APPENDIX 1. Questions asked to policy makers and jurors.

Questions for policy makers
The following questions were asked in interviews with several policy makers who had interacted with the third citizens’ jury (interviews with Member of the Local Executive that requested the jury advice, one senior urban planner of the municipality, the responsible member of the Executive of the waterboard, and a senior planner of the waterboard):

  1. Did you learn new facts from your interactions with the jurors?
  2. Did you develop new insights or new considerations with regard to water issues because of your experience with the jury?
  3. Did your view of citizens change over the process?
  4. How have the jury’s recommendations affected policy decisions?

Questions for the jurors
For all three juries described here, a written questionnaire was given to the jurors. A large proportion of the questions were simply repeated so as to gather comparable data and to be able to see shifts in opinion. The post-jury questionnaire also contained various questions intended to evaluate the jury process, interaction with witnesses, quality of the facilitator, etc. These questions were all asked in Dutch; therefore, we provide here only a sample of the questions asked of the first jury (fully reported in Huitema et al. 2004), translated into English by the authors:
  1. Please finish the following sentence: “I find the current water quality in the Markermeer” (tick what is appropriate): very good, good, not good – not bad, bad, very bad, I don’t know.
  2. Please finish the following sentence: “In my opinion, the level of activity to improve water quality in the Markermeer should be” (tick what is appropriate): intensified, stay as it is, be reduced, I don’t know”.
  3. Please indicate your agreement with the following possible elements of good water quality. “I find that the water in the Markermeer should be ... (tick to indicate your agreement): clear, odorless, streaming, colorless”: strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, strongly disagree, I don’t know.
  4. Please indicate by means of a grade to which extent the Markermeer should be made available to the following economic sectors (grades 1–10, 1 signifying the lake should not be used by this sector at all, 10 the lake should most certainly be available for use by this sector”: (write grade after every sector’s name): drinking water, agriculture, cattle breeding, professional fisheries, nature reservation, recreation, industry, professional shipping, sand and clay mining.
  5. Do you feel that the presentations by the witnesses have increased your knowledge in the field of water quality? (tick appropriate answer): yes, no.
  6. Do you feel that your personal opinions have influenced the jury’s recommendations? (please tick appropriate answer): absolutely not, only a bit, strongly, very strongly.
  7. Are you satisfied with the way the following people have fulfilled their roles during the jury process (questions about: the facilitator, the organizing team, the witnesses, fellow jurors) (tick the appropriate answer: very satisfied, satisfied, neutral, disappointed, very disappointed.