Democracy by Design: The Rise of Consul and the Digital Transformation of Civic Participation

Introduction

The story of Consul Democracy is not merely one of software development; it is a tale of democratic evolution forged in the crucible of economic crisis, political disillusionment, and civic awakening. This chronicle traces how a grassroots movement for greater citizen participation transformed into one of the world's most widely adopted digital democracy platforms, ultimately reshaping the relationship between citizens and their governments across the globe.

As we navigate through the turbulent decade preceding Consul's creation, profile the visionaries who built it, document its implementation, and examine its global impact, a central theme emerges: institutions of governance must evolve to meet the changing expectations of citizenship in the digital age. The Consul Democracy platform represents one of the most significant experiments in this evolution—an attempt to bridge the growing chasm between citizens and their representatives through technology that enables direct participation in democratic processes.

This is a story of institutional innovation emerging from crisis, of how open-source technology became a vehicle for democratic renewal, and of the ongoing struggle to create more responsive and participatory forms of governance in the twenty-first century.

Part I: Seeds of Change - The Decade Before Consul (2005-2015)

Chapter 1: Crisis and Awakening in Spain

The origins of Consul Democracy can be traced to the profound economic and political crisis that engulfed Spain following the 2008 global financial crash. By 2011, Spain was experiencing unemployment rates above 20%, with youth unemployment reaching a staggering 45%. Housing foreclosures skyrocketed as the real estate bubble burst, leaving thousands of families homeless while banks received government bailouts. The combination of economic hardship and perceived corruption among the political elite created a perfect storm of civic discontent.

The crisis had deep roots in Spain's economic model that had developed since the late 1990s. The country had experienced a massive real estate bubble, with housing prices increasing by more than 200% between 1996 and 2007. Construction became the engine of the Spanish economy, accounting for nearly 16% of GDP and 12% of employment by 2007. When the global financial crisis struck, this house of cards collapsed spectacularly. Construction activity plummeted by 60%, and over 1.5 million jobs in the sector were lost between 2007 and 2011.

The government's response to the crisis further fueled public outrage. In May 2010, under pressure from the European Union, Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero announced a €15 billion austerity package that included public sector wage cuts, pension freezes, and reductions in social spending. These measures were implemented despite Zapatero's campaign promises to protect social welfare. The perceived betrayal was compounded by a series of corruption scandals that implicated politicians from both major parties. The Gürtel case, which involved kickbacks for government contracts, and the Bárcenas papers, which revealed illegal financing of the People's Party, eroded public trust in political institutions.

On May 15, 2011, this simmering frustration erupted into large-scale protests across Spain. What became known as the 15M movement or "Los Indignados" (The Outraged) saw thousands of citizens occupying public squares in Madrid, Barcelona, and other major cities. In Madrid, protesters established a sprawling encampment in Puerta del Sol, the city's central square, complete with kitchen facilities, libraries, childcare services, and working groups addressing various social and political issues. Similar encampments appeared in more than 50 Spanish cities, creating a nationwide network of citizen assemblies.

The movement was characterized by its horizontal organization, rejection of traditional political hierarchies, and demands for "real democracy." Rather than merely protesting against specific policies, the Indignados questioned the very foundations of representative democracy in Spain. They developed innovative decision-making processes based on consensus rather than majority rule, used hand signals to facilitate large-group discussions, and leveraged digital tools to coordinate actions and share information. The occupation of public squares became a laboratory for experimenting with new forms of direct democracy and collective governance.

"We want a real democracy" became their rallying cry, reflecting widespread sentiment that the existing political system was failing to represent ordinary citizens. The protesters criticized the two-party system dominated by the People's Party (PP) and the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE), which they perceived as being captured by financial interests and disconnected from the needs of citizens. They articulated this critique in a series of manifestos and documents, most notably "How to Cook a Non-Violent Revolution," which outlined their grievances and aspirations. Their slogan "No nos representan" ("They don't represent us") encapsulated a fundamental crisis of political representation that would later drive the development of alternative participation mechanisms like Consul.

The movement's transformative impact on Spanish political consciousness cannot be overstated. A 2012 survey found that 65% of Spaniards expressed sympathy with the Indignados, while only 27% disapproved. The movement successfully shifted public discourse toward issues of democratic reform, transparency, and participation, creating a fertile ground for the political and technological innovations that would follow. As political scientist Ernesto Ganuza noted, "The 15M changed how Spaniards think about democracy. It wasn't just about protesting austerity; it was about reimagining how citizens could participate in governance."

Chapter 2: From Protest to Politics - The Rise of New Political Platforms

The 15M movement gradually transformed from street protests into more organized political expressions. The encampments eventually disbanded—Madrid's Puerta del Sol camp was cleared on June 12, 2011, after nearly a month of occupation—but the movement's energy shifted to neighborhood assemblies, specialized working groups, and eventually formal political organizations. This evolution was not without internal tensions, as some activists believed that engaging with formal political institutions would compromise the movement's autonomy and radical vision.

By 2014, new political formations including Podemos at the national level and various "citizen platforms" at the municipal level had emerged. Podemos (Spanish for "We Can") was founded in January 2014 by Pablo Iglesias, a political science professor who had gained popularity as a television commentator. The party explicitly positioned itself as the political expression of the 15M movement, though this claim was contested by some activists. Podemos introduced innovative participation methods, including an online platform called "Plaza Podemos" where members could propose and vote on party policies.

