Participatory multi-stakeholder assessment of alternative development scenarios in contested landscapes

被引:0
|
作者
Milena Kiatkoski Kim
Jorge G. Álvarez-Romero
Ken Wallace
David Pannell
Rosemary Hill
Vanessa M. Adams
Michael Douglas
Robert L. Pressey
机构
[1] The University of Western Australia,Centre for Environmental Economics and Policy, School of Agriculture and Environment
[2] James Cook University,ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies
[3] CSIRO and James Cook University Division of Tropical Environments and Societies,School of Technology, Environments and Design
[4] University of Tasmania,School of Biological Sciences
[5] The University of Western Australia,undefined
来源
Sustainability Science | 2022年 / 17卷
关键词
Participatory scenario planning; Subjective wellbeing; Social impact evaluation; Transdisciplinary; Developing northern Australia; Stakeholder participation;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Participatory scenario planning (PSP) has mainly concerned scenario development and outreach, with less emphasis on scenario assessment. However, eliciting stakeholder responses to scenarios, focusing on subjective wellbeing, can increase the legitimacy, relevance, and applicability of PSP. We developed a PSP exercise with a multi-stakeholder, cross-cultural group in the Fitzroy River (Martuwarra) basin in Western Australia. Four scenarios were developed collaboratively, each describing alternative development pathways in the basin by 2050. We held two scenario assessment workshops: a multi-stakeholder workshop and a workshop with Traditional Owners (Aboriginal Australians) only. We first asked participants to consider and discuss the current situation in the basin regarding how well nine categories of wellbeing were satisfied. Then, for each scenario, participants assessed and scored the change in each wellbeing category relative to the current situation. Participants’ ratings followed a similar pattern in both workshops, except for the scenario with strong policy and increased large-scale irrigation, which was scored mostly positively by the multi-stakeholder group, and mostly negatively by Traditional Owners. We identified different discourses that help to explain these results: (a) scenarios with large-scale agriculture, or with poorly regulated development, would increase the money circulating in the region, and benefits would trickle down to local communities through employment, enhancing most wellbeing categories; and (b) such modes of development might create jobs but could negatively impact other areas of wellbeing, potentially affecting culturally or environmentally significant places and increasing social inequities. We discuss how these results can support planning in the region, and how trade-offs were approached.
引用
收藏
页码:221 / 241
页数:20
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Towards understanding a multi-stakeholder approach in a youth leadership development program
    De Vera, Manuel J.
    Corpus, Jose Enrique R.
    Ramos, Donn David P.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC LEADERSHIP, 2016, 12 (02) : 143 - 153
  • [42] Advancing ski tourism transformations to climate change: A multi-stakeholder participatory approach in diverse Canadian destinations
    Knowles, Natalie L. B.
    Scott, Daniel
    [J]. ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH EMPIRICAL INSIGHTS, 2024, 5 (02):
  • [43] Inclusion strategies in multi-stakeholder dialogues: The case of a community-based participatory research on immunization in Nigeria
    Akwataghibe, Ngozi N.
    Ogunsola, Elijah A.
    Broerse, Jacqueline E. W.
    Agbo, Adanna, I
    Dieleman, Marjolein A.
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2022, 17 (03):
  • [44] A multi-stakeholder perspective on the development of key competencies for sustainability in Education for Sustainable Development at school
    Guenther, Julia
    Muster, Sina
    Kaiser, Klara
    Rieckmann, Marco
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION RESEARCH, 2024, 30 (10) : 1651 - 1667
  • [45] The role of accounting in the assessment of knowledge production from a multi-stakeholder's perspective
    Senn, Juliette
    Luque-Vilchez, Mercedes
    Larrinaga, Carlos
    [J]. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING MANAGEMENT AND POLICY JOURNAL, 2022, 13 (05) : 1033 - 1059
  • [46] Multi-stakeholder assessment of forest sustainability: Multi-criteria analysis and the case of the Ontario forest assessment system
    Mendoza, GA
    Dalton, WJ
    [J]. FORESTRY CHRONICLE, 2005, 81 (02): : 222 - 228
  • [47] OPEN RESEARCH QUESTIONS FOR INCORPORATING MULTI-STAKEHOLDER INTERESTS IN ENGINEERING FOR GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT
    Stevenson, Phillip D.
    Wood, Amy E.
    Mattson, Christopher A.
    Salmon, John L.
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF ASME 2021 INTERNATIONAL DESIGN ENGINEERING TECHNICAL CONFERENCES AND COMPUTERS AND INFORMATION IN ENGINEERING CONFERENCE, IDETC-CIE2021, VOL 3B, 2021,
  • [48] AM3BIT: Multi-stakeholder Multi-modelling Multi-representation Development of IS
    Snoeck, Monique
    Vanderdonckt, Jean
    [J]. DATABASE SYSTEMS FOR ADVANCED APPLICATIONS (DASFAA 2020), PT I, 2020, 12112 : 705 - +
  • [49] Rapid Development of a Telehealth Patient Satisfaction Survey Using a Multi-Stakeholder Approach
    Lin, En-Ju D.
    Guntu, Mounika
    Sezgin, Emre
    McLaughlin, Laura
    Ganta, Rajesh
    Lee, Jennifer
    Ramtekkar, Ujjwal
    Huang, Yungui
    Linwood, Simon Lin
    [J]. TELEMEDICINE AND E-HEALTH, 2022, 28 (09) : 1270 - 1279
  • [50] The Sustainable Development Goals in South Africa: Investigating the need for multi-stakeholder partnerships
    Haywood, Lorren Kirsty
    Funke, Nikki
    Audouin, Michelle
    Musvoto, Constansia
    Nahman, Anton
    [J]. DEVELOPMENT SOUTHERN AFRICA, 2019, 36 (05) : 555 - 569