How Preferences for Public Participation are Linked to Perceptions of the Context, Preferences for Outcomes, and Individual Characteristics

Abstract

Practitioners and stakeholders involved in environmental and risk assessment and decision-making efforts have access to a growing list of policies and guidance for implementing good process. The advice is often general. There is little understanding of how situation specific features are relevant in new circumstances. In a series of ten case studies we investigated how people's (a) perceptions of the context, (b) preferences for outcomes, and (c) affiliations, experiences and motivations are related to their preferences for process features in a particular situation. The cases are in three policy areas: watershed management, forestry management, and clean-up and public health management of radioactively contaminated sites. We conclude this paper with a discussion of how the results can inform process design. Process design should be based on a diagnostic approach that specifically assesses relevant situational characteristics.

Evaluating participation in water resource management: A review

“…The objectives might well be corrupt, dysfunctional, unimportant, not orientated to the needs of the intended beneficiaries, or mainly reflect the motives or other conflicts of interest of those in charge of the program.'' Additionally, Tuler and Webler's [2010] research has shown that participants hold different positions on the objectives of a participatory approach. Their work showed that to some participants the objective is to produce and implement a strategy based on best available science combined with stakeholder information.…”

“…This is done through a variety of research tools such as ethnographic approaches involving observation [Moote et al, 1997;Tam, 2006], unstructured and semistructured interviews [Clarke, 2008;McCool and Guthrie, 2001], card sorting [Hare and Pahl-Wostl, 2002] and Q methodology [Chess and Johnson, 2006;Danielson et al, 2010;Tuler and Webler, 2010;Webler et al, 2003]. Q methodology is an approach where interviewees sort a range of statements such as, ''the process should be cost-effective,'' ''a fixed deadline is important,'' according to the weighting the individual gives to each.…”

Evaluation of Public Participation Processes in Environmental Decision-making. Evaluation of Referenda and Public Hearings on Waste Management from a Participant Perspective

“…Ezért egy további cikkükben azt elemezték, hogy a résztvev k elvárásait a részvételi folyamattal kapcsolatban vajon hogyan befolyásolják a körülményekkel kapcsolatos el feltevések, az eredménnyel kapcsolatos elvárások és a személyes tulajdonságok (Tuler−Webler, 2010).…”

“…A kérdésben végzett konkrét kutatások, bár nem teljes kör ek és mélyrehatóak, eddig azt látják igazolni, hogy a körülmények nem befolyásolják meghatározó mértékben a részvételi folyamat min ségét (Beierle−Konisky, 2000) és a folyamattól elvárt tulajdonságokat sem (Tuler−Webler, 2010).…”

“…Webler és szerz társainak megközelítése egy másik szerepl csoport, a résztvev k értékeire helyezi a hangsúlyt, és azt vallja, hogy az a fontos, hogy a résztvev k milyen részvételi folyamatot tartanak megfelel nek, és velük egyeztetve, a folyamat során a véleményükhöz alkalmazkodva kell kialakítani a megfelel mechanizmust (Tuler−Webler, 2010).…”