Breaking the mold: Integrating participatory environmental assessments and underlying narratives to expose differences in traditional stakeholder categories

Anahi Ocampo-Melgar, Barron J Orr, Taryn F. Kong, William K Brandau

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Evaluation that integrates different stakeholders' assessments of past land management actions is important to improving restoration science and practice. This integration process is often perceived as challenging because stakeholder categories are expected to have different values and assessments. This study explores these assessment differences by comparing land management ratings and underlying narratives among three traditional stakeholder categories: researchers, practitioners and land users. Stakeholders were interviewed during a participatory evaluation of past land management actions in the San Simon watershed in Arizona. Results showed that historical, cultural and science-based narratives explained some assessments, while others were in conflict. Neither assessments nor narratives were necessarily aligned with stakeholder categories. Moreover, new typologies of stakeholder categories emerged from the analysis: optimist, pessimists, pro-management and conflicted. Using common narratives to identify stakeholder typology instead of categorizing them based on traditional labels could give more information and facilitate the integration of stakeholders in environmental assessment and management.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)39-47
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Arid Environments
Volume124
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 14 2015

Fingerprint

environmental assessment
stakeholders
stakeholder
land management
typology
environmental management
researchers
watershed

Keywords

  • Drylands restoration
  • Environmental assessment
  • Environmental narratives
  • Participatory evaluation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
  • Earth-Surface Processes
  • Ecology

Cite this

@article{bc351a0d562f498db2a5dc99ba0152a2,
title = "Breaking the mold: Integrating participatory environmental assessments and underlying narratives to expose differences in traditional stakeholder categories",
abstract = "Evaluation that integrates different stakeholders' assessments of past land management actions is important to improving restoration science and practice. This integration process is often perceived as challenging because stakeholder categories are expected to have different values and assessments. This study explores these assessment differences by comparing land management ratings and underlying narratives among three traditional stakeholder categories: researchers, practitioners and land users. Stakeholders were interviewed during a participatory evaluation of past land management actions in the San Simon watershed in Arizona. Results showed that historical, cultural and science-based narratives explained some assessments, while others were in conflict. Neither assessments nor narratives were necessarily aligned with stakeholder categories. Moreover, new typologies of stakeholder categories emerged from the analysis: optimist, pessimists, pro-management and conflicted. Using common narratives to identify stakeholder typology instead of categorizing them based on traditional labels could give more information and facilitate the integration of stakeholders in environmental assessment and management.",
keywords = "Drylands restoration, Environmental assessment, Environmental narratives, Participatory evaluation",
author = "Anahi Ocampo-Melgar and Orr, {Barron J} and Kong, {Taryn F.} and Brandau, {William K}",
year = "2015",
month = "7",
day = "14",
doi = "10.1016/j.jaridenv.2015.07.007",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "124",
pages = "39--47",
journal = "Journal of Arid Environments",
issn = "0140-1963",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Breaking the mold

T2 - Integrating participatory environmental assessments and underlying narratives to expose differences in traditional stakeholder categories

AU - Ocampo-Melgar, Anahi

AU - Orr, Barron J

AU - Kong, Taryn F.

AU - Brandau, William K

PY - 2015/7/14

Y1 - 2015/7/14

N2 - Evaluation that integrates different stakeholders' assessments of past land management actions is important to improving restoration science and practice. This integration process is often perceived as challenging because stakeholder categories are expected to have different values and assessments. This study explores these assessment differences by comparing land management ratings and underlying narratives among three traditional stakeholder categories: researchers, practitioners and land users. Stakeholders were interviewed during a participatory evaluation of past land management actions in the San Simon watershed in Arizona. Results showed that historical, cultural and science-based narratives explained some assessments, while others were in conflict. Neither assessments nor narratives were necessarily aligned with stakeholder categories. Moreover, new typologies of stakeholder categories emerged from the analysis: optimist, pessimists, pro-management and conflicted. Using common narratives to identify stakeholder typology instead of categorizing them based on traditional labels could give more information and facilitate the integration of stakeholders in environmental assessment and management.

AB - Evaluation that integrates different stakeholders' assessments of past land management actions is important to improving restoration science and practice. This integration process is often perceived as challenging because stakeholder categories are expected to have different values and assessments. This study explores these assessment differences by comparing land management ratings and underlying narratives among three traditional stakeholder categories: researchers, practitioners and land users. Stakeholders were interviewed during a participatory evaluation of past land management actions in the San Simon watershed in Arizona. Results showed that historical, cultural and science-based narratives explained some assessments, while others were in conflict. Neither assessments nor narratives were necessarily aligned with stakeholder categories. Moreover, new typologies of stakeholder categories emerged from the analysis: optimist, pessimists, pro-management and conflicted. Using common narratives to identify stakeholder typology instead of categorizing them based on traditional labels could give more information and facilitate the integration of stakeholders in environmental assessment and management.

KW - Drylands restoration

KW - Environmental assessment

KW - Environmental narratives

KW - Participatory evaluation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84938388355&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84938388355&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2015.07.007

DO - 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2015.07.007

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84938388355

VL - 124

SP - 39

EP - 47

JO - Journal of Arid Environments

JF - Journal of Arid Environments

SN - 0140-1963

ER -