IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/nathaz/v81y2016i1d10.1007_s11069-015-2078-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Compromise not consensus: designing a participatory process for landslide risk mitigation

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Scolobig

    (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)
    Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH))

  • Michael Thompson

    (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA))

  • JoAnne Linnerooth-Bayer

    (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA))

Abstract

With the escalating costs of landslides, the challenge for local authorities is to develop institutional arrangements for landslide risk management that are viewed as efficient, feasible and fair by those affected. For this purpose, the participation of stakeholders in the decision-making process is mandated by the European Union as a way of improving its perceived legitimacy and transparency. This paper reports on an analytical-deliberative process for selecting landslide risk mitigation measures in the town of Nocera Inferiore in southern Italy. The process was structured as a series of meetings with a group of selected residents and several parallel activities open to the public. The preparatory work included a literature/media review, semi-structured interviews carried out with key local stakeholders and a survey eliciting residents’ views on landslide risk management. The main point of departure in the design of this process was the explicit elicitation and structuring of multiple worldviews (or perspectives) among the participants with respect to the nature of the problem and its solution. Rather than eliciting preferences using decision analytical methods (e.g. utility theory or multi-criteria evaluation), this process built on a body of research—based on the theory of plural rationality—that has teased out the limited number of contending and socially constructed definitions of problem-and-solution that are able to achieve viability. This framing proved effective in structuring participants’ views and arriving at a compromise recommendation (not, as is often aimed for, a consensus) on measures for reducing landslide risk. Experts played a unique role in this process by providing a range of policy options that corresponded to the different perspectives held by the participants.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Scolobig & Michael Thompson & JoAnne Linnerooth-Bayer, 2016. "Compromise not consensus: designing a participatory process for landslide risk mitigation," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 81(1), pages 45-68, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:81:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s11069-015-2078-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11069-015-2078-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11069-015-2078-y
    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/s11069-015-2078-y?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. Laurie Pearce, 2003. "Disaster Management and Community Planning, and Public Participation: How to Achieve Sustainable Hazard Mitigation," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 28(2), pages 211-228, March.
    2. Bruna De Marchi, 2003. "Public participation and risk governance," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 171-176, June.
    3. Kallis, Giorgos & Hatzilacou, Dionyssia & Mexa, Alexandra & Coccossis, Harry & Svoronou, Eleni, 2009. "Beyond the manual: Practicing deliberative visioning in a Greek island," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 979-989, February.
    4. Aldred, Jonathan & Jacobs, Michael, 2000. "Citizens and wetlands: evaluating the Ely citizens' jury," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 217-232, August.
    5. John S. Dryzek & Simon Niemeyer, 2006. "Reconciling Pluralism and Consensus as Political Ideals," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(3), pages 634-649, July.
    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. Juliette G. C. Martin & Anna Scolobig & JoAnne Linnerooth-Bayer & Wei Liu & Jörg Balsiger, 2021. "Catalyzing Innovation: Governance Enablers of Nature-Based Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-28, February.
    2. Anna Scolobig & Johan Lilliestam, 2016. "Comparing Approaches for the Integration of Stakeholder Perspectives in Environmental Decision Making," Resources, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-16, November.
    3. Philipp Preuner & Anna Scolobig & JoAnne Linnerooth Bayer & David Ottowitz & Stefan Hoyer & Birgit Jochum, 2017. "A Participatory Process to Develop a Landslide Warning System: Paradoxes of Responsibility Sharing in a Case Study in Upper Austria," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-16, October.
    4. Gerd Lupp & Aude Zingraff-Hamed & Josh J. Huang & Amy Oen & Stephan Pauleit, 2020. "Living Labs—A Concept for Co-Designing Nature-Based Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-22, December.
    5. Itohan Esther Aigwi & Robyn Phipps & Jason Ingham & Olga Filippova, 2021. "Characterisation of Adaptive Reuse Stakeholders and the Effectiveness of Collaborative Rationality Towards Building Resilient Urban Areas," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 141-151, April.
    6. Gerlach, Lisa & Bocklisch, Thilo & Verweij, Marco, 2023. "Selfish batteries vs. benevolent optimizers," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    7. Abdul Halik & Marco Verweij & Achim Schlüter, 2018. "How Marine Protected Areas Are Governed: A Cultural Theory Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-23, January.
    8. Anna Scolobig & Monika Riegler & Philipp Preuner & JoAnne Linnerooth-Bayer & David Ottowitz & Stefan Hoyer & Birgit Jochum, 2017. "Warning System Options for Landslide Risk: A Case Study in Upper Austria," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-19, August.

