CONCEPT
Consequence Condition
Fung's third condition: participatory outcomes must exercise genuine influence over actual decisions, not merely enter the administrative record as optional inputs that decision-makers are free to disregard.
The consequence condition is the most frequently violated of Fung's three conditions, because it demands what decision-makers are most reluctant to grant: binding authority. Participation without consequence is worse than no participation at all — it consumes the time and attention of participants, generates expectations that are subsequently betrayed, and erodes the trust that genuine participation requires. Porto Alegre's assemblies worked because their decisions were binding; Chicago's beat meetings worked because plans were implemented with accountability. A stakeholder session in which affected communities describe concerns to executives free to disregard everything they hear fails the condition regardless of the sincerity involved. Consequence requires costly institutional commitment, not merely procedural openness.
In The You On AI Field Guide
The condition identifies the most reliable indicator of whether a participatory mechanism is genuine or theatrical: does participation carry binding force, or is it advisory? The distinction is not hypothetical. Most AI governance consultation mechanisms are explicitly advisory — decision-makers solicit input while retaining unilateral authority. This structure produces predictable results: input that
Keep reading with YOU ON AI
Unlock the full book, 10,000+ field-guide entries, and a 1000+ thinker library. If you have a book code, register now — it takes a minute.