At the municipal level, "citizen platforms" formed in dozens of Spanish cities to contest the May 2015 local elections. These platforms—with names like Barcelona en Comú (Barcelona in Common), Ahora Madrid (Madrid Now), and Zaragoza en Común (Zaragoza in Common)—were not traditional political parties but rather coalitions bringing together social movements, community organizations, and individuals new to politics. They emphasized participatory processes for developing their platforms and selecting candidates, often using digital tools to facilitate broad involvement.

In Madrid, the citizen platform Ahora Madrid brought together activists, community organizers, and political novices under the leadership of Manuela Carmena, a 71-year-old retired judge known for her human rights work. Carmena had been one of the founding members of the progressive legal collective Lawyers for Democracy during Spain's transition from dictatorship to democracy in the 1970s, and had later served on Spain's General Council of the Judiciary. Her candidacy represented a generational bridge between Spain's earlier democratic transition and the new wave of democratic renewal embodied by the 15M movement.

Ahora Madrid developed its electoral program through a combination of in-person workshops and an online participation platform. Over 15,000 citizens contributed to this process, proposing and voting on policy priorities. The resulting platform emphasized five key areas: democratic governance, human rights, sustainable city, economy for the common good, and integrated city. For each area, concrete measures were specified, including the creation of "mechanisms for direct citizen participation in the making of especially relevant decisions."

Against all expectations, Ahora Madrid secured 20 of the 57 seats in Madrid's municipal council in the May 2015 elections, coming second to the conservative People's Party, which won 21 seats but lacked a majority. With the support of the 9 councilors from the Socialist Party, Ahora Madrid formed a coalition government, and Carmena became mayor of Madrid on June 13, 2015. Similar "municipalist" coalitions took power in Barcelona, Valencia, Zaragoza, Cádiz, and several other Spanish cities, in what became known as the "cities of change" movement.

This electoral victory represented a profound shift in Spanish politics, bringing the participatory ideals of the 15M movement into the institutions of governance. As political scientist Joan Subirats observed, "These new municipal governments are attempting to translate the spirit of the squares into public policies." The new Madrid administration immediately set about implementing its promises of greater transparency and citizen involvement in decision-making, establishing a Department of Citizen Participation, Transparency, and Open Government led by Pablo Soto, a software developer and activist who had been involved in the 15M movement.

The transition from protest to institutional politics was not seamless. The new municipal governments faced resistance from entrenched bureaucracies, legal constraints on their authority, and the complex reality of governing diverse cities with limited resources. Some activists criticized the "municipalist" governments for compromising too much with established power structures, while conservatives accused them of incompetence and ideological extremism. Nevertheless, this political transformation created an unprecedented opportunity to experiment with new forms of citizen participation within formal government structures—the context in which Consul Democracy would soon be born.

Chapter 3: The Global Context - Digital Democracy Experiments Worldwide

The developments in Spain were not occurring in isolation. Across the globe, various experiments in digital democracy were underway, reflecting a broader trend toward using technology to enhance citizen participation. These initiatives responded to what political scientists have termed a "democratic deficit"—a growing disconnect between citizens and their representatives in established democracies, manifested in declining voter turnout, falling party membership, and decreasing trust in political institutions.

In Iceland, following the 2008 financial crisis and subsequent political turmoil, citizens were invited to participate in drafting a new constitution using digital tools. The country's banking system had collapsed spectacularly, with the combined debt of Iceland's three largest banks reaching over 900% of the country's GDP. The crisis triggered the "Pots and Pans Revolution," where thousands of Icelanders protested by banging kitchen utensils outside parliament, eventually forcing the government to resign. In the aftermath, Iceland embarked on an unprecedented experiment in democratic renewal.

The constitutional drafting process began with a randomly selected National Forum of 950 citizens who identified key values and priorities. A Constitutional Council of 25 elected citizens then drafted the document, using digital platforms to solicit input. The "Your Priorities" platform, developed by the Icelandic Citizens Foundation in 2008, allowed citizens to propose and debate ideas for the constitutional process. Council members posted draft clauses on Facebook and Twitter, receiving thousands of comments that informed revisions. The resulting draft constitution, approved by 67% of voters in a non-binding referendum, included innovative provisions for direct democracy, transparency, and public ownership of natural resources. Though political complications prevented the draft from being ratified, the process demonstrated the potential of combining digital tools with deliberative methods.

In Estonia, e-governance initiatives had started much earlier, with online voting introduced in 2005 and a comprehensive digital identity system that allowed citizens to interact with government services online. Estonia's pioneering approach emerged from unique historical circumstances: when the country regained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, it needed to build new governmental systems from scratch. Rather than replicating paper-based bureaucracies, Estonia's leaders—many of them young and tech-savvy—opted to create a digital state infrastructure from the outset.

The cornerstone of Estonia's system is a secure digital identity issued to every citizen. Using this ID and a personal PIN code, Estonians can vote online, file taxes, sign documents, access medical records, and use hundreds of other services through a unified portal. By 2025, over 99% of government services were available online, and approximately 35% of votes in national elections were cast electronically. While some critics raised concerns about security and the digital divide, Estonia's experience showed that comprehensive digital governance could enhance both efficiency and participation when backed by appropriate infrastructure, legal frameworks, and digital literacy initiatives.

Brazil had pioneered participatory budgeting (PB) in Porto Alegre in the 1980s, which was increasingly being enhanced with digital tools. The practice began in 1989 when the Workers' Party gained control of the city government and instituted a radical system of citizen control over municipal spending. The original Porto Alegre model involved in-person neighborhood assemblies where citizens identified local priorities, elected delegates to represent these priorities in city-wide forums, and ultimately decided how to allocate a portion of the municipal budget. By the early 2000s, thousands of cities worldwide had adopted versions of participatory budgeting, and many were incorporating digital elements to expand participation.

