IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/marpol/v34y2010i3p645-654.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholder consultation during the planning phase of scientific programs

Author

Listed:
  • Human, Brett A.
  • Davies, Amanda

Abstract

Stakeholder consultation is being adopted as standard practice in the planning and management of natural resource management programs. While the utility of stakeholder participation has been investigated for the evaluation and implementation phases of natural resource management programs, few studies have examined the utility of stakeholder consultation during the initial phases of developing such programs. This paper presents a case study from a project developing a marine and coastal monitoring program for the Pilbara and Kimberley region of northern Western Australia. Via a series of workshops held in the region, stakeholders were asked to prioritise future research needs using several voting procedures. During the analyses of the results from the different voting procedures, it became apparent that there were high levels of inconsistency, poor correlation, and contradiction, between participants' responses. Despite the rigour of the selection process used to identify 'suitable' stakeholders for the workshops, these results show that stakeholders did not have the technical or broader contextual knowledge about marine ecosystems to effectively and objectively contribute to the research prioritisation and planning process. Based on the outcomes of this study, we argue that project designers need to be clear about why they are involving stakeholders in a project, particularly in light of the costs involved (financial, time, resources, costs to the stakeholder) in stakeholder consultation. Stakeholder involvement may be appropriate in later stages of developing natural resource management programs (implementation and management), however, stakeholder involvement is not appropriate in the initial phases of such programs, where scientific expertise is essential in formulating scientific concepts and frameworks.

Suggested Citation

  • Human, Brett A. & Davies, Amanda, 2010. "Stakeholder consultation during the planning phase of scientific programs," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 645-654, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:marpol:v:34:y:2010:i:3:p:645-654
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308-597X(09)00189-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kinell, Gerda & Söderqvist, Tore & Elmgren, Ragnar & Walve, Jacob & Franzén, Frida, 2012. "Cost-Benefit Analysis in a Framework of Stakeholder Involvement and Integrated Coastal Zone Modeling," CERE Working Papers 2012:1, CERE - the Center for Environmental and Resource Economics.
    2. Scemama, Pierre & Mongruel, Rémi & Kermagoret, Charlène & Bailly, Denis & Carlier, Antoine & Mao, Patrick Le & Vaschalde, et Diane, 2022. "Guidance for stakeholder consultation to support national ecosystem services assessment: A case study from French marine assessment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    3. Wolok, Eduart & Yapanto, Lis M & Olii, Abdul Hafidz & Tanipu, Funco, 2021. "Industrial Development in Fisheries Based on Blue Economy of Tominy Bay," OSF Preprints tqnzx, Center for Open Science.
    4. Carolus, Johannes Friedrich & Hanley, Nick & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Pedersen, Søren Marcus, 2018. "A Bottom-up Approach to Environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 282-295.
    5. Qiu Qiu & Liping Dai & Helena F. M. W. Van Rijswick & Gang Tu, 2021. "Improving the Water Quality Monitoring System in the Yangtze River Basin—Legal Suggestions to the Implementation of the Yangtze River Protection Law," Laws, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-13, April.
    6. Tim S. Gray & Thomas L. Catchpole, 2021. "The Relation between Fisheries–Science Partnerships and Co-Management: A Case Study of EU Discards Survival Work," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-19, March.

    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:eee:marpol:v:34:y:2010:i:3:p:645-654. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/marpol .

    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.