Towards understanding participatory processes: Framework, application and results

Hassenforder, Émeline; Smajgl, Alex; Ward, John

doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.04.012

Cited by 75 publications

(83 citation statements)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Those dimensions are fully described in various papers (i.e. Bergmann et al, 2012;Hassenforder et al, 2015) and mirror well the state-of-the-art discussion in 2015.…”

Section: Evaluation Of Processessupporting

confidence: 64%

“…Klein (2008) calls this level "principles", while Walter et al (2007) uses "impact categories". The authors follow Jahn and Keil (2015) and Hassenforder et al (2015), who use the term "dimension", as it seems quite suitable for this general level. Jahn and Keil (2015) identify further nine different dimensions to evaluate transdisciplinary research.…”

Section: Evaluation Cascadementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluating co-creation of knowledge: from quality criteria and indicators to methods

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Basic research in the natural sciences rests on a long tradition of evaluation. However, since the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) came out in 2012, there has been intense discussion in the natural sciences, above all amongst researchers and funding agencies in the different fields of applied research and scientific service. This discussion was intensified when climate services and other fields, used to make users participate in research and development activities (co-creation), demanded new evaluation methods appropriate to this new research mode. This paper starts by describing a comprehensive and interdisciplinary literature overview of indicators to evaluate co-creation of knowledge, including the different fields of integrated knowledge production. Then the authors harmonize the different elements of evaluation from literature in an evaluation "cascade" that scales down from very general evaluation dimensions to tangible assessment methods. They describe evaluation indicators already being documented and include a mixture of different assessment methods for two exemplary criteria. It is shown what can be deduced from already existing methodology for climate services and envisaged how climate services can further to develop their specific evaluation method.

show abstract

“…Those dimensions are fully described in various papers (i.e. Bergmann et al, 2012;Hassenforder et al, 2015) and mirror well the state-of-the-art discussion in 2015.…”

Section: Evaluation Of Processessupporting

confidence: 64%

Section: Evaluation Cascadementioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating co-creation of knowledge: from quality criteria and indicators to methods

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since context is such an important element to consider in any evaluation of public participation, this table is the first step toward delineating charrette characteristics, which could be used as a precursor guiding evaluation (Hassenforder et al, 2015). Comparability of cases is only feasible if a degree of similarity can be identified; therefore, the results from this analysis could help toward building classifications or charrette-groups (Conley et al, 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scotland's Approach to Participatory Planning: Characterising the Charrette

Kennedy¹

2017

ArchNet-IJAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTIONInvolving multiple stakeholders in spatial and community planning has become a salient concept with decades of legislative support in the United Kingdom (Jenkins, 2002). Many public services now lay claim to having been longstanding supporters of this participatory turn (Bishop, 2015); of which, planning is one. The 1969 Skeffington Report is often evidenced as one of the earliest national level documents to consider public involvement strategies (Baker et al., 2007;Damer et al., 1971). Since then, a plethora of techniques have come to the fore (Sanoff, 2000), and the Scottish Government in recent years endorsed the 'charrette' as an effective participatory design tool to generate strategies for community development (Scottish Government, 2010a, 2011b. The term 'charrette' derives from the Ecole des Beaux-Arts, in which architecture students would hurriedly work until the 'little cart' came to collect their drawings for the examiners. The term has since been used to connote a sense of urgency, which frames the format of a typical charrette as it is approached today (Walters, 2007). The tool is a participatory 'model' yet malleable enough in the sense that its process constitutes a series of other participatory mechanisms, which can be matched to suit different scenarios (Sanoff, 2000).The model that was introduced to Scotland in 2010 was developed by New Urbanism's cofounder, Andres Duany as part of Duany Plater-Zyberk (DPZ) & Company. The charrette is often their go-to approach to community participation (Grant, 2006), which typically lasts between four to seven days and involves a multidisciplinary team establishing a temporary design studio within the study area. The team will work collaboratively with community members and key stakeholders in a series of interactive workshops, often producing a masterplan that has been developed through a series of short feedback loops (Sanoff, 2000;Walters, 2007). The compressed format has been lauded over other communicative approaches that may last weeks or months. Proponents argue these feedback loops condense the time between input and design to just hours, so not only do participants exercise more influence they can watch a transparent process unfold, thus fostering greater trust (Lennertz, 2003;Walters, 2007). Benefits of this approach therefore do not centre only on the physical; there is a commitment to social goals embedded in New Urbanism (Talen, 2002), and communicative processes more generally.Jurgen Habermas, who many communicative theorists are indebted to, also advocated collaborative discursive approaches to challenge the shortcomings observed in representative democracy (Bond, 2011). These approaches challenged modernist thinking that valued expert epistemologies, and instead believed knowledge to be something coconstructed; not a collation of ideas but rather that communication has the power to build shared meanings through reasoning and deliberative exchange (Brand et al., 2007;Innes et al., 1999). Equally, the charrette's consensus-seeking na...

show abstract

“…Many publications highlight the benefits of PP in IRBM CIS 2003;Mostert et al 2007;Reed 2008;Ker-Rault and Jeffrey 2008;Pahl-Wostl et al 2008;de Stefano 2010;Demetropoulou et al 2010;von Korff et al 2010von Korff et al , 2012Luyet et al 2012;Hassenforder et al 2015). These benefits are seen as:…”

Section: The Benefits Of Public Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The "degree of participation" is one of the most addressed categories for process description in the literature (Hassenforder et al 2015). Arnstein (1969), who wrote the first main contribution related to this topic, set out a ladder for citizen participation based on eight steps.…”

Section: Participation Levels Techniques and Basic Framework Of Pubmentioning

confidence: 99%

Riverine Ecosystem Management

Schmutz¹,

Sendzimir²

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open Access This book is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author (s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this book are included in the book's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the book's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Printed on acid-free paperThis Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer International Publishing AG part of Springer Nature. The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland Challenges in Riverine Ecosystem Management Jan Sendzimir and Stefan SchmutzThis book is dedicated to those interested in the natural and social sciences and elements of governance that will support the sustainable management of rivers and aquatic ecosystems. Since elements of nature and society interact to determine the integrity and trajectory of these systems, they are referred to hereafter as socialecological systems (SESs). This introduction opens the door to these topics in four steps. It begins by explaining why a book dedicated to river management and science is needed at this point. In the second part, it outlines the history of some of the major developments that challenge the integrity of SESs worldwide. In the third part, it describes several of the principal tools used to study as well as manage SES. Tools to measure the degree of degradation of an SES include indicators of biological integrity, ecosystem health, and resilience. Tools to assess and manage the trajectory of an SES include the DPSIR and adaptive management. The introduction closes by outlining the structure of the book through the progression of its chapters. Justification of BookRivers are among the most threatened ecosystems of the world. For more than a centur...

show abstract

Towards understanding participatory processes: Framework, application and results

Cited by 75 publications

References 81 publications

Evaluating co-creation of knowledge: from quality criteria and indicators to methods

Evaluating co-creation of knowledge: from quality criteria and indicators to methods

Scotland's Approach to Participatory Planning: Characterising the Charrette

Riverine Ecosystem Management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About