Belo Horizonte, Brazil's sixth-largest city, launched one of the first digital participatory budgeting platforms in 2006. Citizens could vote online for infrastructure projects in different regions of the city, with the most popular projects receiving funding. In the first digital PB process, over 170,000 citizens participated—approximately 10% of the city's voters—a significantly higher number than typically attended in-person assemblies. Similar digital PB platforms emerged in cities across Latin America, Europe, and North America, though most combined online participation with in-person elements to ensure inclusivity.

Other notable digital democracy experiments included Taiwan's vTaiwan platform, launched in 2015 to facilitate consensus-building on contentious regulatory issues. Using Pol.is, an AI-powered tool that identifies areas of consensus across different stakeholder groups, vTaiwan successfully mediated conflicts over Uber regulation, alcohol sales, and other issues. In Paris, the "Madame Mayor, I have an idea" platform allowed citizens to propose and vote on projects for city funding, allocating €500 million over five years. The city actively worked to ensure participation from marginalized communities, setting up physical kiosks in low-income neighborhoods and providing assistance to those with limited digital access.

These international experiences provided both inspiration and practical lessons for the developers of what would become Consul Democracy. The global landscape of digital democracy was evolving rapidly, with various approaches being tested in different contexts. The successes and challenges of these diverse experiments informed the design choices of the Consul platform, particularly regarding the balance between digital and in-person participation, the importance of institutional integration, and the need for measures to ensure inclusive access. As Miguel Arana, who would become Madrid's Director of Citizen Participation, observed after studying these global precedents, "We wanted to learn from everyone, but we also knew we needed to create something tailored to our specific context and goals."

Part II: Architects of Change - The People Behind Consul Democracy

Chapter 4: Political Leadership - Manuela Carmena and the Vision for Participatory Madrid

"At public events, the septuagenarian mayor would often demonstrate the Decide Madrid platform herself, sending a powerful message that digital participation was for everyone, not just the young or tech-savvy"

When Manuela Carmena took office as Madrid's mayor in June 2015, she was 71 years old and had never held political office. Her background as a judge and human rights advocate had earned her respect across the political spectrum. Born in Madrid in 1944 during the Franco dictatorship, Carmena came of age during a period of significant political repression. She studied law at the Complutense University of Madrid, graduating in 1965, and went on to become a labor lawyer defending workers and political prisoners during the late Franco era.

In 1977, during Spain's transition to democracy, Carmena co-founded the progressive legal collective "Abogados de Atocha" (Lawyers of Atocha). That same year, far-right terrorists attacked the group's office, killing five people and wounding four others in what became known as the Atocha massacre. Carmena herself escaped the attack only because she had left the office earlier. The tragedy deeply affected her and strengthened her commitment to justice and democratic values.

Carmena served as a judge from 1981 to 2010, including as a judge of surveillance of penitentiary conditions, where she worked to improve prisoner rights and rehabilitation programs. From 1996 to 2001, she served on Spain's General Council of the Judiciary, the constitutional body that governs the judicial branch. After retirement, she founded "Yayos Emprendedores" (Entrepreneurial Grandparents), a social enterprise that helped former prisoners manufacture and sell children's clothing and toys.

This rich background in justice, human rights, and social entrepreneurship shaped Carmena's approach to governance. Her leadership style emphasized dialogue, consensus-building, and citizen involvement—a striking contrast to the more traditional top-down governance that had characterized Madrid's administration for decades. As journalist Guillem Martínez observed, "Carmena brought to the mayoralty not the certainties of an ideologue but the careful listening of a judge accustomed to weighing evidence and perspectives."

Carmena provided crucial political support for the development of Consul. She understood that fulfilling her campaign promise of increasing citizen participation would require innovative tools. In her inaugural address on June 13, 2015, she declared, "Madrid will be governed by listening to its people." She backed this rhetoric with concrete institutional changes, creating a new Department of Citizen Participation, Transparency, and Open Government and allocating substantial resources to participation initiatives.

In public statements, she consistently emphasized the need to "open up city hall" and create channels for citizens to participate directly in governance. During a September 2015 press conference announcing the launch of the Decide Madrid platform, Carmena articulated a vision of "continuous democracy" that went beyond periodic elections: "Democracy is not just voting every four years," she stated. "It is about citizens having a real say in the decisions that affect their daily lives. This platform is not just a tool; it is a new way of understanding the relationship between the government and the people of Madrid."

Carmena's senior age proved an asset rather than a liability in promoting digital innovation. At public events, the septuagenarian mayor would often demonstrate the Decide Madrid platform herself, sending a powerful message that digital participation was for everyone, not just the young or tech-savvy. Her embrace of technology helped counter skepticism about digital democracy among older residents, an important consideration in a city where approximately 20% of the population was over 65.

As mayor, Carmena appointed Pablo Soto as Councillor for Participation, Transparency, and Open Government—a new position that signaled the administration's commitment to these values. The choice of Soto, a 36-year-old software developer and activist with roots in the 15M movement, was particularly significant. Soto had gained prominence in the early 2000s as the creator of peer-to-peer file-sharing applications, which led to a high-profile legal battle with the recording industry. Though he eventually won the case, the experience shaped his views on technology, intellectual property, and power.

