The environmental field is highly technological and scientific, and involves complex problems and high political stakes. These features make transmitting local knowledge challenging. Using theory-based sampling, I selected two very different organizations with success transmitting local knowledge to elaborate theory: the Southwest Network for Environmental and Economic Justice and the Powder River Basin Resource Council. In each case, I conducted 18 narrative interviews with a range of actors (36 total), collected archival data and did observations. I developed comparative accounts using a narrative analysis technique called re-transcription. I find that each organization developed a set of discursive practices that support what I call deliberative citizenship , a process by which citizens critically reflect on and make sense of their experiences to judge and promote its political significance. Deliberative citizenship drives transmission: as members make sense of their experience, they help to create pathways along which to transmit local knowledge. My analysis revealed four common dimensions of transmission--relational, linguistic, temporal and spatial--that interacted to shift power dynamics in the deliberative system to make transmission possible. These dimensions suggest that transmission is not indirect. Rather, SCOs work hard "at the boundary" between civil society and the state--in deliberative forums and other arenas--to convince public officials to consider their environmental concerns, to design forums to empower affected publics, and to ground responsibility for environmental decisions in the deliberative system. These strategies explain important links between civil society and the state in deliberative politics.