Cartoon image of two people sitting in the same boat but rowing in opposite directions.
Those who facilitate collaborative policy making often work to bring together people with conflicting views, but how do you deal with disagreements on what is true and false? Photo: AdobeStock

How to talk when truth is contested – three strategies for collaborative policy making

News published:  14/08/2025

Facilitators of collaborative policy making on sustainability issues often face heated debates and conflicting truths. They are on the front lines when facts are contested and emotions run high. A new study explores their experiences and presents strategies for navigating post-truth situations.

The researchers interviewed 19 facilitators to understand how they deal with situations where facts are disputed and emotions run high, so-called post-truth situations. The interviewees shared experiences from different policy areas such as urban planning, wildlife management, social sustainability and food policy. Their stories ranged from violent outburst at meetings to disagreements over green spaces in city plans.

“They told us about situations where they experienced disagreements on what is true and false”, says Amelia Mutter, researcher in environmental communication and co-author of the paper.

Based on the interviews, the researchers identified three strategies that the facilitators use when faced with post-truth situations: Recognising identities and emotions, Agreeing on facts and Establishing a legitimate process. 

“It is about adapting to the situation. For example, if emotions are running high, you might have to start with addressing that. Focusing only on facts in that moment can cause more provocation. Once you identify the problem, you can choose an appropriate facilitation strategy”, says Martin Westin, researcher in environmental communication and lead-author of the paper.

To guide the choice of a suitable facilitation strategy, the researchers have also developed a set of questions for analysing post-truth situations.

Post-truth is about more than Trump and Brexit

Post-truth is often associated with Donald Trump or Brexit, but one aim of the study was to shed light on post-truth dynamics in Sweden. The researchers also question the concept itself.

“The common definition of post-truth says that people rely on emotions and opinions rather than facts. It implies that emotions and facts can always be separated, but it is more complex than that”, Amelia explains.

“A clear truth is something you can fact-check. But in many cases, it is not that simple. Take the Swedish wolf population, for instance. There are a lot of uncertainties both regarding numbers and locations of wolves”, Martin adds.

In post-truth situations, many tend to avoid opening up conversations between people with different views, Amelia explains. But facilitators don’t have that option since they are commissioned to facilitate dialogue.

“Their job is to bring together people with conflicting views, facts, and emotions. In times of social tension, we can learn from them as a society to find more common ground”, she says.

Strategies for dealing with post-truth situations

Problem: what is the problem with post-truth?

Separate identity formation coupled with lack of recognition lead to loss of trust between social groups and the following negative emotional responses cannot be constructively discussed in public conversations.

Solution: how can facilitation address the problem of post-truth?

The facilitation should enable open communication about emotions and identities; those who feel left out can thereby regain a sense of recognition and participate constructively in joint sense-making and action.

Problem: what is the problem with post-truth?

Lack of agreement on facts leads to conflicts that block the possibility to agree on and use the best available knowledge in joint action.

Solution: how can facilitation address the problem of post-truth?

The facilitation should enable actors to develop knowledge across differences of worldviews and values. Through a communicative process between dissenters they can learn and develop a shared understanding.

Problem: what is the problem with post-truth?

Contestation of processes for decision-making and implementation leads to inability to address societal challenges.

Solution: how can facilitation address the problem of post-truth?

The facilitation should enable the actors to agree on criteria for legitimate processes and adhere to these in an ordered fashion. When a shared understanding of the process is established, actors can communicate constructively.

  1. How facts are contested
    1. Is there a fact controversy? If yes, how is it influencing the policy-making?
    2. Whose facts are contested, and by whom and why?
    3. Are there actors who intentionally frame or distort facts to their benefit? If yes, who are they and how do they operate?

  2. How emotions play a role
    1. Do emotions matter to the policy-making? If yes, how?
    2. In what ways are emotions expressed/suppressed in communication between actors with different views on the policy?
    3. Are emotions weaponized, i.e. used strategically by political actors to cast doubt and suspicion on the policy process? If yes, who are these actors and how do they operate?

  3. How the policy process is contested 
    1. Is the legitimacy of the policy process contested? If yes, how is the controversy influencing the policy-making?
    2. In what ways, if any, are the involved actors challenging the process of policy-making?
    3. Are there actors who intentionally undermine the process? If yes, who are they and how do they operate?

Tool: Dialogue navigator
The Dialogue Navigator – a tool to strengthen your dialogue competence

Currently available only in Swedish at the moment. An English translation is in progress.

Course
Hållbarhetspolitik och postsanning – utmaningar och möjligheter för dialog och styrning (in Swedish)

“We are doing this course with the intention to help people becoming more capable of listening, understanding, and engaging in discussions with people with other views, which tends to be more and more difficult”, says Martin Westin.

The study
Read the full article: Grappling with post-truth politics - facilitation strategies for policy-making in troubled times

Contact