Soto also had a personal story that resonated with many Madrileños. Born with spinal muscular atrophy, he used a wheelchair and had experienced firsthand the challenges of navigating a city with significant accessibility barriers. His appointment represented Carmena's commitment to both technological innovation and social inclusion—twin values that would influence the development of the Consul platform.

Carmena gave Soto and his team considerable autonomy while providing consistent political backing when needed. When bureaucratic resistance threatened to slow down the development of participation initiatives, Carmena would intervene to clear obstacles. When conservative opposition parties criticized the expense of participation programs, she defended them as essential investments in democratic renewal. And when the first citizen proposals began receiving enough support to trigger implementation, she ensured that city departments took them seriously, even when they came from ordinary citizens rather than established interest groups.

This combination of visionary leadership from Carmena and tactical implementation by Soto's team created the conditions for rapid development of Consul. As political scientist Inés Gómez noted in a 2017 analysis, "The Madrid experiment shows the importance of political will at the highest levels combined with technical expertise and activist energy. Without any one of these elements, the project would likely have faltered." The mayor's unwavering support for participation, backed by concrete resources and institutional changes, provided the foundation on which the technical innovation of Consul could be built.

Chapter 5: The Development Team - Technologists and Civic Innovators

The technical development of Consul began in July 2015, spearheaded by a team within Madrid's city government. This team brought together software developers, participation experts, and city officials, many of whom had backgrounds in activism and the 15M movement. The composition of this team reflected a deliberate strategy to combine technical expertise with participatory values—to create not just functional software but a tool embodying democratic principles.

The development team was housed in MediaLab-Prado, a city-owned civic innovation lab located in a converted sawmill in central Madrid. This location was symbolic as well as practical: rather than working in traditional government offices, the team operated in a space dedicated to the intersection of technology, culture, and citizenship. MediaLab-Prado had been a hub for digital activism during the 15M movement, hosting hackathons and workshops on technological tools for social change. Placing the Consul development team in this environment reinforced the project's roots in civic activism and its commitment to open, collaborative creation.

Key members of the original development team included:

1. Pablo Soto, Councillor for Participation, who provided political leadership for the project. As mentioned previously, Soto had an unusual background for a government official. His experience creating peer-to-peer file-sharing applications like Blubster and Piolet in the early 2000s had given him both technical skills and a critical perspective on how technology could distribute or concentrate power. Soto often spoke about how his battle with the recording industry—which sued him for €13 million but ultimately lost—shaped his views on open-source software and digital rights. "When I was creating file-sharing applications, I was trying to democratize access to culture," he explained in a 2016 interview. "With Consul, we're trying to democratize access to decision-making power."

2. Miguel Arana, who became the Director of Citizen Participation for Madrid. Arana's journey to this position illustrates the pathway from street activism to institutional innovation that characterized many involved in the project. During the 15M movement, Arana had been part of the technology commission in the Puerta del Sol encampment, helping develop digital tools for coordinating the movement's activities. He later co-founded LaboDemo, a civic technology laboratory that experimented with digital tools for collective decision-making. When Ahora Madrid won the 2015 election, Arana joined the new administration, bringing his experience in both grassroots organizing and technical development. "We saw Consul as a way to scale up the kind of horizontal decision-making we practiced in the squares," Arana noted. "The challenge was translating those processes into a digital tool that could work for a city of over three million people."

3. Alberto García, a UX/UI designer who went by the username "decabeza" in the development community. García had previously worked for various startups and social enterprises, developing user interfaces for web applications. His focus on making the platform accessible and user-friendly for citizens regardless of their technical proficiency was crucial for the project's goal of inclusive participation. García conducted extensive user testing with diverse groups of Madrid residents, including seniors, migrants, and people with disabilities, to ensure the platform would be accessible to all. "A participation tool that isn't usable by everyone isn't really democratic," García insisted. "Every design decision we made was guided by the principle of inclusivity."

4. Julián Herrero, a Ruby on Rails developer (known as "microweb10"), who worked on the core technical architecture of the platform. Herrero brought experience from both commercial software development and volunteer work on open-source projects. His technical decisions shaped the fundamental architecture of Consul, establishing patterns that would enable its later expansion and adaptation. Herrero emphasized modular design principles that would allow different features of the platform to be turned on or off depending on local needs, an approach that would later facilitate Consul's adoption in diverse contexts around the world.

The team also included several other developers, designers, and participation experts who made significant contributions. Enrique García Cota, another experienced developer, worked on the platform's security features and voting mechanisms. Raimond García, a front-end developer, focused on making the platform responsive across different devices. María Checa, with a background in public policy, helped translate participation methodologies into digital features. Javier Sánchez, an accessibility specialist, ensured the platform complied with international accessibility standards.

The development followed open-source principles from the beginning, with the code publicly available on GitHub under the GNU Affero General Public License version 3. This license not only made the code freely available but also required that any modifications or improvements be shared under the same terms, ensuring that the platform would remain a common resource rather than being privatized. The team's commitment to transparency extended beyond the code itself to the development process, with team meetings open to public observation and regular updates published on the project's progress.

We weren't just writing code; we were coding democracy

The project used Ruby on Rails as its primary programming language, with PostgreSQL for database management. These technology choices reflected both practical considerations—Rails' suitability for rapid web application development—and philosophical alignment, as both Ruby and Rails emerged from communities with strong values around elegant design and developer happiness. The team also employed modern development practices like test-driven development, continuous integration, and code reviews to maintain quality as the project grew.

