Dialogue methods
A dialogue is only as fair as its procedure. The Global Risks Forum (GRF) designs its dialogues so that the right institutions are in the room, less powerful voices are heard, disagreements are kept and the record can be trusted. This page sets out the procedure: how a question is framed, how participants are identified and invited, how the session is run, and how the record is drafted, checked and released. The procedure applies to consultations, forum dialogues and small-group exchanges alike.
- Institution
- The Global Risks Forum (GRF)
- Service level
- R0: information and enquiries
Deliberation desk
Council of members · Round 4 of 5
Deliberation
- Frame the questionagreed
- Evidence briefindependent
- Hear positionsall members
- Optionswith trade-offs
- Recommendreasons
- Decidemandate holder
Positions
| Member state A | Support | Neutral | Object | Funding concern |
| Member state B | Neutral | Support | Support | |
| Regional body | Support | Support | Neutral | Prefers phasing |
| Civil society | Object | Support | Support | Equity |
Rules
- Quorum
- 2 thirds
- Dissent
- recorded with reasons
- Evidence
- brief EB-64
- Decision
- not GRF's
GRF · Deliberation deskDeliberation desk, in outline: domain structure with placeholder names and illustrative values, not a record.
The short answer.
GRF dialogue methods are the six-step procedure that makes a dialogue fair: framing the question, identifying and inviting participants, running the session, and drafting, checking and releasing the record. The procedure makes sure the right institutions are in the room, less powerful voices are heard, disagreements are kept and the record can be trusted.
Scoping to review.
Fig.A programme from scoping to the owner's decision. Design, not a record.
Jurisdictions in the Nile Basin.
The jurisdictions that hold authority over this question: countries, their first-level divisions and capitals, shown for the Nile Basin as an example geography for this subject.
Six steps from question to record.
- 01
Frame the question
A dialogue starts from a question participants can answer, with its scope and the decisions it may inform.
- 02
Map who shares the risk
Authorities, operators, affected communities, evidence holders and those who will act on the outcome.
- 03
Invite with terms
Invitations state the purpose, the rules of the session, how it will be recorded and how participants can withdraw.
- 04
Declare interests
Participants declare relevant interests; conflicts are managed before the session.
- 05
Run the session
A facilitator protects time for every constituency and records agreements, commitments, open questions and dissent.
- 06
Check and release
Participants review the draft record before release, within a stated period, and corrections are kept.
Facilitation methods and what each protects.
| Method | What it does | What it protects against |
|---|---|---|
| Pre-circulated question and evidence brief | Gives everyone the same starting facts | Asymmetry between well-resourced and less-resourced participants |
| Round-robin first statements | Every institution speaks before open debate | Domination by the most senior voice |
| Structured disagreement log | Records each objection with its holder's reasoning | False consensus |
| Delphi-style anonymous rounds | Collects expert judgement without status pressure | Anchoring on early or senior opinions |
| Interpretation and plain-language summaries | Works across languages and disciplines | Exclusion by vocabulary |
Practice GRF draws on.
- The OECD Good Practice Principles for Deliberative Processes: clear purpose, accountability for the response, transparency, representativeness, inclusiveness, information, group deliberation, time, integrity, privacy, evaluation.
- The IAP2 spectrum of public participation, to be explicit about whether a session informs, consults, involves, collaborates or empowers.
- Free, prior and informed consent where Indigenous peoples' rights and lands are concerned, following UNDRIP.
Which level of the participation spectrum a dialogue sits at is stated in its invitation, so no participant mistakes a consultation for a decision.
Protecting voices with less power.
Rights-holders first
Community and Indigenous institutions take part on agreed terms, and protected knowledge is used only under an agreed schedule.
Barriers removed
Formats, languages and timing are chosen so that participation does not depend on travel budgets or seniority.
Safeguarding by design
Students, volunteers and community members are never exposed to pressure or retaliation for what they say.
How the record stays honest.
- Silence is never recorded as agreement.
- Dissent is recorded with the same care as agreement, attributed only with consent.
- Commitments name the institution that made them and the follow-up date it chose.
- Restricted parts are withheld and the record says so.
- A sponsor or host cannot approve or change the record.
Where a dialogue draws on evidence, the evidence and its uncertainty come from its publisher, such as The Global Centre for Risk and Innovation (GCRI); see GCRI scientific and editorial integrity.
Terms used on this page.
Each term as this page uses it. Where a standard-setting body defines the term, the wording follows that body.
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Deliberative forum | A structured process in which participants weigh evidence and arguments together before reaching a view, the approach the OECD describes for representative deliberative processes. |
| Chatham House Rule | A rule under which participants may use information received but may not reveal the identity or affiliation of speakers. |
| Procedural fairness | The perception that decisions are made through fair, transparent and respectful processes. |
| Joint fact-finding | A process in which parties to a dispute agree on the questions, experts and methods to establish shared facts. |
Where this page's references lead.
The bodies and documents this page is read against. Status and editions change; each link goes to the issuing body.
Questions and answers.
Who facilitates a GRF dialogue?
Can I speak without being named?
What if I disagree with the draft record?
Are these methods the same for every dialogue?
Around GRF.
Start with an enquiry.
The current service level is R0: information and enquiries. An enquiry receives a reference and names the next step; applications, payments, compute allocations and registrations open only when their team, terms and review capacity exist.