Why multi-stakeholder groups succeed and fail

Anti-corruption initiatives increasingly use multi-stakeholder groups, comprised of representatives from government, private sector, and civil society organizations, to drive implementation at the local level and serve as a force for transparency. In theory, the multi-stakeholder groups ideal is quite appealing -- each stakeholder has its own interest in the initiative and contributes its unique capacities. In practice, many multi-stakeholder groups have fallen short of expectations. This paper considers two separate but related questions. First, what are the unique barriers to implementation facing multi-stakeholder groups? Second, what policy measures can be taken to improve the likelihood that multi-stakeholder groups will succeed? The authors use existing research in political science and economics to develop a multi-level framework that accounts for the"nested nature"of multi-stakeholder groups. The framework is then applied to experiences of MSGs from the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative, a new pilot program that aims to promote transparency in construction through the release of material project information. The evidence shows that the barriers facing multi-stakeholder groups are substantial, but once the level (individual incentives, organizational dynamics, country context, or international pressures) of the challenge confronting a multi-stakeholder group is identified, the specific barrier, its root causes, and appropriate solutions can be identified. More broadly, the Construction Sector Transparency Initiative experiences suggest that multi-stakeholder groups are best used as a means of promoting dialogue and building consensus, not as the locus of policy implementation and oversight.Public Sector Corruption&Anticorruption Measures,Social Accountability,Emerging Markets,Corporate Law,Corruption&Anticorruption Law

Protocol for the development of guidance for stakeholder engagement in health and healthcare guideline development and implementation

Stakeholder engagement has become widely accepted as a necessary component of guideline development and implementation. While frameworks for developing guidelines express the need for those potentially affected by guideline recommendations to be involved in their development, there is a lack of consensus on how this should be done in practice. Further, there is a lack of guidance on how to equitably and meaningfully engage multiple stakeholders. We aim to develop guidance for the meaningful and equitable engagement of multiple stakeholders in guideline development and implementation. METHODS: This will be a multi-stage project. The first stage is to conduct a series of four systematic reviews. These will (1) describe existing guidance and methods for stakeholder engagement in guideline development and implementation, (2) characterize barriers and facilitators to stakeholder engagement in guideline development and implementation, (3) explore the impact of stakeholder engagement on guideline development and implementation, and (4) identify issues related to conflicts of interest when engaging multiple stakeholders in guideline development and implementation. DISCUSSION: We will collaborate with our multiple and diverse stakeholders to develop guidance for multi-stakeholder engagement in guideline development and implementation. We will use the results of the systematic reviews to develop a candidate list of draft guidance recommendations and will seek broad feedback on the draft guidance via an online survey of guideline developers and external stakeholders. An invited group of representatives from all stakeholder groups will discuss the results of the survey at a consensus meeting which will inform the development of the final guidance papers. Our overall goal is to improve the development of guidelines through meaningful and equitable multi-stakeholder engagement, and subsequently to improve health outcomes and reduce inequities in health

Use of discrete choice to obtain urban freight evaluation data

The ex-ante evaluation of urban freight solutions is a complex task, due to the interference of different stakeholder groups with different views and objectives. The multi-actor multi-criteria methods have developed as a response to this scenario, but the determination of the weights required by them remains an unclear and controversial task. We propose the use of discrete choice methods as a powerful tool to confront these multi-faced evaluation problems, since the resulting surveys are flexible and easy to respond, and do not give away the final quantitative results. We have applied this methodology to the selection of urban freight solutions in the city of Seville, in Spain, followed by the determination of the relative weights associated to different objectives, both analyses carried out from the side of the carriers stakeholder group.Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad TEC2013-47286-C3-3-

