Dear Susannah, Thanks for your question. Here are some of the reasons that I think sets Rio Grande do Sul’s case apart: 1) Impact on policymaking: rather than a mere consultative process, the policy proposals generated and selected by the citizens are discussed with the governor and integrated to the policymaking process of the state government. 2) Outreach: Specific outreach initiatives are carried out in order to ensure a broader inclusiveness of the process. Apart from being a process that combined face-to-face and online environments, buses equipped with Internet access and trained personnel travel across the state in order to gather input from the least privileged sections of society. 3) Technological design: The technological design, addresses challenges commonly associated with crowdsourcing efforts. Based on a pair-wise ideation system, the technological architecture presents the following features: o All ideas submitted benefit from equal visibility during the voting phase. o The system prevents information cascades (herding effects) and early voting biases o The system provides optimal measurement of preferences. Of course, these are one of the few factors, but I believe that each one of them sets Rio Grande do Sul apart from most similar attempts.