Evaluating Environmental Public Participation: Methodological Questions
Increasingly, environmental agencies are engaged in public participation activities. Unfortunately, the limited evaluation of public participation programmes also makes improvement of such programmes more difficult. To encourage further thinking about the evaluation of environmental public participation programmes, this article discusses some of the basic issues raised by evaluators of social programmes (e.g. unemployment and housing, etc.) that have served as methodological proving grounds for evaluation. These issues include why evaluate and what and how to evaluate, as well as questions concerning the role of evaluators. To illustrate ways in which evaluators of environmental public participation programmes have grappled with these issues, examples of different methodological approaches are included. Finally, based on this review, recommendations are made to improve evaluations of environmental public participation programmes, such as increasing evaluation aimed at making mid-course corrections, which includes involving participants in evaluation and assessing a variety of participatory goals.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 43 (2000)
Issue (Month): 6 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20 |
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CJEP20|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:43:y:2000:i:6:p:769-784. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.