatory and Deliberative Democracy. He has a background in media studies and environmental studies. His current work focus is on the engagement of citizens in the protection of biodiversity.