IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsoctx/v10y2020i4p98-d461502.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Responding to Social Distancing in Conducting Stakeholder Workshops in COVID-19 Era

Author

Listed:
  • Catherine Tobin

    (School for the Environment, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA 02125-3393, USA)

  • Georgia Mavrommati

    (School for the Environment, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA 02125-3393, USA)

  • Juanita Urban-Rich

    (School for the Environment, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA 02125-3393, USA)

Abstract

In March 2020, COVID-19 disrupted global society. Impacts as a result of COVID-19 were seen in all industries, including higher education research, which was paused in order to accommodate newly imposed restrictions. Social science research, specifically stakeholder engagement research, was one area that was potentially impacted given its need for person-to-person interaction. Here, we describe how we successfully adjusted our stakeholder engagement methodology to accommodate for socially distant requirements. Initially, we planned to host in-person workshops to assess stakeholder perceptions of microplastics impacts on oysters in Boston Harbor and coastal Massachusetts using the deliberative multicriteria evaluation (DMCE) methodology. To transfer these workshops online, we used familiar, open-access platforms, Zoom and GoogleDrive, to enable dialogue among participants and evaluate preferences. While modifications to length (5 to 3 h) and order (participants were asked to watch expert videos before their participation date) of the workshop were necessary, most other elements of the methodology remained the same for the online format. The main element that was lacking was the in-person interactions. However, with video conferencing tools available, this element was not completely lost.

Suggested Citation

  • Catherine Tobin & Georgia Mavrommati & Juanita Urban-Rich, 2020. "Responding to Social Distancing in Conducting Stakeholder Workshops in COVID-19 Era," Societies, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsoctx:v:10:y:2020:i:4:p:98-:d:461502
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/10/4/98/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/10/4/98/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giovanni Bonaccorsi & Francesco Pierri & Matteo Cinelli & Andrea Flori & Alessandro Galeazzi & Francesco Porcelli & Ana Lucia Schmidt & Carlo Michele Valensise & Antonio Scala & Walter Quattrociocchi , 2020. "Economic and social consequences of human mobility restrictions under COVID-19," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117(27), pages 15530-15535, July.
    2. Milla Salin & Anniina Kaittila & Mia Hakovirta & Mari Anttila, 2020. "Family Coping Strategies During Finland’s COVID-19 Lockdown," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-13, November.
    3. Aleksander Aristovnik & Damijana Keržič & Dejan Ravšelj & Nina Tomaževič & Lan Umek, 2020. "Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Life of Higher Education Students: A Global Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-34, October.
    4. Richard B. Howarth & Matthew A. Wilson, 2006. "A Theoretical Approach to Deliberative Valuation: Aggregation by Mutual Consent," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(1), pages 1-16.
    5. Yue Qian & Sylvia Fuller, 2020. "COVID-19 and the Gender Employment Gap among Parents of Young Children," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 46(S2), pages 89-101, August.
    6. Irvine, Katherine N. & O’Brien, Liz & Ravenscroft, Neil & Cooper, Nigel & Everard, Mark & Fazey, Ioan & Reed, Mark S. & Kenter, Jasper O., 2016. "Ecosystem services and the idea of shared values," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 184-193.
    7. Wendy Proctor & Martin Drechsler, 2006. "Deliberative Multicriteria Evaluation," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 24(2), pages 169-190, April.
    8. Clare Shelley-Egan, 2020. "Testing the Obligations of Presence in Academia in the COVID-19 Era," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-10, August.
    9. Yang Liu & Yu Zhang & Weifeng Qiao & Lu Zhou & Hamish Coates, 2020. "Ensuring the Sustainability of University Learning: Case Study of a Leading Chinese University," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-18, August.
    10. Raymond, Christopher M. & Kenter, Jasper O. & Plieninger, Tobias & Turner, Nancy J. & Alexander, Karen A., 2014. "Comparing instrumental and deliberative paradigms underpinning the assessment of social values for cultural ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 145-156.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Carlos Miguel Ferreira & Sandro Serpa, 2020. "COVID-19 and Social Sciences," Societies, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-3, December.
    2. Annibal Scavarda & Ana Dias & Augusto Reis & Haydee Silveira & Isabel Santos, 2021. "A COVID-19 Pandemic Sustainable Educational Innovation Management Proposal Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-21, June.
    3. Marko Perić & Vanja Vitezić, 2021. "Tourism Getting Back to Life after COVID-19: Can Artificial Intelligence Help?," Societies, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-13, September.