THE ROLE OF STRATEGIC MULTI-STAKEHOLDER PARTNERSHIPS IN REDUCING FOOD LOSS AND WASTE IN SOUTH AFRICA

Food loss and waste is a wicked problem (a problem with no single solution). This problem is addressed by SDG 12. Solving this wicked problem in South Africa requires the collaboration of a variety of stakeholders, all with their own organisational interests. Therefore, multi-stakeholder partnerships (MSP) are imperative to the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 12.3, which focuses on the reduction of food waste. This qualitative case study unpacks the necessity for the use of multi-stakeholder partnerships (SDG 17) in achieving SDG 12.3. The South African Food Loss and Waste Voluntary Agreement (SAFLWVA) is the multi-stakeholder partnership being studied in this article. Multi-stakeholder partnerships cannot be effective without strategic communication. Therefore, the barriers and enablers of strategic communication, within a multi-stakeholder partnership of this nature, are explored. The was conducted in South Africa, with stakeholders involved with the SAFLWVA. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 participants. The findings indicate that strategic communication is one of the pillars of a successful multi-stakeholder partnership. Additionally, the following enablers for successful communication in MSPs were identified: trust, information sharing, education about benefits, receiving value, and gaining ownership. The study contributes to our understanding of communication barriers and enablers within multi-stakeholder partnerships

Multi-stakeholder partnerships in affordable rental housing: An investigation using soft systems framework

Queensland Department of Housing has proposed the use of partnerships as one possible option to deliver affordable housing outcomes. Although this initiative is supported by other stakeholders, many constraints have impeded its implementation for the delivery of real projects. Whilst it might find application for mixed housing projects with some relaxation on tax and/ or planning requirements, in general, affordable housing has not been seen as a valuable investment. Moreover, the partnerships require stakeholders to work across boundaries and outside their comfort zones.\ud \ud This initial study examines the use of soft systems framework to explore stakeholders’ views of multi-stakeholder partnerships in affordable rental housing. A series of in-depth interviews with major stakeholders representing housing providers, regulators and users in Queensland has been conducted. \ud \ud Soft systems methodology has been used to express the unstructured problem by using systematic thinking to develop a conceptual model to solve the problem. A complex problem is broken down into role, social system and political system analyses. This study provides an example of using systematic thinking in solving conflicting problems. The gap between the conceptual model and implementation in the real world situation was also investigated. Major changes in the socio-cultural aspects of the broader community as well as between stakeholders were required to implement the further development of multi-stakeholder partnerships for affordable rental housing

Storytelling - SHAPE ENERGY facilitation guidelines for interdisciplinary and multi-stakeholder processes

Storytelling as a research and collaboration tool is grounded in several social science disciplines, including Anthropology and Sociology. The storytelling methodology that SHAPE ENERGY will use is developed and coordinated by our project partner Duneworks, and will facilitate productive working in several SHAPE ENERGY activities and within our own communication approaches. This report details the guidelines for facilitators of the 18 SHAPE ENERGY multi-stakeholder workshops and the four Horizon 2020 sandpits with H2020/FP7 project partners. However, these guidelines are also designed to enable wider use by others aiming to facilitate interdisciplinary and/or multi-stakeholder collaboration

The Importance of Being Political: Emergence of a Multi-stakeholder Forum at the Lake Malili Complex, South Sulawesi

Multi-stakeholder forums are considered an essential element of landscape approaches for sustainable development and integrated ecosystem management. Such forums are widely adopted in environmental management policies and introduced as precursors for novel institutional arrangements for collective action in complex landscapes. However, while they are often held up as a mechanism for greater inclusion and representation, they can also further marginalize less powerful stakeholders. In this respect, the importance of politics in shaping the success of a multi-stakeholder forum is often overlooked. This article examines different multi-stakeholder mechanisms for governing the Lake Malili Complex in Sulawesi, Indonesia —a landscape characterized by competing land use interests and the presence of threatened endemic species.  The case highlights a successful bottom-up multi-stakeholder approach that became a model for collaboration, and which was subsequently scaled up to cover the broader Lake Malili Complex area.. The research is based on longstanding participation in the politics of decision-making processes at the Lake Malili Complex, complemented by in-depth examination of the establishment of the multi-stakeholder forum. The findings show that strong, locally-based initiatives provide an avenue for generating greater participation in achieving mutual goals for conserving the Lake Malili Complex. However, participation in the multi-stakeholder platform is not enough to push for decision making at the district level, where more powerful management decisions take place. We therefore note that outcomes of community-based resource management are limited when they are not backed by more political approaches to influence decision makin