Literature DB >> 12224747

The quality of stakeholder-based decisions.

Thomas C Beierle1.   

Abstract

The increased use of stakeholder processes in environmental decision making has raised concerns about the quality of decisions these processes produce. Some claim that stakeholders make inadequate use of scientific information and analysis and are all too ready to sacrifice technical quality for political expediency. This article looks to the case study record to examine the quality of the decisions from stakeholder-based processes. The data for the analysis come from a "case survey," in which researchers coded information from 239 published case studies of stakeholder involvement in environmental decision making. These cases reflect a diversity of planning, management, and implementation activities carried out by environmental and natural resource agencies at many levels of government. Overall, the case-study record suggests that there should be little concern that stakeholder processes are resulting in low-quality decisions. The majority of cases contain evidence of stakeholders improving decisions over the status quo; adding new information, ideas, and analysis; and having adequate access to technical and scientific resources. Indeed, data suggest that it is the more intensive stakeholder processes--precisely those that have aroused recent concern--that are more likely to result in higher-quality decisions.

Year:  2002        PMID: 12224747     DOI: 10.1111/0272-4332.00065

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Risk Anal        ISSN: 0272-4332            Impact factor:   4.000


  16 in total

1.  Evidence to action needs research.

Authors:  Shamsuzzoha B Syed; Adnan A Hyder
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 9.408

2.  Stakeholder Interaction in Participatory Land Restoration in Iceland: Environmental Officers' Challenges and Strategies.

Authors:  Brita Berglund; Lars Hallgren; Ása L Aradóttir
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2015-04-23       Impact factor: 3.266

3.  Does Collaboration Make Any Difference? Linking Collaborative Governance to Environmental Outcomes.

Authors:  Tyler Scott
Journal:  J Policy Anal Manage       Date:  2015-04-08

4.  Stakeholder Participation in Freshwater Monitoring and Evaluation Programs: Applying Thresholds of Potential Concern within Environmental Flows.

Authors:  John Conallin; Craig A McLoughlin; Josh Campbell; Roger Knight; Troy Bright; Ian Fisher
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2017-09-25       Impact factor: 3.266

Review 5.  The art of co-production of knowledge in environmental sciences and management: lessons from international practice.

Authors:  Ida Nadia S Djenontin; Alison M Meadow
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2018-04-05       Impact factor: 3.266

6.  How Participatory Should Environmental Governance Be? Testing the Applicability of the Vroom-Yetton-Jago Model in Public Environmental Decision-Making.

Authors:  Nikolas Lührs; Nicolas W Jager; Edward Challies; Jens Newig
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2018-01-13       Impact factor: 3.266

7.  Framing scientific analyses for risk management of environmental hazards by communities: case studies with seafood safety issues.

Authors:  Nancy L Judd; Christina H Drew; Chetana Acharya; Todd A Mitchell; Jamie L Donatuto; Gary W Burns; Thomas M Burbacher; Elaine M Faustman
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 9.031

8.  Meeting report: national workshops for the communication of air pollution and health information: summary of four workshops in different regions of Europe.

Authors:  Eric Gordon Sanderson; Nina Fudge; Annike Irene Totlandsdal; Ingrid Hovelynck; Herbert Korbee; Edith Rameckers; Bert Brunekreef; Leendert van Bree
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 9.031

9.  Chemical plants remain vulnerable to terrorists: a call to action.

Authors:  Tobi Mae Lippin; Thomas H McQuiston; Kristin Bradley-Bull; Toshiba Burns-Johnson; Linda Cook; Michael L Gill; Donna Howard; Thomas A Seymour; Doug Stephens; Brian K Williams
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 9.031

10.  Spatial access priority mapping (SAPM) with fishers: a quantitative GIS method for participatory planning.

Authors:  Katherine L Yates; David S Schoeman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-07-16       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.