How can governments turn commitments to participation, innovation and reform into improvements that citizens experience in their everyday lives?
This question connected several discussions that interested Dr Monique Bennett, Policy Dialogue Manager at Policy Innovation Lab, during a recent OECD forum.
Held in Paris on 12–13 October 2026, the OECD Global Forum on Building Trust and Reinforcing Democracy brought together government representatives, researchers and practitioners. Its programme examined how public institutions can respond to changing expectations while strengthening democratic governance.
For Dr Bennett, the discussions highlighted connections between public trust, meaningful participation and governments’ capacity to deliver. They also offered an opportunity to consider how international experiences relate to South Africa’s own reform debates. A striking observation was the familiarity of many challenges discussed. Administrative fragmentation, procurement delays and difficulties translating policy into practice featured across contributions from different countries.
Dr Bennett noted that South African discussions often identify similar problems and propose comparable solutions. This prompted reflection on the conditions that enable governments to implement ideas and sustain change.
Trust works in both directions
Contributions from the Minister Anna-Kaisa Ikonen of Finland made a particularly positive impression because of their attention to citizens’ experiences and perspectives. One question stood out: alongside asking whether citizens trust government, how much does government trust its citizens?
This framing drew attention to how public institutions recognise citizens’ knowledge and ability to contribute to decisions. Examples of national dialogues illustrated opportunities for government and civil society to encounter different perspectives and build relationships. Looking beyond national averages when interpreting trust was another interesting point because differences between social groups can reveal experiences that broad measures sometimes obscure.
The distinction between stakeholder engagement and citizen involvement was another important consideration. Engagement with established organisations may not capture the experiences of people who rarely participate in formal policy discussions.
For the Lab’s policy dialogue project, these discussions raised questions about whose voices are heard and how their contributions influence subsequent decisions. They also highlighted the importance of sustained participation. Creating opportunities for engagement requires attention to the relationships, resources and institutional arrangements that keep people involved.
Making government simpler for citizens
A recurring theme concerned the complexity people encounter when accessing public services. Dr Bennett was particularly interested in the argument that simplification should precede digitisation. The Portuguese contribution by Minister Gonçalo Saraiva Matias, connected this issue with public frustration when government processes fail to resolve everyday problems. Digital tools offer limited value when underlying procedures remain unnecessarily complicated.
Examples involving housing permits and infrastructure procurement illustrated how administrative delays can postpone solutions and create opportunities for corruption.
The issue of procurement frequently emerged across the discussions. Its significance extended beyond purchasing procedures to governments’ ability to deliver infrastructure, adopt technology and maintain public integrity. Discussions about organising services around citizens’ life events offered a related perspective. People’s needs frequently span departments, while administrative responsibilities remain divided between institutions.
The challenge is therefore to make these services work together in ways that reduce the burden on citizens.
Digital transformation depends on people and institutions
The relationship between technology and organisational change was another strong area of interest during the Forum.
Contributions from the Dominican Republic Minister Sigmund Freund described difficulties arising when public institutions digitise separately. Dr Bennett highlighted the observation that interoperability is also a human and administrative challenge. Connecting systems requires institutions to cooperate, clarify responsibilities and reconsider established ways of working.
Mexico’s contribution reinforced this point through discussions about institutional culture. Passing legislation does not automatically change how officials work or how citizens experience government.
There was an accompanying emphasis on training, incentives and public servants’ ability to act proactively. Skills discussed included cybersecurity and appropriate AI use. These observations connected with South Africa’s contribution on ethical leadership and the professionalisation of the public service.
Preparing government for future challenges
Sessions on proactive government extended the discussion from responding to immediate demands towards anticipating future needs. There was an emphasis on embedding foresight within institutions and drawing on different disciplines to identify emerging challenges.
The ability to interpret evidence was central. Governments need officials who can recognise patterns, assess warnings and understand what information means for policy decisions. Diverse professional backgrounds and perspectives can help institutions identify blind spots and avoid groupthink.
Contributions from Co-Develop also drew Dr Bennett’s attention to the longer-term conditions for effective digital public infrastructure. These included financing systems throughout their life cycle and supporting participation from the outset.
The discussion highlighted costs that can receive insufficient attention when projects focus primarily on launch. Maintaining safeguards, supporting users and sustaining institutional capacity require continuing resources.
What will AI change for citizens?
The discussion on agentic AI raised the question on whether these technologies make dealing with government easier?
Examples from Norway and Mistral AI explored faster access to support and better interactions with public services. These possibilities connected with a recurring theme: citizens should not have to navigate government’s internal complexity to get help.
Making that possible requires attention to the institutions behind the technology. Fragmented systems, slow procurement and limited skills can prevent promising innovations from improving services.
A takeaway of the forum was how familiar these challenges felt from South African policy discussions. The international examples offered useful ways to examine what enables implementation, from Finland’s citizen dialogues to Portugal’s emphasis on simplifying processes before digitising them.
For the Policy Innovation Lab, these discussions connect responsible AI with practical questions about how government works and whose needs inform its decisions.
The forum’s themes ultimately meet in everyday experiences: an understandable explanation, a simpler application or assistance that arrives when needed. These are concrete opportunities for governments to demonstrate responsiveness and earn trust.