IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jenvss/v13y2023i3d10.1007_s13412-023-00835-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A new approach for studying social, behavioral, and environmental change through stakeholder engagement in water resource management

Author

Listed:
  • Weston M. Eaton

    (University of Wyoming)

  • Kathryn J. Brasier

    (Pennsylvania State University)

  • Mark E. Burbach

    (University of Nebraska-Lincoln)

  • Stephanie Kennedy

    (University of Nebraska-Lincoln)

  • Jodi L. Delozier

    (North Dakota State University)

  • Sara Esther Bonilla Anariba

    (Pennsylvania State University)

  • Hannah T. Whitley

    (Virginia Tech)

  • Walt Whitmer

    (Pennsylvania State University)

  • Nicole Santangelo

    (Penn State Extension, Penn State University)

Abstract

As public agencies and research institutions increasingly pursue involving stakeholders in making decisions, scholars and practitioners are calling for a more rigorous empirical understanding of engagement processes and their outcomes. However, effective research methodologies for stakeholder engagement research are limited due to the complex challenge of both linking engagement contexts, processes, and outcomes and conducting research in ways that meet both practical and scholarly goals. This paper outlines a method for studying stakeholder engagement contexts, processes, and outcomes in water resource management settings developed through stakeholder engagement efforts in five US project sites. In response to methodological needs identified in diverse scholarship on participatory approaches to water resource management, we describe a longitudinal, mixed-methods, case comparison, and participatory research design, for gathering evidence for social, behavioral, and environmental change outcomes while simultaneously supporting engagement processes. This paper describes the research design and data collection procedures we developed to study change through engagement. This design was intended to allow in-depth analysis of place-specific engagement processes and outcomes, as well as the ability to compare across contexts to illuminate drivers of differences. We present this research design as a framework for others considering similar approaches and conclude by discussing benefits and limitations of the research design and tensions across research on and with stakeholder participants.

