IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0223044.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Factors influencing participation dynamics in research for development interventions with multi-stakeholder platforms: A metric approach to studying stakeholder participation

Author

Listed:
  • Murat Sartas
  • Piet van Asten
  • Marc Schut
  • Mariette McCampbell
  • Moureen Awori
  • Perez Muchunguzi
  • Moses Tenywa
  • Sylvia Namazzi
  • Ana Sole Amat
  • Graham Thiele
  • Claudio Proietti
  • Andre Devaux
  • Cees Leeuwis

Abstract

Multi-stakeholder platforms have become mainstream in projects, programmes and policy interventions aiming to improve innovation and livelihoods systems, i.e. research for development interventions in low- and middle-income contexts. However, the evidence for multi-stakeholder platforms’ contribution to the performance of research for development interventions and their added value is not compelling. This paper focuses on stakeholder participation as one of the channels for multi-stakeholder platforms’ contribution to the performance of research for development interventions, i.e. stakeholder participation. It uses a quantitative approach and utilizes descriptive statistics and ARIMA models. It shows that, in three Ugandan multi-stakeholder platform cases studied, participation increased both in nominal and in unique terms. Moreover, participation was rather cyclical and fluctuated during the implementation of the research for development interventions. The study also shows that, in addition to locational and intervention factors such as type of the area along a rural–urban gradient targeted by the intervention and human resources provided for multi-stakeholder platform implementation, temporal elements such as phases of research for development intervention objectives and the innovation development process play significant roles in influencing participation. The study concludes that contribution of multi-stakeholder platforms to the performance of research for development projects, programs, policies and other initiatives is constrained by locational and temporal context and conditional on the participation requirements of the objectives pursued by research for development intervention.