    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. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chris, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.
    2. Saarikoski, Heli & Mustajoki, Jyri, 2021. "Valuation through deliberation - Citizens' panels on peatland ecosystem services in Finland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    3. Mavrommati, Georgia & Borsuk, Mark E. & Kreiley, Allison I. & Larosee, Christopher & Rogers, Shannon & Burford, Klancey & Howarth, Richard B., 2021. "A methodological framework for understanding shared social values in deliberative valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    4. Kenter, Jasper O., 2016. "Integrating deliberative monetary valuation, systems modelling and participatory mapping to assess shared values of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 291-307.
    5. Cooper, Nigel & Brady, Emily & Steen, Helen & Bryce, Rosalind, 2016. "Aesthetic and spiritual values of ecosystems: Recognising the ontological and axiological plurality of cultural ecosystem ‘services’," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 218-229.
    6. Rodríguez-Piñeros, Sandra & Martínez-Cortés, Oscar & Villarraga-Flórez, Liz & Ruíz-Díaz, Alejandra, 2018. "Timber market actors' values on forest legislation: A case study from Colombia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 1-10.
    7. Liu, Shuang & Proctor, Wendy & Cook, David, 2010. "Using an integrated fuzzy set and deliberative multi-criteria evaluation approach to facilitate decision-making in invasive species management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2374-2382, October.
    8. Edwards, David M. & Collins, Timothy M. & Goto, Reiko, 2016. "An arts-led dialogue to elicit shared, plural and cultural values of ecosystems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 319-328.
    9. Kenter, Jasper O. & Jobstvogt, Niels & Watson, Verity & Irvine, Katherine N. & Christie, Michael & Bryce, Ros, 2016. "The impact of information, value-deliberation and group-based decision-making on values for ecosystem services: Integrating deliberative monetary valuation and storytelling," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 270-290.
    10. Raymond, Christopher M. & Kenter, Jasper O., 2016. "Transcendental values and the valuation and management of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 241-257.
    11. Garmendia, Eneko & Gamboa, Gonzalo, 2012. "Weighting social preferences in participatory multi-criteria evaluations: A case study on sustainable natural resource management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 110-120.
    12. Bullock, Craig & Joyce, Deirdre & Collier, Marcus, 2018. "An exploration of the relationships between cultural ecosystem services, socio-cultural values and well-being," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 142-152.
    13. Bunse, Lukas & Rendon, Olivia & Luque, Sandra, 2015. "What can deliberative approaches bring to the monetary valuation of ecosystem services? A literature review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 88-97.
    14. Saarikoski, Heli & Mustajoki, Jyri & Hjerppe, Turo & Aapala, Kaisu, 2019. "Participatory multi-criteria decision analysis in valuing peatland ecosystem services—Trade-offs related to peat extraction vs. pristine peatlands in Southern Finland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 17-28.
    15. Saarikoski, Heli & Mustajoki, Jyri & Barton, David N. & Geneletti, Davide & Langemeyer, Johannes & Gomez-Baggethun, Erik & Marttunen, Mika & Antunes, Paula & Keune, Hans & Santos, Rui, 2016. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis and Cost-Benefit Analysis: Comparing alternative frameworks for integrated valuation of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 238-249.
    16. Armands Auzins & Uchendu Eugene Chigbu, 2021. "Values-Led Planning Approach in Spatial Development: A Methodology," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-19, April.
    17. Peck, Megan & Khirfan, Luna, 2021. "Improving the validity and credibility of the sociocultural valuation of ecosystem services in Amman, Jordan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    18. Ainscough, Jacob & Wilson, Meriwether & Kenter, Jasper O., 2018. "Ecosystem services as a post-normal field of science," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 93-101.
    19. Dickinson, Dawn C. & Hobbs, Richard J., 2017. "Cultural ecosystem services: Characteristics, challenges and lessons for urban green space research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 179-194.
    20. Stålhammar, Sanna & Pedersen, Eja, 2017. "Recreational cultural ecosystem services: How do people describe the value?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 1-9.

    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:gam:jsoctx:v:10:y:2020:i:4:p:98-:d:461502. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.