The team's approach to development was iterative, releasing early versions of the platform and continuously improving based on user feedback. This methodology enabled rapid development, with the first version of the platform—called "Decide Madrid"—launched just three months after development began on September 7, 2015. The platform initially included basic features for debates, proposals, and user accounts, with additional functionality added in subsequent releases. This incremental approach allowed the team to gather real-world usage data and adapt the platform based on actual citizen experiences rather than theoretical assumptions.

Regular "work in progress" presentations at MediaLab-Prado invited citizens to test early versions of the platform and provide feedback. These sessions sometimes led to significant pivots in the development roadmap. For example, early user testing revealed that the initial proposal submission process was too complex, requiring multiple steps and technical language. Based on this feedback, the team simplified the interface, reducing the number of required fields and replacing technical terms with plain language. When data showed that most users were accessing the platform via mobile devices, the team prioritized responsive design improvements.

The development team's composition, values, and methods established a template that would influence not only the technical features of Consul but also its later evolution as a global project. The combination of political vision, technical expertise, design sensibility, and participatory methods created a foundation for a platform that was simultaneously ambitious in its democratic goals and practical in its implementation. As Miguel Arana reflected later, "We weren't just writing code; we were coding democracy."

Chapter 6: Civil Society Partners and International Collaborators

While the Madrid city government initiated Consul's development, the project quickly attracted interest and contributions from civil society organizations and international partners. These collaborations helped enhance the platform and promote its adoption globally.

Organizations like the Open Government Partnership provided international visibility and networking opportunities. The Sunlight Foundation, a U.S.-based transparency advocacy organization, contributed expertise on open data standards. European institutions, including various EU bodies focused on digital innovation, also supported the project through funding and knowledge exchange.

As Consul gained traction, a global community of developers, participation experts, and government officials formed around the project. This community began sharing experiences, contributing code improvements, and adapting the platform to diverse contexts.

The collaborative, open-source nature of the project enabled rapid improvement and adaptation. By embracing external contributions, the Consul team created a platform that could evolve more quickly than traditional government IT projects and respond to the diverse needs of users around the world.

Part III: Building the Platform - Technical Development and Implementation

Chapter 7: From Concept to Code - The Technical Development Process

The technical development of Consul began on July 15, 2015, with the first production deployment on September 7, 2015, to the decide.madrid.es platform. This rapid development timeline reflected the Madrid government's commitment to quickly implementing its participatory democracy agenda.

Consul was developed as a web application using Ruby on Rails, a framework chosen for its balance of development speed, flexibility, and robust architecture. The development team opted for a modular design that would allow cities to enable or disable specific features based on their needs.

The core features developed for the initial release included:

1. **Debates**: Open forums where citizens could discuss issues of concern to the city.

2. **Proposals**: A system for citizens to submit specific policy or project proposals and gather support from other residents.

3. **Participatory Budgeting**: A mechanism for citizens to propose and vote on projects to be funded from a designated portion of the city budget.

4. **Voting**: Secure online voting systems for citizens to express preferences on various initiatives.

5. **Collaborative Legislation**: Tools allowing citizens to comment on and suggest modifications to draft legislation or regulations.

The development process embodied many of the same participatory principles the platform sought to promote. The code was open source from the beginning, published on GitHub under the GNU Affero General Public License, which ensured that the software remained free and open as it was adopted by other cities.

Regular "hackathons" and public development events invited external contributors to help improve the platform. This collaborative approach not only enhanced the technical quality of the software but also built a community of developers who would later help implement Consul in other locations.

Chapter 8: Decide Madrid - The First Implementation

The first implementation of Consul was "Decide Madrid" (decide.madrid.es), launched in September 2015. This served as both a production platform for Madrid's citizens and a showcase demonstrating the potential of the software to other governments.

The Madrid implementation included all the core features of Consul, with a particular emphasis on participatory budgeting. The city allocated €60 million to citizen-proposed projects in 2016, increasing to €100 million by 2018.

The platform immediately attracted significant citizen engagement. Within the first year, over 180,000 Madrid residents had registered accounts, and thousands of proposals had been submitted. The first major consultation conducted through the platform involved redesigning Madrid's Plaza de España, one of the city's iconic public spaces. Nearly 27,000 citizens participated in this process, providing input on design proposals and voting on the final selection.

To ensure inclusivity, Madrid established physical "participation spaces" throughout the city where citizens without internet access could receive assistance in using the platform. The city also conducted extensive outreach campaigns to raise awareness about the platform and encourage participation from all segments of society.

Implementation challenges included verifying the identity of users (to prevent fraudulent voting), ensuring accessibility for users with disabilities, and integrating the platform with existing administrative processes to ensure that citizen inputs were actually implemented by city departments.

Chapter 9: From Madrid to the World - Global Adoption and Adaptation

The open-source nature of Consul allowed it to spread rapidly beyond Madrid. By the end of 2016, several other Spanish cities had implemented the platform, each adapting it to their local context. Barcelona initially adopted Consul but later developed its own fork called "Decidim," which diverged to address the specific needs of the Catalan city.

International adoption soon followed. Buenos Aires, Argentina became one of the first major cities outside Spain to implement Consul, followed by Paris, France and Porto Alegre, Brazil. Each implementation brought unique adaptations and contributed improvements back to the core codebase.

The Madrid team established a dedicated international support service to assist other cities in implementing the platform. This included technical documentation, training materials, and direct consultation. The team also organized "CONSULCon," an annual conference bringing together implementers from around the world to share experiences and best practices.

By 2018, Consul had been implemented in over 100 cities and institutions across more than 30 countries, with the software translated into dozens of languages. This rapid global adoption demonstrated both the technical quality of the platform and the widespread demand for tools to facilitate citizen participation.

