Advisory councils (ACs) exist at diverse government levels, from sublocal units to supranational ones. In fact, they are probably the most common of the existing participatory institutions in many countries, but most research about them involves the comparison of a few cases at the same government level (Campos and Gonzalez, 1999; Navarro, 2004), partially because their characteristics are so diverse that comparisons become difficult.

Our research analyses the characteristics of ACs in one specific institutional context, Spain, comparing the national, regional and local levels. The paper uses different types of evidence, from a general mapping of 2000 existing ACs, to a survey to the members of a sample of 90 of them (n=560), plus interviews from 10 comparative case studies at the three government levels.

The main goal of the paper is to compare the working characteristics, democratic qualities and participants' satisfaction at the three levels. Preliminary results point to a better performance of the local and regional ones. Is this result a proximity effect (more appropriate participatory political arenas due to proximity to citizens) or is it due to the institutional designs adopted in each specific AC? We answer this question combining the quantitative and qualitative evidences mentioned above.