A Framework for Clarifying "Participation" in Participatory Research to Prevent its Rejection for the Wrong Reasons

Participatory research relies on stakeholder inputs to obtain its acclaimed benefits of improved social relevance, validity, and actionability of research outcomes. We focus here on participatory research in the context of natural resource management. Participants' acceptance of participatory research processes is key to their implementation. Our first assumption is that this positive view and acceptance of participation in research processes is a public good for the whole participatory research community. We also assume that the diversity of participatory forms of research is rarely considered by potential participants when they make their decisions about whether or not to participate in a proposed process. We specifically address how to avoid stakeholders' reluctance to be involved in participatory research projects based on disillusion with past experiences. We argue that the disappointment experienced by stakeholders and other participants (i.e., researchers and policy makers) can be avoided by being upfront and precise about how participation will be implemented, and what kind of involvement is expected from participants. Such a collective effort from the research community can also clarify the variety of possible implementations for potential participants. Building on earlier efforts to characterize and categorize the diversity of participatory research approaches, we develop a conceptual analytic procedural framework to make participants' roles explicit in the implementation of different participatory research processes. This framework consists of three facets: (1) the flows of information among participants and the control over these flows for each step in a process, i.e., who will be expected to produce information, who will use this information, and who will receive the results; (2) the timing of the involvement of participants in the different steps of the research process, and the framing power that is associated with each process step; and (3) the organization of communication among participants for each information flow, i.e., in what configuration (bilaterally or as a group, mediated or face to face) the interactions among researchers, stakeholders, and policy makers will take place. This framework can accommodate a wide variety of research methods, and highlights exactly how participants are involved in research processes. We are prescriptive in dealing with the need to be procedurally explicit when engaging in participatory research. We anticipate that using this framework will lead to more thoughtful acceptances or refusals to participate in proposed research processes. Our framework is based on various experiences with participatory research. It is intended to be used from the very beginning of a participatory research process as a conceptual guide for researchers. We suggest a protocol to transform it into more practical guidelines for communicating about upcoming participatory research processes. The leader of such processes should propose at each key stage an explicit, yet adaptive, plan for the following stages. This plan should also specify in what ways participants will be involved, and how the plan itself can be questioned and revised

Policy analysis and policy analytics

Working from a description of what policy analysis entails, we review the emergence of the recent field of analytics and how it may impact public policy making. In particular, we seek to expose current applications of, and future possibilities for, new analytic methods that can be used to support public policy problem-solving and decision processes, which we term policy analytics. We then review key contributions to this special volume, which seek to support policy making or delivery in the areas of energy planning, urban transportation planning, medical emergency planning, healthcare, social services, national security, defence, government finance allocation, understanding public opinion, and fire and police services. An identified challenge, which is specific to policy analytics, is to recognize that public sector applications must balance the need for robust and convincing analysis with the need for satisfying legitimate public expectations about transparency and opportunities for participation. This opens up a range of forms of analysis relevant to public policy distinct from those most common in business, including those that can support democratization and mediation of value conflicts within policy processes. We conclude by identifying some potential research and development issues for the emerging field of policy analytics

Designing participation processes for water management and beyond

This article addresses the question of how to design participation processes in water management and other fields. Despite a lot of work on participation, and especially its evaluation, this question has received little attention in the research literature. However, it is important, because previous research has made it clear that participation may yield important benefits for humans and the environment but that these benefits do not occur automatically. One precondition is sound design. The design of participation processes has been addressed in detail in the so-called "craft" literature but more rarely in the scientific literature. This article helps close this gap by systematically analyzing and comparing five design guides to determine whether it is possible to combine them into a more robust guide. The article confirms that possibility and presents a preliminary outline for such a guide. Principles for participatory process orientation are presented, as well as numerous partially iterative steps. The adaptive process is laid out in a way intended to help designers determine the objectives of the participation process and the initial design context, and make preplanning choices that eventually lead to the selection of suitable participation mechanisms. There are also design tools that facilitate this work. We discuss how our findings are largely compatible with previous research on participation, notably the work on criteria for "good" or "effective" participation processes. We also argue that our article advances research on an important remaining question in the scientific literature on participation: What process should be chosen in which context