Suggested Citation

  • Weston M. Eaton & Kathryn J. Brasier & Mark E. Burbach & Stephanie Kennedy & Jodi L. Delozier & Sara Esther Bonilla Anariba & Hannah T. Whitley & Walt Whitmer & Nicole Santangelo, 2023. "A new approach for studying social, behavioral, and environmental change through stakeholder engagement in water resource management," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 13(3), pages 389-403, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jenvss:v:13:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s13412-023-00835-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s13412-023-00835-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13412-023-00835-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13412-023-00835-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew Kliskey & Paula Williams & David L. Griffith & Virginia H. Dale & Chelsea Schelly & Anna-Maria Marshall & Valoree S. Gagnon & Weston M. Eaton & Kristin Floress, 2021. "Thinking Big and Thinking Small: A Conceptual Framework for Best Practices in Community and Stakeholder Engagement in Food, Energy, and Water Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-19, February.
    2. Terri Mannarini & Cosimo Talò, 2013. "Evaluating public participation: instruments and implications for citizen involvement," Community Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(2), pages 239-256, May.
    3. Plummer, Ryan & Baird, Julia & Dzyundzyak, Angela & Armitage, Derek & Bodin, Örjan & Schultz, Lisen, 2017. "Is Adaptive Co-management Delivering? Examining Relationships Between Collaboration, Learning and Outcomes in UNESCO Biosphere Reserves," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 79-88.
    4. Tomas M. Koontz, 2014. "Social learning in collaborative watershed planning: the importance of process control and efficacy," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(10), pages 1572-1593, October.
    5. Andrea K. Gerlak & Tanya Heikkila & Sharon L. Smolinski & Dave Huitema & Derek Armitage, 2018. "Learning our way out of environmental policy problems: a review of the scholarship," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(3), pages 335-371, September.
    6. Uta Wehn & Kevin Collins & Kim Anema & Laura Basco-Carrera & Alix Lerebours, 2018. "Stakeholder engagement in water governance as social learning: lessons from practice," Water International, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 34-59, January.
    7. Clark, William C. & van Kerkhoff, Lorrae & Lebel, Louis & Gallopin, Gilberto, 2016. "Crafting Usuable Knowledge for Sustainable Development," Working Paper Series 16-005, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    8. Gaventa, John & Barrett, Gregory, 2012. "Mapping the Outcomes of Citizen Engagement," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(12), pages 2399-2410.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrew Kliskey & Paula Williams & David L. Griffith & Virginia H. Dale & Chelsea Schelly & Anna-Maria Marshall & Valoree S. Gagnon & Weston M. Eaton & Kristin Floress, 2021. "Thinking Big and Thinking Small: A Conceptual Framework for Best Practices in Community and Stakeholder Engagement in Food, Energy, and Water Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-19, February.
    2. Artur José Sitoe & Seunghoo Lim, 2024. "Understanding citizens' perception of channels for participating in administration based on their motivation in an authoritarian regime: The case of Gaza Province, Mozambique," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(1), pages 606-625, January.
    3. Reed, Deborah K. & Aloe, Ariel M., 2020. "Interpreting the effectiveness of a summer reading program: The eye of the beholder," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    4. Garrett M. Broad, 2023. "Improving the agri-food biotechnology conversation: bridging science communication with science and technology studies," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(3), pages 929-938, September.
    5. O’Connor John, 2022. "Strengthening the science–policy interface in Ireland," Administration, Sciendo, vol. 70(4), pages 29-52, December.
    6. Ardanaz, Martin & Otálvaro-Ramírez, Susana & Scartascini, Carlos, 2023. "Does information about citizen participation initiatives increase political trust?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    7. de Renzio, Paolo & Wehner, Joachim, 2017. "The impacts of fiscal openness," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 82521, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. van Noordwijk, Meine, 2019. "Integrated natural resource management as pathway to poverty reduction: Innovating practices, institutions and policies," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 60-71.
    9. Adeyeye, Yemi & Hagerman, Shannon & Pelai, Ricardo, 2019. "Seeking procedural equity in global environmental governance: Indigenous participation and knowledge politics in forest and landscape restoration debates at the 2016 World Conservation Congress," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    10. Simon O'Meally, 2014. "The Contradictions of Pro-poor Participation and Empowerment: The World Bank in East Africa," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 45(6), pages 1248-1283, November.
    11. Rossing, Walter A.H. & Albicette, Maria Marta & Aguerre, Veronica & Leoni, Carolina & Ruggia, Andrea & Dogliotti, Santiago, 2021. "Crafting actionable knowledge on ecological intensification: Lessons from co-innovation approaches in Uruguay and Europe," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    12. International Food Policy Research Institute, 2015. "Global Nutrition Report: Actions and Accountability to Accelerate the World’s Progress on Nutrition," Working Papers id:7417, eSocialSciences.
    13. Jennifer Garard & Larissa Koch & Martin Kowarsch, 2018. "Elements of success in multi-stakeholder deliberation platforms," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-16, December.
    14. Deborah R. Coen & Adam Sobel, 2022. "Introduction: Critical and historical perspectives on usable climate science," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 172(1), pages 1-9, May.
    15. Ardanaz, Martín & Otálvaro-Ramírez, Susana & Scartascini, Carlos, 2022. "Does Citizen Participation in Budget Allocation Pay? A Survey Experiment on Political Trust and Participatory Governance," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 12256, Inter-American Development Bank.
    16. Viola Hakkarainen & Katri Mäkinen‐Rostedt & Andra Horcea‐Milcu & Dalia D'Amato & Johanna Jämsä & Katriina Soini, 2022. "Transdisciplinary research in natural resources management: Towards an integrative and transformative use of co‐concepts," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(2), pages 309-325, April.
    17. Gerlak, Andrea K. & Guido, Zack & Owen, Gigi & McGoffin, Mariana Sofia Rodriguez & Louder, Elena & Davies, Julia & Smith, Kelly Jay & Zimmer, Andy & Murveit, Anna M. & Meadow, Alison & Shrestha, Padme, 2023. "Stakeholder engagement in the co-production of knowledge for environmental decision-making," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    18. Neeff, Till & Piazza, Marco, 2020. "How countries link forest monitoring into policy-making," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    19. Antti Gronow & Maria Brockhaus & Monica Di Gregorio & Aasa Karimo & Tuomas Ylä-Anttila, 2021. "Policy learning as complex contagion: how social networks shape organizational beliefs in forest-based climate change mitigation," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(3), pages 529-556, September.
    20. Grillos, Tara & Zarychta, Alan & Nelson Nuñez, Jami, 2021. "Water scarcity & procedural justice in Honduras: Community-based management meets market-based policy," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jenvss:v:13:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s13412-023-00835-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.