A framework to implement Stakeholder participation in environmental projects

Abstract

a b s t r a c tParticipation has emerged as an appropriate approach for enhancing natural resources management. However, despite long experimentation with participation, there are still possibilities for improvement in designing a process of stakeholder involvement by addressing stakeholder heterogeneity and the complexity of decision-making processes.This paper provides a state-of-the-art overview of methods. It proposes a comprehensive framework to implement stakeholder participation in environmental projects, from stakeholder identification to evaluation. For each process within this framework, techniques are reviewed and practical tools proposed. The aim of this paper is to establish methods to determine who should participate, when and how. The application of this framework to one river restoration case study in Switzerland will illustrate its strengths and weaknesses.

Integrating knowledge exchange and the assessment of dryland management alternatives – A learning-centered participatory approach

“…It also meets most of the essential principles for successful participation identified in the literature, including the integration of local and scientific knowledge; an early involvement of stakeholders; and a transparent process that promotes learning and trust among stakeholders (Reed, 2008;Luyet et al, 2012). This approach has been successfully used in contrasting land management systems such as public forest lands in the Mediterranean Europe (the current study), semiarid rangelands under federal management in southwestern USA (Ocampo-Melgar and Orr, 2016), and livestock farming in the South African Kalahari (Kong et al, 2014), among other systems (Rojo et al, 2012).…”

“…The process is transparent in both the way it incorporates the diversity of knowledge and values and the way it integrates data and stakeholder perspectives. In participatory processes, special attention has to be paid to the adequacy and representativeness of the stakeholders involved, avoiding biases in the identification and selection of the participants (Luyet et al, 2012;Newig and Fritsch, 2009;Stanghellini, 2010). The PRACTICE protocol relies on the combination of analytical (top-down, primed by pre-identified stakeholders) and reconstructive (bottom-up, identified through the referral process) stakeholder identification methods, which can be efficient with respect to time and resources needed, but also effective in the identification of traditionally marginalized or peripheral stakeholder groups (Reed et al, 2009).…”

“…However, bias is still possible and there is risk of reproducing existing homogeneous networks. By using a multiple entry point to the chain referral process, this bias can largely be avoided (Luyet et al, 2012).…”

“…It must be stressed however that the proposed protocol shares with existing participatory frameworks a variety of potential risks, including the potential for resulting in a costly and time consuming process, generating stakeholder frustration, identifying and bringing new conflicts to the surface, involving stakeholders that are not relevant to the issue addressed, ignoring individual and relative levels of power within the group of participating stakeholders, etc. (Armah et al, 2009;Luyet et al, 2012;Mitchell et al, 1997), which can largely influence the outcomes of a participatory process (De Vente et al, 2016;Reed et al, 2009;Rowe and Frewer, 2005). Furthermore, land management decision-making is influenced by many situational factors such as financial resources, land tenure, and social norms, so that high level of knowledge and positive attitude alone did not always result in behavior change (Kong et al, 2014;Leeuwis, 2000).…”

“…The degree of involvement could also vary among stakeholders (Luyet et al, 2012). Several authors have proposed strategies to attribute the appropriate degree of involvement for the specific process and/or for each identified stakeholder or stakeholder group (Daniels et al, 1996;Vroom, 2003).…”