Many scholars have pointed to the fact that the expected
benefits of participation do not occur automatically, and that
participation processes can “go wrong” if they are not
competently designed and implemented (Brett 1996, Stern and
Fineberg 1996, Coglianese 1997, Webler 1999, Delli Carpini
et al. 2004, Irvin and Stansbury 2004). At the same time, it
must be noted that considerable advice has been created either
in the form of practical guidelines for the managers of
participation processes (e.g., Creighton 2005), numerous case
study examples (Carr and Halvorsen 2001, Webler and Tuler
2001, Beierle and Cayford 2002, Rowe et al. 2004, Klinke
2009), elaborations of the concept of participation (e.g.,
Arnstein 1969, Pateman 1970, Webler and Renn 1995, Mostert
2003, Delli Priscoli 2004, Newig 2005), or in the form of
research that usually focuses on the question of what are the
criteria of “good” or “effective” participation processes (e.g.,
Rowe and Frewer 2000, Beierle and Cayford 2002, Dietz and
Stern 2008). Despite these achievements, the question of
which participatory approach to choose in which particular
setting or context remains very much on the agenda
(Rosenhead and Mingers 2001, Rowe et al. 2004). This
remaining difficulty is also illustrated by the fact that many
water and natural resources managers throughout Europe and
beyond still lack experience with the implementation of
interactive stakeholder participation processes (Pahl-Wostl et
al. 2008b) or feel uncomfortable with it (Daniell et al. 2010).
Trend: design of participation processes
Many scholars have pointed to the fact that the expectedbenefits of participation do not occur automatically, and thatparticipation processes can “go wrong” if they are notcompetently designed and implemented (Brett 1996, Stern andFineberg 1996, Coglianese 1997, Webler 1999, Delli Carpiniet al. 2004, Irvin and Stansbury 2004). At the same time, itmust be noted that considerable advice has been created eitherin the form of practical guidelines for the managers ofparticipation processes (e.g., Creighton 2005), numerous casestudy examples (Carr and Halvorsen 2001, Webler and Tuler2001, Beierle and Cayford 2002, Rowe et al. 2004, Klinke2009), elaborations of the concept of participation (e.g.,Arnstein 1969, Pateman 1970, Webler and Renn 1995, Mostert2003, Delli Priscoli 2004, Newig 2005), or in the form ofresearch that usually focuses on the question of what are thecriteria of “good” or “effective” participation processes (e.g.,Rowe and Frewer 2000, Beierle and Cayford 2002, Dietz andStern 2008). Despite these achievements, the question ofwhich participatory approach to choose in which particularsetting or context remains very much on the agenda(Rosenhead and Mingers 2001, Rowe et al. 2004). Thisremaining difficulty is also illustrated by the fact that manywater and natural resources managers throughout Europe andbeyond still lack experience with the implementation ofinteractive stakeholder participation processes (Pahl-Wostl etal. 2008b) หรือรู้สึกอึดอัดกับมัน (Daniell et al. 2010)แนวโน้ม: การออกแบบของกระบวนการมีส่วนร่วม
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