Suggested Citation

  • Murat Sartas & Piet van Asten & Marc Schut & Mariette McCampbell & Moureen Awori & Perez Muchunguzi & Moses Tenywa & Sylvia Namazzi & Ana Sole Amat & Graham Thiele & Claudio Proietti & Andre Devaux & , 2019. "Factors influencing participation dynamics in research for development interventions with multi-stakeholder platforms: A metric approach to studying stakeholder participation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-20, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0223044
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223044
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0223044
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0223044&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0223044?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rosenfield, Patricia L., 1992. "The potential of transdisciplinary research for sustaining and extending linkages between the health and social sciences," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 1343-1357, December.
    2. Cees Leeuwis, 2000. "Reconceptualizing Participation for Sustainable Rural Development: Towards a Negotiation Approach," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 31(5), pages 931-959, November.
    3. Johnson, Nancy L. & Lilja, Nina & Ashby, Jacqueline A., 2003. "Measuring the impact of user participation in agricultural and natural resource management research," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 287-306, November.
    4. Bawden, R. J., 1992. "Systems approaches to agricultural development: The Hawkesbury experience," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-3), pages 153-176.
    5. Aden Aw-Hassan, 2008. "Strategies for out-scaling participatory research approaches for sustaining agricultural research impacts," Development in Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4-5), pages 564-575.
    6. Hall, Andrew & Rasheed Sulaiman, V. & Clark, Norman & Yoganand, B., 2003. "From measuring impact to learning institutional lessons: an innovation systems perspective on improving the management of international agricultural research," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 213-241, November.
    7. Nathalie Steins & Victoria Edwards, 1999. "Synthesis: Platforms for collective action in multiple-use common-pool resources," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 16(3), pages 309-315, September.
    8. Stephanie Barrientos & Sharon McClenaghan & Liz Orton, 2001. "Stakeholder participation, gender, and codes of conduct in South Africa," Development in Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(5), pages 575-586, November.
    9. Agarwal, Bina, 2001. "Participatory Exclusions, Community Forestry, and Gender: An Analysis for South Asia and a Conceptual Framework," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(10), pages 1623-1648, October.
    10. Nathalie Steins & Victoria Edwards, 1999. "Platforms for collective action in multiple-use common-pool resources," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 16(3), pages 241-255, September.
    11. David North & David Smallbone, 2000. "Innovative Activity in SMEs and Rural Economic Development: Some Evidence from England," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 87-106, February.
    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. Nicolas Faysse, 2006. "Troubles on the way: An analysis of the challenges faced by multi‐stakeholder platforms," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 30(3), pages 219-229, August.
    2. Sartas, Murat & Schut, Marc & Hermans, Frans & Asten, Piet van & Leeuwis, Cees, 2018. "Effects of multi-stakeholder platforms on multi-stakeholder innovation networks: Implications for research for development interventions targeting innovations at scale," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 13(6), pages 1-20.
    3. Lilja, Nina K. & Bellon, Mauricio R., 2006. "Analysis of Participatory Research Projects in the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center," Impact Studies 56099, CIMMYT: International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center.
    4. Klerkx, Laurens & Leeuwis, Cees, 2008. "Institutionalizing end-user demand steering in agricultural R&D: Farmer levy funding of R&D in The Netherlands," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 460-472, April.
    5. Letty, Brigid & Shezi, Zanele & Mudhara, Maxwell, 2012. "An exploration of agricultural grassroots innovation in South Africa and implications for innovation indicator development," MERIT Working Papers 2012-023, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    6. Johnson, Nancy & Ravnborg, Helle Munk & Westermann, Olaf & Probst, Kirsten, 2001. "User participation in watershed management and research:," CAPRi working papers 19, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. Charles Heckscher & John McCarthy, 2014. "Transient Solidarities: Commitment and Collective Action in Post-Industrial Societies," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 52(4), pages 627-657, December.
    8. Takako Izumi & Sangita Das & Miwa Abe & Rajib Shaw, 2022. "Managing Compound Hazards: Impact of COVID-19 and Cases of Adaptive Governance during the 2020 Kumamoto Flood in Japan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-16, January.
    9. Karin Andrea Wigger & Dean A. Shepherd, 2020. "We’re All in the Same Boat: A Collective Model of Preserving and Accessing Nature-Based Opportunities," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 44(3), pages 587-617, May.
    10. Thornton, PK & Schuetz, T & Förch, W & Cramer, L & Abreu, D & Vermeulen, S & Campbell, BM, 2017. "Responding to global change: A theory of change approach to making agricultural research for development outcome-based," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 145-153.
    11. José Ribas, 2014. "An Assessment of Conflicting Intentions in the Use of Multipurpose Water Reservoirs," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(12), pages 3989-4000, September.
    12. Anabel Sanchez-Plaza & Annelies Broekman & Pilar Paneque, 2019. "Analytical Framework to Assess the Incorporation of Climate Change Adaptation in Water Management: Application to the Tordera River Basin Adaptation Plan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-13, February.
    13. Peter Jones, 2013. "Governing protected areas to fulfil biodiversity conservation obligations: from Habermasian ideals to a more instrumental reality," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 39-50, February.
    14. Das, Nimai, 2009. "Understanding of Social Capital in Gender-based Participatory JFM Programme: An Evidence from West Bengal," MPRA Paper 15304, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Dieuwke Lamers & Marc Schut & Laurens Klerkx & Piet van Asten, 2017. "Compositional dynamics of multilevel innovation platforms in agricultural research for development," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(6), pages 739-752.
    16. Muñoz Escobar, Marcela & Hollaender, Robert & Pineda Weffer, Camilo, 2013. "Institutional durability of payments for watershed ecosystem services: Lessons from two case studies from Colombia and Germany," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 46-53.
    17. John Selsky & Barbara Parker, 2010. "Platforms for Cross-Sector Social Partnerships: Prospective Sensemaking Devices for Social Benefit," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 94(1), pages 21-37, July.
    18. Josefina Erikson & Oscar L. Larsson, 2020. "How platforms facilitate collaboration across organizational boundaries: fighting human trafficking in Sweden," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(1), pages 181-203, March.
    19. Weingart, Anne & Kirk, Michael, 2008. "Escaping poverty traps?: Collective action and property rights in post-war rural Cambodia," CAPRi working papers 89, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    20. Hermans, Frans & Sartas, Murat & van Schagen, Boudy & van Asten, Piet & Schut, Marc, 2017. "Social network analysis of multi-stakeholder platforms in agricultural research for development: Opportunities and constraints for innovation and scaling," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21.

    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:pone00:0223044. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.