Presentation to Defra by Prof Mark Reed providing an overview of his British Academy funded research into participatory processes

1. nvolved
What makes stakeholder participation in environmental management work? Designing more effective participatory decision-making processes

2. nvolved
What makes stakeholder participation in environmental management work?
Participation: frustrating...
... yet alluring

3. Barriers to participationPractical: lack of time, money, skills
Stakeholder fatigue, apathy based on negative former experiencesFear of losing control, unwanted/biased outcomesWorld view (or epistemology):
•Reductionists, in search of universal truth, find it hard to value local knowledge and multiple perspectives
•If you know what’s right, why consult?
•Often related to disciplinary background, but more about the way people construct & perceive knowledge Increasingly tractable

4. Barriers to participationPractical: lack of time, money, skillsStakeholder fatigue, apathy based on negative former experiences
Fear of losing control, unwanted/biased outcomesWorld view (or epistemology):
•Reductionists, in search of universal truth, find it hard to value local knowledge and multiple perspectives
•If you know what’s right, why consult?
•Often related to disciplinary background, but more about the way people construct & perceive knowledge Increasingly tractable

5. Overcoming barriers
Deeper issues may take generations to change
But most of these are tractable issues
Practical –we can make time/money and good practice skills available
Stakeholder scepticism: replacing bad with good practice, negative with positive experiences
Decision-maker scepticism: good practice can set boundaries (avoid raising false expectations via participation if no alternatives) and minimise bias
The key: identifying, spreading and facilitating good practice

6. nvolved
What makes stakeholder participation in environmental management work?
How can we design participatory processes that effectively engage stakeholders in policy decisions?
How can we harness participation to achieve social and environmental benefits, but avoid the pitfalls?

7. Plan
1.Context: the Ecosystems Approach, big society & the Natural Environment White Paper
2.What can the literature tell us?
3.Preliminary findings from ongoing research

8. 1. Context

9. Ecosystem Approach
A strategy for integrated management of land, water & living resources that promotes cons- ervation & sustainable use in an equitable way
Emphasises
Decentralising environmental management
Inclusive stakeholder participation
Capturing/valuing local knowledge
Learning by doing (“adaptive management”)

10. Ecosystem Approach
Much in common with localism & “big society”
Echoed in Natural Environment White Paper
Local Nature Partnerships & Natural Value Ambassadors
Public-private partnerships to establish Nature Improvement Areas & Payments for Nature’s Services

11. Ecosystem Approach
To apply the Ecosystem Approach in real-life decision-making, we need to know what works best when working with stakeholders
How can we effectively adapt our practice to different contexts and purposes?
What do we know are the key elements of a successful participatory process, regardless of context?

12. 2. What can the literature tell us?

13. nvolved
What makes stakeholder participation in environmental management work?
1. Start talking to people as soon as you can
•From concept to completion
•Early involvement leads to higher quality and more durable decisions
•Avoid raising false expectations: make sure there’s something to negotiate

14. nvolved
What makes stakeholder participation in environmental management work?
2. Make sure you’re talking to the right people
•The nature and legitimacy of outcomes is significantly affected by participant mix
•Lots of methods available now for “stakeholder analysis”

15. nvolved
What makes stakeholder participation in environmental management work?
•Design the process to the goals
•Identify goals with stakeholders
•Be prepared to negotiate and compromise
•Partnerships, ownership and active engagement in the process is more likely
3. Make sure you know what people want to talk about

16. nvolved
What makes stakeholder participation in environmental management work?
4. Be flexible: base level of participation & methods on your context & objectives
•Communicate e.g. information dissemination via leaflets or the mass media, hotlines and public meetings
•Consulte.g. consultation documents, opinion polls and referendums, focus groups and surveys
•Participate e.g. citizen’s juries, consensus conferences, task-forces and public meetings with voting
•Tailor your methods to context
•Manage power

17. nvolved
What makes stakeholder participation in environmental management work?5. Get a facilitator
•The outcome of a participatory process is more sensitive to the manner in which it is conducted than the tools that are used
•Don’t underestimate the power of investing in a good facilitator to bring people together and deliver high quality outcomes

18. nvolved
What makes stakeholder participation in environmental management work? 6. Put local and scientific knowledge on an equal footing
•Science can help people make more informed decisions
•Local knowledge can question assumptions, and perhaps lead to more rigorous science

19. nvolved
What makes stakeholder participation in environmental management work?
•Decisions based on a combination of local and scientific knowledge may by more robust due to more comprehensive information inputs

20. nvolved
What makes stakeholder participation in environmental management work? 3. Preliminary findings from ongoing work

21. Four ongoing paired projects
Environmental Consequences of Participatory Governance (ECOPAG): a comparative meta- analysis of 300 OECD case studies in environmental decision-making (Jens Newig)
Involved: in-depth interviews with those who led and participated in environmental management projects/programmes in Spain & Portugal

22. Four ongoing paired projects
Sustainable Uplands and Ecocycles: interviews & Social Network Analysis of knowledge exchange processes across UK uplands & catchment management projects

23. One Goal
To help people design participatory and knowledge exchange processes that are more likely to deliver the outcomes people want, by understanding why different approaches work in different contexts

24. Questions (1)
Does participatory environmental governance – as opposed to more hierarchical, top-down approaches:
Improve the quality of decisions or policies, facilitate their implementation and thus achieve environmental goals more swiftly and effectively?
Benefit participants in other ways linked to the process e.g. learning, trust etc., and achieve their stated goals (whether related to the environment or not)?

25. Questions (2)
Which contextual factors and which modes of participation affect the outcomes of participatory processes?
More broadly, what are the barriers and factors that facilitate knowledge exchange (whether via participation or not)?
How is knowledge transformed as it travels through peer-to-peer networks?
What gets into policy and practice, and why?

26. Emerging lessons
Low participation create simple solutions: easily implemented and accepted but perhaps ineffective
High levels of participation may lead to deeper understanding, learning and more complex solutions: more effective but harder to apply
Policy makers with actual decision-making power, need to be in the process for short-termimpact
Can create power imbalance that limits active participation & generation of new ideas, but if notpart of process, implementation less likely

27. Emerging lessons
With participation of land managers:
Outcomes may be more economically/practically feasible
More social benefits (learning, trust etc.)
Outcomes more likely to be implemented in longer term
To get their participation, process needs to come to them and communication tailored appropriately
No quantitative evidence from first 47 ECOPAG cases that participation leads to more beneficial environmental outcomes
Group composition strongly influences outcome, so initial stakeholder analysis is important to get right

28. Conclusion
Good practice is emergingand the evidence base is growing
Need to continue sharing our experience and learning from each other
Key lessons in your handout