IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i5p2980-d763647.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Images to Evoke Decision-Making: Building Compelling Representations for Stakeholder-Driven Futures

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Cronan

    (Landscape Architecture Program, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844, USA
    Center for Resilient Communities, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844, USA)

  • E. Jamie Trammell

    (Center for Resilient Communities, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844, USA
    Environmental Science and Policy, Southern Oregon University, Ashland, OR 97520, USA)

  • Andrew (Anaru) Kliskey

    (Landscape Architecture Program, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844, USA
    Center for Resilient Communities, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844, USA)

Abstract

Contemporary landscape planning challenges require an increasingly diverse ensemble of voices, including regional stakeholders, physical scientists, social scientists, and technical experts, to provide insight into a landscape’s past trends, current uses, and desired future. To impactfully integrate these disparate components, stakeholder-driven research must include clear lines of communication, share data transparently, and slowly develop trust. Alternative future scenario representations aim to generate conversations through discourse, evoke scenario-based stakeholder input, and ensure stakeholder-based revisions to research models. The current literature lacks a metric for gauging effectiveness and a framework for optimal evaluation for future scenario representations. We have developed and applied a metric for a ranked set of compelling scenario representations using stakeholder input from an active research project. Researchers surveyed stakeholders through a case study in Idaho’s Magic Valley to gauge the effectiveness of each representational approach. To improve future stakeholder-driven geodesign projects and gaps in the research literature, this project provides a ranking of graphic strategies based on the stakeholder survey. Additionally, we provide examples and evaluate graphic representation strategies that can stimulate meaningful conversations, create common understandings, and translate research processes and findings to a variety of audiences. The results of this study intend to provide landscape architects, landscape planners, and geodesign specialists with a framework for evaluating compelling future scenario representations for a stakeholder group.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Cronan & E. Jamie Trammell & Andrew (Anaru) Kliskey, 2022. "Images to Evoke Decision-Making: Building Compelling Representations for Stakeholder-Driven Futures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-13, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:5:p:2980-:d:763647
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/5/2980/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/5/2980/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stewart, Anson F. & Zegras, P. Christopher, 2016. "CoAXs: A Collaborative Accessibility-based Stakeholder Engagement System for communicating transport impacts," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 423-433.
    2. Derek Walker & Lynda Margaret Bourne & Arthur Shelley, 2008. "Influence, stakeholder mapping and visualization," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(6), pages 645-658.
    3. E. Jamie Trammell & J. Scott Thomas & Dave Mouat & Quinn Korbulic & Scott Bassett, 2018. "Developing alternative land-use scenarios to facilitate natural resource management across jurisdictional boundaries," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(1), pages 64-85, January.
    4. Daniel Cronan & E. Jamie Trammell & Andrew (Anaru) Kliskey & Paula Williams & Lilian Alessa, 2022. "Socio-Ecological Futures: Embedded Solutions for Stakeholder-Driven Alternative Futures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-19, March.
    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. Daniel Cronan & E. Jamie Trammell & Andrew Kliskey, 2023. "From Uncertainties to Solutions: A Scenario-Based Framework for an Agriculture Protection Zone in Magic Valley Idaho," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-13, April.
    2. Daniel Cronan & E. Jamie Trammell & Andrew (Anaru) Kliskey & Paula Williams & Lilian Alessa, 2022. "Socio-Ecological Futures: Embedded Solutions for Stakeholder-Driven Alternative Futures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-19, March.

