An applied methodology for stakeholder identification in transdisciplinary research
Tóm tắt
In this paper we present a novel methodology for identifying stakeholders for the purpose of engaging with them in transdisciplinary, sustainability research projects. In transdisciplinary research, it is important to identify a range of stakeholders prior to the problem-focussed stages of research. Early engagement with diverse stakeholders creates space for them to influence the research process, including problem definition, from the start. However, current stakeholder analysis approaches ignore this initial identification process, or position it within the subsequent content-focussed stages of research. Our methodology was designed as part of a research project into a range of soil threats in seventeen case study locations throughout Europe. Our methodology was designed to be systematic across all sites. It is based on a snowball sampling approach that can be implemented by researchers with no prior experience of stakeholder research, and without requiring significant financial or time resources. It therefore fosters transdisciplinarity by empowering physical scientists to identify stakeholders and understand their roles. We describe the design process and outcomes, and consider their applicability to other research projects. Our methodology therefore consists of a two-phase process of design and implementation of an identification questionnaire. By explicitly including a design phase into the process, it is possible to tailor our methodology to other research projects.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Bracken LJ, Bulkeley HA, Whitman G (2014) Transdisciplinary research: understanding the stakeholder perspective. J Environ Plan Manag 58(7):1–18
Cuppen E (2012) Diversity and constructive conflict in stakeholder dialogue: considerations for design and methods. Policy Sci 45(1):23–46
Cuppen E, Breukers S, Hisschemöller M, Bergsma E (2010) Q methodology to select participants for a stakeholder dialogue on energy options from biomass in the Netherlands. Ecol Econ 69(3):579–591
Dougill A, Fraser E, Holden J, Hubacek K, Prell C, Reed M, Stagl S, Stringer L (2006) Learning from doing participatory rural research: lessons from the Peak District National Park. J Agric Econ 57(2):259–275
Dyer JC, Leventon J, Stringer LC, Dougill AJ, Syampungani S, Nshimbi M, Chama F, Kafwifwi A (2013) Partnership models for climate compatible development: experiences from Zambia. Resources 2(1):1–25
Fiorino DJ (1990) Citizen participation and environmental risk: a survey of institutional mechanisms. Sci Technol Hum Values 15(2):226–243
Fisher B, Turner RK, Morling P (2009) Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol Econ 68(3):643–653
Fletcher S (2007) Influences on stakeholder representation in participatory coastal management programmes. Ocean Coast Manag 50(5–6):314–328
Freeman RE (1984) Stakeholder management: framework and philosophy. Pitman, Mansfield
Fry GLA (2001) Multifunctional landscapes—towards transdisciplinary research. Landsc Urban Plan 57(3–4):159–168
Grimble R, Wellard K (1997) Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities. Agric Syst 55(2):173–193
Hessel R, Reed MS, Geeson N, Ritsema CJ, van Lynden G, Karavitis CA, Schwilch G, Jetten V, Burger P, van der Werff ten Bosch MJ, Verzandvoort S, van den Elsen E, Witsenburg K (2014) From framework to action: The DESIRE approach to combat desertification. Environ Manag 54(5):935–950
Hurni H, Wiesmann U (2014) Transdisciplinarity in practice. Experience from a concept-based research programme addressing global change and sustainable development. GAIA Ecol Perspect Sci Soc 23(3):275–277
Jahn T, Bergmann M, Keil F (2012) Transdisciplinarity: between mainstreaming and marginalization. Ecol Econ 79:1–10
Jakobsen CH, Hels T, McLaughlin WJ (2004) Barriers and facilitators to integration among scientists in transdisciplinary landscape analyses: a cross-country comparison. For Policy Econ 6(1):15–31
Lang D, Wiek A, Bergmann M, Stauffacher M, Martens P, Moll P, Swilling M, Thomas C (2012) Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: practice, principles, and challenges. Sustain Sci 7(1):25–43
Letki N (2004) Socialization for participation? Trust, membership, and democratization in East-Central Europe. Polit Res Q 57(4):665–679
Leventon J, Antypas A (2012) Multi-level Governance, multi-level deficits: the case of drinking water management in Hungary. Environ Policy Gov 22(4):253–267
Mathie A, Greene JC (1997) Stakeholder participation in evaluation: How important is diversity? Eval Program Plan 20(3):279–285
Mattor K, Betsill M, Huayhuaca CA, Huber-Stearns H, Jedd T, Sternlieb F, Bixler P, Luizza M, Cheng AS (2014) Transdisciplinary research on environmental governance: a view from the inside. Environ Sci Policy 42:90–100
Mitton C, Adair CE, McKenzie E, Patten SB, Perry BW (2007) Knowledge transfer and exchange: review and synthesis of the literature. Milbank Q 85(4):729–768
Nieto-Romero M, Milcu A, Leventon J, Mikulcak F, Fischer J (2016) The role of scenarios in fostering collective action for sustainable development: lessons from central Romania. Land Use Policy 50:156–168
Phillipson J, Lowe P, Proctor A, Ruto E (2012) Stakeholder engagement and knowledge exchange in environmental research. J Environ Manag 95(1):56–65
Prell C, Hubacek K, Reed M (2009) Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis in natural resource management. Soc Nat Resour 22(6):501–518
Prell C, Reed M, Racin L, Hubacek K (2010) Competing structure, competing views: the role of formal and informal social structures in shaping stakeholder perceptions. Ecol Soc 15(4):34
Ravnborg HM, Westermann O (2002) Understanding interdependencies: stakeholder identification and negotiation for collective natural resource management. Agric Syst 73(1):41–56
Reed MS (2008) Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biol Conserv 141(10):2417–2431
Reed MS, Graves A, Dandy N, Posthumus H, Hubacek K, Morris J, Prell C, Quinn CH, Stringer LC (2009) Who’s in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. J Environ Manag 90(5):1933–1949
Renard Y (2004) Guidelines for stakeholder identification and analysis: a manual for Caribbean natural resource managers and planners. Caribbean Natural Resources Institute Guidelines Series, Caribbean Natural Resources Institute
Schwilch G, Bachmann F, Liniger HP (2009) Appraising and selecting conservation measures to mitigate desertification and land degradation based on stakeholder participation and global best practices. Land Degrad Dev 20(3):308–326
Schwilch G, Bachmann F, Valente S, Coelho C, Moreira J, Laouina A, Chaker M, Aderghal M, Santos P, Reed MS (2012) A structured multi-stakeholder learning process for sustainable land management. J Environ Manag 107:52–63
Stauffacher M, Flüeler T, Krütli P, Scholz R (2008) Analytic and dynamic approach to collaboration: a transdisciplinary case study on sustainable landscape development in a Swiss Prealpine Region. Syst Pract Action Res 21(6):409–422
Stirling A (2008) “Opening Up” and “Closing Down”: power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Sci Technol Hum Values 33(2):262–294
Stokols D, Misra S, Moser RP, Hall KL, Taylor BK (2008) The ecology of team science: understanding contextual influences on transdisciplinary collaboration. Am J Prev Med 35(2 Supplement):S96–S115
Stringer LC, Scrieciu SS, Reed MS (2009) Biodiversity, land degradation, and climate change: participatory planning in Romania. Appl Geogr 29(1):77–90
Vos JFJ (2003) Corporate social responsibility and the identification of stakeholders. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 10(3):141–152
Vos JFJ, Achterkamp MC (2006) Stakeholder identification in innovation projects. Eur J Innov Manag 9(2):161–178
Wester P, Merrey DJ, de Lange M (2003) Boundaries of consent: stakeholder representation in River Basin Management in Mexico and South Africa. World Dev 31(5):797–812