IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pntd00/0007863.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A typology of community and stakeholder engagement based on documented examples in the field of novel vector control

Author

Listed:
  • Cynthia E Schairer
  • Riley Taitingfong
  • Omar S Akbari
  • Cinnamon S Bloss

Abstract

Background: Despite broad consensus on the importance of community and stakeholder engagement (CSE) for guiding the development, regulation, field testing, and deployment of emerging vector control technologies (such as genetically engineered insects), the types of activities pursued have varied widely, as have the outcomes. We looked to previous CSE efforts for clarity about appropriate methods and goals. Our analysis yielded a typology of CSE, and related vocabulary, that describes distinctions that funders, organizers, and scholars should make when proposing or evaluating CSE. Methods: We compiled available formal documentation of CSE projects, starting with projects mentioned in interviews with 17 key informants. Major features of these examples, including the initiators, target groups, timing, goals, and methods were identified using qualitative coding. Based on these examples, subcategories were developed for a subset of features and applied to the identified cases of CSE in the documents. Co-occurrence of subcategorized features was examined for patterns. Results: We identified 14 documented examples CSE projects, which were comprised of 28 distinct CSE activities. We found no clear patterns with respect to timing. However, we found that grouping examples according to whether initiators or targets could enact the immediate desired outcome could help to clarify relationships between goals, methods, and targets. Conclusion: Based on this analysis, we propose a typology that distinguishes three categories of CSE: engagement to inquire –where initiators are empowered to act on information collected through engagement with target groups; engagement to influence –where initiators engage to affect the actions of already-empowered target groups; and engagement to involve –where initiators engage to delegate authority to target groups. The proposed typology can serve as a guide for establishing the goals, identifying appropriate methods, and evaluating and reporting CSE projects by directing attention to important questions to be asked well before determining who to engage and how. Author summary: Mosquito borne diseases, such as malaria and dengue, are major causes of illness and death worldwide. Furthermore, it is getting harder to control mosquitoes and other disease-carrying pests because global climate change is facilitating their spread to new areas, and over time, mosquitoes develop resistance to pesticides. Scientists are therefore developing new methods for controlling mosquito vectors using new gene editing tools. However, releasing genetically engineered insects into the environment is controversial. Many experts recommend that communities and stakeholders be consulted about if or how to use these new methods, but there are few guidelines for the best way to do this. We examined published accounts of community and stakeholder engagement pertaining to novel vector control and looked for patterns across these cases. We found that many efforts were not described in published sources, but those that were could be grouped into three categories: engagement to inquire, engagement to influence, and engagement to involve.

Suggested Citation

  • Cynthia E Schairer & Riley Taitingfong & Omar S Akbari & Cinnamon S Bloss, 2019. "A typology of community and stakeholder engagement based on documented examples in the field of novel vector control," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(11), pages 1-21, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0007863
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0007863
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0007863
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0007863&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pntd.0007863?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
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pntd00:0007863. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: plosntds (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/ .

    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.