Evaluating Participatory Modeling: Developing a Framework for Cross-case Analysis

Participatory modeling is increasingly recognised as an effective way to assist collective decision-making processes in the domain of natural resource management. This paper introduces a framework for evaluating projects that have adopted a participatory modeling approach. This framework – known as the ‘Protocol of Canberra’ – was developed through a collaboration between French and Australian researchers engaged in participatory modeling and evaluation research. The framework seeks to assess the extent to which different participatory modeling practices reinforce or divert from the theoretical assumptions they are built upon. The paper discusses the application of the framework in three case-studies, two from Australia and one from the Pacific island of the Republic of Kiribati. The paper concludes with some comments for future use of the framework in a range of participatory modeling contexts, including fostering consideration of why and how different methodological approaches are used to achieve project aims and to build a collective vision amongst diverse stakeholders.participation, modeling, evaluation, complex systems science

China: A New Trajectory Prioritizing Rural Rather Than UrbanDevelopment?

The adverse effects of rapid urbanization are of global concern. Careful planning for and accommodation of accelerating urbanization and citizenization (i.e., migrants gaining official urban residency) may be the best approach to limit some of the worst impacts. However, we find that another trajectory may be possible: one linked to the rural development plan adopted in the latest Chinese national development strategy. This plan aims to build rural areas as attractive areas for settlement by 2050 rather than to further urbanize with more people in cities. We assess the political motivations and challenges behind this choice to develop rural areas based on a literature review and empirical case analysis. After assessing the rural and urban policy subsystem, we find five socio-political drivers behind China’s rural development strategy, namely ensuring food security, promoting culture and heritage, addressing overcapacity, emphasizing environmental protection and eradicating poverty. To develop rural areas, China needs to effectively resolve three dilemmas: (1) implementing decentralized policies under central supervision; (2) deploying limited resources efficiently to achieve targets; and (3) addressing competing narratives in current policies. Involving more rural community voices, adopting multiple forms of local governance, and identifying and mitigating negative project impacts can be the starting points to manage these dilemmas.This work was supported by the Australian National University under Grant No. 5998099 and China Scholarship Council (CSC) under Grant No. 201808190012

Towards an art and science of decision aiding for water management and planning: a participatory modelling process

Planning and management of water resources are faced with increasingly high levels of complexity, uncertainty and conflict. Traditional technical and top-down management strategies have proved inadequate, forcing a move to more integrated forms of management, planning and decision making that can include stakeholders and communities, as well as technical experts and policy makers. These integrated forms of management require not only good technical or scientific ability, but a range of art-like skills including communication, creativity and the capacity to acknowledge and integrate diverse points of view. However, processes designed to aid such inter-organisational or multi-stakeholder decisionmaking are rare and in need of investigation. This paper proposes a process of participatory modelling using a series of semi-structured collective decision cycles which can aid decisions involving multiple stakeholders in water management and planning. The participatory modelling process outlined in this paper is designed to capture and integrate both tacit and explicit knowledge from stakeholders, right from the problem identification phase through to the final decision making, implementation and ongoing monitoring and evaluation. A brief idealised example of the participatory modelling process testing in Montpellier, France, is highlighted, as well as further questions and identified priority research areas

Towards an art and science of decision aiding for water management and planning: a participatory modelling process

Planning and management of water resources are faced with increasingly high levels of complexity, uncertainty and conflict. Traditional technical and top-down management strategies have proved inadequate, forcing a move to more integrated forms of management, planning and decision making that can include stakeholders and communities, as well as technical experts and policy makers. These integrated forms of management require not only good technical or scientific ability, but a range of art-like skills including communication, creativity and the capacity to acknowledge and integrate diverse points of view. However, processes designed to aid such inter-organisational or multi-stakeholder decisionmaking are rare and in need of investigation. This paper proposes a process of participatory modelling using a series of semi-structured collective decision cycles which can aid decisions involving multiple stakeholders in water management and planning. The participatory modelling process outlined in this paper is designed to capture and integrate both tacit and explicit knowledge from stakeholders, right from the problem identification phase through to the final decision making, implementation and ongoing monitoring and evaluation. A brief idealised example of the participatory modelling process testing in Montpellier, France, is highlighted, as well as further questions and identified priority research areas