Part IV: Democracy in Action - Outcomes and Impact

Chapter 10: Madrid's Experience - Successes and Limitations

The implementation of Decide Madrid produced significant outcomes for the city's governance. Between 2015 and 2019, Madrid citizens submitted nearly 20,000 proposals through the platform, with dozens receiving enough support to trigger formal consideration by the city government.

Participatory budgeting through the platform directed over €300 million to citizen-proposed projects, funding initiatives ranging from infrastructure improvements to social programs. The number of citizens participating in these processes grew steadily, from 45,000 in 2016 to over 90,000 by 2018.

Despite these successes, the platform faced limitations. The requirement that proposals receive support from at least 1% of the city's population (originally set at 2% but lowered due to low success rates) proved challenging for many citizen initiatives. This threshold meant that only proposals with broad appeal or backed by organized campaigns typically advanced to implementation.

The integration of the platform with administrative processes also proved challenging. Even when proposals received sufficient support, they were subject to technical, legal, and financial feasibility assessments by city departments. This filtering process sometimes created frustration among citizens whose proposals were deemed unfeasible after garnering significant support.

Another limitation emerged in the capacity to process the sheer volume of citizen input. With thousands of proposals and comments submitted, the city struggled to provide timely responses to all participants, potentially undermining the sense of responsiveness the platform aimed to create.

Chapter 11: The Political Challenge - Changes in Administration

In May 2019, Madrid's municipal elections brought a significant political shift. Mayor Manuela Carmena's party won the most seats but was unable to form a coalition. Instead, the conservative People's Party formed an alliance with the center-right Ciudadanos party and the far-right Vox party, bringing José Luis Martínez-Almeida to the mayor's office.

This political transition posed an existential challenge for Decide Madrid and the broader Consul project. The new administration, which had campaigned partly against what it characterized as the previous government's excessive focus on participation at the expense of effective management, reduced the budget and staffing for participation initiatives.

Several key members of the original Consul development team, including Miguel Arana, left the city government following the change in administration. The new government maintained the Decide Madrid platform but reduced its prominence in city governance, lowering the participatory budgeting allocation and conducting fewer consultations.

This political challenge highlighted a fundamental vulnerability of digital participation initiatives: their dependence on consistent political support. When administrations change, particularly with significant ideological shifts, participation platforms may be marginalized or repurposed.

Chapter 12: The Foundation - Ensuring Continuity and Evolution

Recognizing the vulnerability of Consul to political changes in Madrid, key members of the original development team worked with international partners to establish the Consul Democracy Foundation in 2019. Registered in the Netherlands as "Stichting Consul Democracy," the foundation aimed to ensure the platform's continued development and support regardless of political changes in any single implementing city.

The foundation's mission is to "improve direct democracy and citizen participation worldwide by using Consul Democracy." It took over the roles previously played by the Madrid city government: developing and maintaining the software, supporting the global community of users, promoting the platform internationally, and organizing events like CONSULCon.

The foundation is governed by a board and operates with a small staff, including a director and network manager. It works with "certified companies" that provide technical support to institutions implementing Consul, as well as "regional partners" that promote the platform in specific geographic areas.

The creation of the foundation marked an important transition for Consul from a Madrid-centered project to a truly global and independent initiative. It demonstrated the maturity of the project and its evolution beyond its original context.

Chapter 13: Global Impact - A Comparative Study of Implementations

By 2025, Consul Democracy had been implemented by approximately 250 institutions in more than 35 countries, making it one of the most widely adopted digital democracy platforms in the world. These implementations span from small towns to major cities and even national governments, each adapting the platform to their specific context and needs.

Some notable implementations include:

- **Buenos Aires, Argentina**: Implemented a successful participatory budgeting program that has funded hundreds of citizen-proposed projects.

- **Porto Alegre, Brazil**: The birthplace of participatory budgeting integrated Consul to enhance its already strong tradition of citizen participation.

- **New York City, USA**: Adapted specific modules of Consul to support its participatory budgeting processes in various city districts.

- **Paris, France**: Implemented the platform to support its ambitious "Budget Participatif" program, one of the largest participatory budgeting initiatives in Europe.

Comparative analysis of these implementations reveals both common patterns and important variations. Participatory budgeting has emerged as the most widely implemented and successful feature across contexts, perhaps because it combines concrete outcomes (funded projects) with a relatively straightforward process (proposing and voting on projects).

The scale of implementation varies dramatically, from cities allocating less than 1% of their budget to participation to those dedicating over 5%. Similarly, participation rates range from less than 1% of eligible citizens to over 10% in the most successful cases.

The institutional context of implementation also varies widely. Some cities have created dedicated participation departments with substantial staff and resources, while others operate their platforms with minimal dedicated support. These differences in institutional commitment significantly impact the effectiveness and sustainability of participation processes.

Part V: The Broader Landscape - Consul in Context

Chapter 14: Digital Democracy Ecosystem - Comparative Analysis

Consul Democracy exists within a broader ecosystem of digital democracy platforms and initiatives. Understanding this ecosystem provides important context for assessing Consul's unique contributions and limitations.

Among the most significant comparable platforms are:

- **Decidim**: Developed in Barcelona as a fork of Consul, Decidim evolved into a distinct platform with its own features and philosophy. While sharing Consul's commitment to open-source development and participatory governance, Decidim offers greater flexibility in process design and places more emphasis on deliberative processes.