    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. Shibly Shahrier & Koji Kotani, 2016. "Labor Donation Or Money Donation? Pro-Sociality On Prevention Of Natural Disasters In A Case Of Cyclone Aila, Bangladesh," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 61(01), pages 1-26, March.
    2. Heather Rosoff & Robert Siko & Richard John & William J. Burns, 2013. "Should I stay or should I go? An experimental study of health and economic government policies following a severe biological agent release," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 121-137, March.
    3. Jill H. Slinger & Scott C. Cunningham & Baukje L. M. Kothuis, 2023. "A co-design method for including stakeholder perspectives in nature-based flood risk management," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 119(3), pages 1171-1191, December.
    4. Pankaj Jaiswal & Cees Westen, 2013. "Use of quantitative landslide hazard and risk information for local disaster risk reduction along a transportation corridor: a case study from Nilgiri district, India," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 65(1), pages 887-913, January.
    5. Walmsley, Heather L., 2011. "Stock options, tax credits or employment contracts please! The value of deliberative public disagreement about human tissue donation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 209-216, July.
    6. Emanuela Ceva, 2012. "Just interactions in value conflicts: The Adversary Argumentation Principle," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 11(2), pages 149-170, May.
    7. Jorge León & Alan March, 2016. "An urban form response to disaster vulnerability: Improving tsunami evacuation in Iquique, Chile," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 43(5), pages 826-847, September.
    8. Álvarez-Farizo, Begoña & Gil, José M. & Howard, B.J., 2009. "Impacts from restoration strategies: Assessment through valuation workshops," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 787-797, January.
    9. Yi Lixin & Cheng Ke & Cao Xiaoying & Sun Yueling & Cheng Xiaoqing & He Ye, 2017. "Analysis of social vulnerability of residential community to hazards in Tianjin, China," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 87(2), pages 1223-1243, June.
    10. Hugh Ward & Aletta Norval & Todd Landman & Jules Pretty, 2003. "Open Citizens’ Juries and the Politics of Sustainability," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51(2), pages 282-299, June.
    11. Klenk, Nicole L. & Hickey, Gordon M., 2011. "A virtual and anonymous, deliberative and analytic participation process for planning and evaluation: The Concept Mapping Policy Delphi," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 152-165, January.
    12. Camilo Gomez & Andrés D. González & Hiba Baroud & Claudia D. Bedoya‐Motta, 2019. "Integrating Operational and Organizational Aspects in Interdependent Infrastructure Network Recovery," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(9), pages 1913-1929, September.
    13. Nicolas Rossignol & Pierre Delvenne & Catrinel Turcanu, 2015. "Rethinking Vulnerability Analysis and Governance with Emphasis on a Participatory Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(1), pages 129-141, January.
    14. Tasos Hovardas, 2021. "Social Sustainability as Social Learning: Insights from Multi-Stakeholder Environmental Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-20, July.
    15. Stefan A. Hajkowicz, 2012. "For the Greater Good? A Test for Strategic Bias in Group Environmental Decisions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 331-344, May.
    16. Bajmócy, Zoltán & Málovics, György, 2009. "A fenntarthatóság közgazdaságtani értelmezései [Economic interpretations of sustainability]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(5), pages 464-483.
    17. Yanwei Li & Araz Taeihagh & Martin de Jong & Andreas Klinke, 2021. "Toward a Commonly Shared Public Policy Perspective for Analyzing Risk Coping Strategies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 519-532, March.
    18. A. Lara & X. Garcia & F. Bucci & A. Ribas, 2017. "What do people think about the flood risk? An experience with the residents of Talcahuano city, Chile," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 85(3), pages 1557-1575, February.
    19. Alvarez-Farizo, Begona & Hanley, Nick & Barberan, Ramon & Lazaro, Angelina, 2007. "Choice modeling at the "market stall": Individual versus collective interest in environmental valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 743-751, February.
    20. Magaji, Sule & Eke, Chukwuemeka Ifegwu, 2015. "An Economic Assessment of the Impact of ICT on Performance Indicators of Water Resource Management in Africa: A Suggested Strategy for avoiding the eminent International Water War," African Journal of Economic Review, African Journal of Economic Review, vol. 3(01), January.

    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:nathaz:v:81:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s11069-015-2078-y. 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.