    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. Thanne Mafaziya Nijamdeen & Jean Huge & Hajaniaina Ratsimbazafy & Kodikara Arachchilage Sunanda Kodikara & Farid Dahdouh-Guebas, 2022. "A social network analysis of mangrove management stakeholders in Sri Lanka's Northern Province," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/349602, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    2. Zhengqi He & Dechun Huang & Changzheng Zhang & Junmin Fang, 2018. "Toward a Stakeholder Perspective on Social Stability Risk of Large Hydraulic Engineering Projects in China: A Social Network Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-15, April.
    3. Ahmad Salman & Mastura Jaafar & Diana Mohamad & Mana Khoshkam, 2023. "Understanding Multi-stakeholder Complexity & Developing a Causal Recipe (fsQCA) for achieving Sustainable Ecotourism," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(9), pages 10261-10284, September.
    4. William Jones & Mahesh Sooriyabandara & Mike Yearworth & Angela Doufexi & R. Eddie Wilson, 2016. "Planning For 5G: A Problem Structuring Approach for Survival in the Telecoms Industry," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 301-321, July.
    5. Konstantina Katsela & Michael Browne, 2019. "Importance of the Stakeholders’ Interaction: Comparative, Longitudinal Study of Two City Logistics Initiatives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-17, October.
    6. Víctor Muñoz Sanz & Sara Romero Muñoz & Teresa Sánchez Chaparro & Lorena Bello Gómez & Tanja Herdt, 2022. "Making Green Work: Implementation Strategies in a New Generation of Urban Forests," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(2), pages 202-213.
    7. Berardi, Umberto, 2013. "Stakeholders’ influence on the adoption of energy-saving technologies in Italian homes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 520-530.
    8. Nuccio Ludovico & Federica Dessi & Marino Bonaiuto, 2020. "Stakeholders Mapping for Sustainable Biofuels: An Innovative Procedure Based on Computational Text Analysis and Social Network Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-22, December.
    9. Md. Mashiur Rahman & Madad Ali & Naveed Malik & Muhammad Salman Ahmad & Fahad Asmi, 2017. "Essential Skills for Project Stakeholders Identification: Sustainability Perspective," International Journal of Business and Social Research, MIR Center for Socio-Economic Research, vol. 7(8), pages 43-55, August.
    10. Feyisetan Leo-Olagbaye & Henry Odeyinka & Pavithra Rathnasiri, 2023. "Stakeholders’ Roles in the Delivery of Sustainable Housing Projects in Lagos State, Nigeria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-22, July.
    11. Diego F. Uribe & Isabel Ortiz-Marcos & Ángel Uruburu, 2018. "What Is Going on with Stakeholder Theory in Project Management Literature? A Symbiotic Relationship for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-23, April.
    12. Wulfhorst, Gebhard & Büttner, Benjamin & Ji, Chenyi, 2017. "The TUM Accessibility Atlas as a tool for supporting policies of sustainable mobility in metropolitan regions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 121-136.
    13. Marco De Nigris & Francesca Giuliano, 2023. "The Role of Organised Civil Society in the Implementation of the Renewable Energy Transition and Renewable Energy Communities: A Qualitative Assessment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-27, May.
    14. Kristijan Robert Prebanić & Mladen Vukomanović, 2021. "Realizing the Need for Digital Transformation of Stakeholder Management: A Systematic Review in the Construction Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-27, November.
    15. Stewart, Anson F., 2017. "Mapping transit accessibility: Possibilities for public participation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 150-166.
    16. Yawson, Robert M. & Greiman, Bradley, 2014. "Stakeholder Analysis as a Tool for Systems Approach Research in HRD," MPRA Paper 61278, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Anne Bridget Lane & Bree Devin, 2018. "Operationalizing Stakeholder Engagement in CSR: A Process Approach," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(3), pages 267-280, May.
    18. Daniel Cronan & E. Jamie Trammell & Andrew (Anaru) Kliskey & Paula Williams & Lilian Alessa, 2022. "Socio-Ecological Futures: Embedded Solutions for Stakeholder-Driven Alternative Futures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-19, March.
    19. Bhatt, Brijesh & Singh, Anoop, 2020. "Stakeholders’ role in distribution loss reduction technology adoption in the Indian electricity sector: An actor-oriented approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    20. Alessandra Montenegro & Marina Dobrota & Marija Todorovic & Teodora Slavinski & Vladimir Obradovic, 2021. "Impact of Construction Project Managers’ Emotional Intelligence on Project Success," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-18, September.

    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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:5:p:2980-:d:763647. 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.