- **Your Priorities**: Created by the Icelandic Citizens Foundation, Your Priorities focuses on structured debate and idea generation. It emphasizes helping groups identify areas of consensus and constructively address disagreements.

- **Liquid Feedback**: Developed in Germany, Liquid Feedback implements a specific model of "liquid democracy" that allows citizens to delegate their voting power to trusted representatives on specific issues.

- **CIVICUS Monitor**: A global platform focused on monitoring civic space and citizens' rights to participate, associate, and express themselves.

Compared to these alternatives, Consul's distinctive features include its comprehensive suite of participation tools, its focus on integration with government administrative processes, and its particularly strong support for participatory budgeting. Consul also benefits from having one of the largest implementation communities, creating network effects in knowledge sharing and code improvement.

However, other platforms offer advantages in specific areas. Decidim provides more flexibility in process design, Your Priorities offers stronger deliberation tools, and Liquid Feedback implements more innovative voting mechanisms. This diversity of approaches reflects the evolving and experimental nature of digital democracy as a field.

Chapter 15: Theoretical Framework - Democracy by Design

Consul Democracy embodies specific theoretical assumptions about democracy and participation that are worth examining explicitly. The platform's design reflects a particular vision of democracy that combines elements of direct democracy with representative institutions.

At its core, Consul implements what political theorists might call a "thin" conception of direct democracy. It enables citizens to directly propose and vote on specific initiatives (through proposals and participatory budgeting) but does not fundamentally challenge the role of elected representatives and bureaucrats in governing. Indeed, citizen proposals must still pass through administrative feasibility assessments and ultimately require implementation by government officials.

This hybrid approach attempts to address what political scientists call the "scale problem" of democracy—the challenge of enabling meaningful participation in large, complex societies. By using digital tools to reduce the transaction costs of participation and creating structured processes for citizen input, Consul tries to make direct participation feasible without completely replacing representative institutions.

The platform also reflects specific normative commitments regarding what makes participation legitimate. It emphasizes transparency (all proposals and votes are public), equality (each citizen has equal formal power), and accessibility (the platform is designed to be usable regardless of technical expertise). However, it places less emphasis on deliberation—the process of reasoned discussion through which preferences might be transformed—than some alternative approaches to participation.

Understanding these theoretical foundations helps clarify both the potential and limitations of the Consul approach to digital democracy. It represents one possible configuration of participatory and representative elements, but not the only conceivable design for democratic institutions in the digital age.

Chapter 16: Beyond Software - The Institutional Challenges of Participation

The experience of Consul Democracy demonstrates that technological tools, while necessary, are insufficient for meaningful democratic renewal. The most successful implementations of Consul have combined the software with significant institutional reforms and cultural changes within government.

Several key institutional factors have emerged as crucial for effective digital participation:

1. **Dedicated Staff and Resources**: Cities that establish dedicated participation teams with adequate staffing and funding generally achieve higher levels of engagement and more successful implementation of citizen proposals.

2. **Clear Mandates and Processes**: Effective participation requires clarity about which decisions are subject to citizen input and how that input will be processed. Ambiguity about these questions can lead to frustration when citizen expectations go unmet.

3. **Cross-Departmental Integration**: Participation platforms must be integrated with the operational departments that ultimately implement decisions. Siloed participation initiatives that lack connections to the rest of government often fail to produce tangible outcomes.

4. **Political Commitment**: Sustained support from political leadership is essential, particularly for ensuring that citizen input is actually acted upon. This reliance on political will represents a vulnerability for participation initiatives, as demonstrated by the changes following Madrid's 2019 election.

5. **Civic Infrastructure**: Beyond government institutions, successful participation requires organized civil society groups that can mobilize citizens, help them navigate participation processes, and hold governments accountable for implementing results.

These institutional factors highlight the limitation of technological solutionism—the belief that technology alone can solve complex social and political problems. While Consul provides powerful tools for participation, those tools must be embedded within supportive institutional contexts to realize their potential.

Part VI: The Road Ahead - Challenges and Opportunities

Chapter 17: Technological Evolution - Future Developments

The Consul Democracy platform continues to evolve, with ongoing technical development addressing both current limitations and emerging opportunities. Several key areas of technological development are worth noting:

1. **Artificial Intelligence Integration**: Experiments with AI tools to help categorize and summarize large volumes of citizen input are underway, potentially addressing the challenge of information overload that has limited the effectiveness of some participation processes.

2. **Mobile Optimization**: As smartphone penetration continues to increase globally, Consul is being optimized for mobile users, potentially expanding accessibility in regions where computers are less common than phones.

3. **Enhanced Verification Systems**: New approaches to identity verification aim to balance security (ensuring one person, one vote) with privacy and accessibility concerns.

4. **Improved Analytics**: Better data analysis tools are being developed to help governments understand patterns in participation and identify underrepresented communities.

5. **Interoperability**: Work is underway to improve integration with other government systems and potentially with other participation platforms, creating a more connected ecosystem of democratic technologies.

These technological developments come with both opportunities and risks. While they may enhance the capabilities and reach of the platform, they also raise important questions about privacy, security, and the potential centralization of previously distributed processes.

Chapter 18: Democratic Innovations - Beyond the Current Model

While Consul Democracy represents an important innovation in democratic practice, it is not the end point of democratic evolution. Both within and beyond the Consul ecosystem, new approaches to democratic participation continue to emerge.

Some promising directions include:

1. **Deliberative Mini-Publics**: Randomly selected citizen assemblies are increasingly being combined with digital platforms like Consul, creating hybrid processes that combine the breadth of digital participation with the depth of face-to-face deliberation.

2. **Quadratic Voting**: Experimental voting mechanisms that allow citizens to express the intensity of their preferences, not just their direction, offer potential solutions to the "tyranny of the majority" in direct democratic processes.

3. **Civic Crowdfunding**: Models that combine government funds with direct citizen contributions to projects they support are being tested as complements to traditional participatory budgeting.

4. **Civic Tech Ecosystems**: Rather than single platforms, some cities are developing ecosystems of interoperable civic tools, allowing citizens to engage through multiple channels and formats.

5. **Democratic AI**: Explorations of how artificial intelligence might support (rather than undermine) democratic governance are emerging, raising profound questions about the future relationship between technology and democracy.

These innovations suggest that digital democracy remains a dynamic and evolving field, with Consul playing an important but not exclusive role in its development. The future of democratic governance likely involves not a single platform or model, but rather an ecology of complementary approaches tailored to different contexts and purposes.

Chapter 19: Global Challenges - Democracy Under Pressure

The development and implementation of Consul Democracy has occurred against a backdrop of growing challenges to democracy globally. Understanding these challenges is essential for assessing both the potential and limitations of digital participation initiatives.

Since 2006, the world has experienced what political scientists call a "democratic recession," with more countries experiencing democratic decline than democratic improvement. This trend has accelerated in recent years, with challenges including:

1. **Rising Authoritarianism**: Authoritarian regimes have become more sophisticated in their methods, often maintaining the appearance of democratic institutions while undermining their substance.

2. **Polarization**: Many democracies are experiencing increased political polarization, making consensus-building and constructive participation more difficult.

3. **Information Disorders**: Misinformation, disinformation, and computational propaganda threaten the shared factual basis necessary for meaningful democratic deliberation.

4. **Economic Inequality**: Growing economic inequality in many countries undermines political equality, as wealthy interests exercise disproportionate influence over political processes.

5. **Climate Crisis**: The escalating climate emergency creates new governance challenges, requiring decisions with long time horizons and complex global implications.

These challenges raise important questions about the role of digital participation tools like Consul. Can they help reverse democratic decline by rebuilding trust and legitimacy? Or will they remain islands of innovation in an increasingly troubled democratic landscape? The answers likely depend not only on the tools themselves but on the broader political and social contexts in which they operate.

Conclusion: The Unfinished Revolution

The story of Consul Democracy reveals both the potential and limitations of digital technology as a tool for democratic renewal. From its origins in the Spanish protest movements of 2011 to its current status as a global platform used by millions of citizens, Consul represents one of the most significant experiments in digital democracy to date.

The platform's strengths are clear: it has enabled thousands of citizen-proposed projects, channeled hundreds of millions of euros into community priorities, and created new channels for citizen voice in dozens of countries. Its open-source, collaborative development model has fostered innovation and adaptation to diverse contexts. The establishment of the Consul Democracy Foundation has helped ensure the platform's sustainability beyond its original context.

Yet the Consul experience also reveals enduring challenges. Digital participation remains vulnerable to political changes, as demonstrated by the reduced prominence of Decide Madrid following the 2019 election. The digital divide continues to affect who participates, potentially reinforcing existing inequalities. And the translation of citizen input into governmental action remains inconsistent, subject to administrative, legal, and political constraints.

Perhaps most fundamentally, initiatives like Consul operate within broader political systems and power structures that they may influence but do not transform. The democratic recession observed globally in recent years has occurred despite—not because of—innovations in digital participation.

This suggests that while tools like Consul are valuable and worth developing further, they are best understood as complements to, rather than substitutes for, the essential work of building and maintaining democratic institutions, cultures, and movements. Technology can enhance democracy, but it cannot replace the human work of democratic citizenship.

The revolution that began in Spain's public squares in 2011 and found technological expression in Consul Democracy remains unfinished. Its ultimate impact will depend not only on the evolution of the platform itself but on the broader struggles for democratic renewal of which it is one part.

About the Author

Afilado Tumbas is a volunteer researcher with the Network Theory Applied Research Institute. His work focuses on the intersection of technology, democratic innovation, and institutional development across diverse political contexts.

References

CONSUL DEMOCRACY Foundation. (2024). About us. Retrieved from https://consuldemocracy.org/about-us/

CONSUL DEMOCRACY Foundation. (2024). Official website. Retrieved from https://consuldemocracy.org/

Democracy Technologies. (2024, July 24). The Consul Democracy Foundation: Part of the Transformation. Retrieved from https://democracy-technologies.org/participation/consul-democracy-foundation/

Democracy Technologies. (2024, August 15). Decide Madrid & Consul Democracy: How Do They Measure Up. Retrieved from https://democracy-technologies.org/participation/decide-madrid-and-consul/

Democrateam. (n.d.). Hello, democracy! Retrieved from https://democrateam.com/

GitHub. (n.d.). Consul Democracy - Open Government and E-Participation Web Software. Retrieved from https://github.com/consuldemocracy/consuldemocracy

Interoperable Europe Portal. (n.d.). Consul Democracy. Retrieved from https://interoperable-europe.ec.europa.eu/collection/open-source-observatory-osor/consul-democracy

Madrid Use Cases. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://docs.consuldemocracy.org/use_cases/spain/madrid

Observatory of Public Sector Innovation. (2019, June 11). Consul Project. Retrieved from https://oecd-opsi.org/innovations/consul-project/

Participedia. (n.d.). Decide Madrid: Online Participatory Planning. Retrieved from https://participedia.net/case/5726