IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jenpmg/v43y2000i6p769-784.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating Environmental Public Participation: Methodological Questions

Author

Listed:
  • Caron Chess

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Caron Chess, 2000. "Evaluating Environmental Public Participation: Methodological Questions," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(6), pages 769-784.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:43:y:2000:i:6:p:769-784
    DOI: 10.1080/09640560020001674
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09640560020001674
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09640560020001674?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Jabbar, Amina M. & Abelson, Julia, 2011. "Development of a framework for effective community engagement in Ontario, Canada," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(1), pages 59-69, June.
    2. Julien Vrydagh, 2022. "Measuring the impact of consultative citizen participation: reviewing the congruency approaches for assessing the uptake of citizen ideas," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(1), pages 65-88, March.
    3. Joanna Burger & Michael Gochfeld, 2009. "Changes in Aleut Concerns Following the Stakeholder‐Driven Amchitka Independent Science Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(8), pages 1156-1169, August.
    4. Plummer, Ryan & Armitage, Derek, 2007. "A resilience-based framework for evaluating adaptive co-management: Linking ecology, economics and society in a complex world," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 62-74, February.
    5. Gloria Lentijo & Mark Hostetler, 2013. "Effects of a participatory bird census project on knowledge, attitudes and behaviors of coffee farmers in Colombia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 199-223, February.
    6. Maria Cerretta & Lidia Diappi, 2014. "Adaptive Evaluations in Complex Contexts: Introduction," SCIENZE REGIONALI, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2014(1 Suppl.), pages 5-22.
    7. Paluš, Hubert & Marcineková, Lenka & Šálka, Jaroslav, 2024. "Was stakeholder participation in the PEFC revision process successful in Slovakia?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    8. Dara O'Rourke & Gregg P. Macey, 2003. "Community environmental policing: Assessing new strategies of public participation in environmental regulation," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(3), pages 383-414.
    9. Brescancin, Flavia & Dobšinská, Zuzana & De Meo, Isabella & Šálka, Jaroslav & Paletto, Alessandro, 2018. "Analysis of stakeholders' involvement in the implementation of the Natura 2000 network in Slovakia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 22-30.
    10. Francis Marleau Donais & Irène Abi-Zeid & E. Owen D. Waygood & Roxane Lavoie, 2021. "A Framework for Post-Project Evaluation of Multicriteria Decision Aiding Processes from the Stakeholders’ Perspective: Design and Application," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1161-1191, October.
    11. Susan L. Santos & Caron Chess, 2003. "Evaluating Citizen Advisory Boards: The Importance of Theory and Participant‐Based Criteria and Practical Implications," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 269-279, April.
    12. Plummer, Ryan & Baird, Julia & Dzyundzyak, Angela & Armitage, Derek & Bodin, Örjan & Schultz, Lisen, 2017. "Is Adaptive Co-management Delivering? Examining Relationships Between Collaboration, Learning and Outcomes in UNESCO Biosphere Reserves," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 79-88.
    13. Lia T. Vasconcelos & Flávia Z. Silva & Filipa G. Ferreira & Graça Martinho & Ana Pires & José Carlos Ferreira, 2022. "Collaborative process design for waste management: co-constructing strategies with stakeholders," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(7), pages 9243-9259, July.
    14. Thomas Webler & Seth Tuler, 2021. "Four Decades of Public Participation in Risk Decision Making," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 503-518, March.
    15. Silva Larson & Thomas G Measham & Liana J Williams, 2009. "Remotely Engaged? A Framework for Monitoring the Success of Stakeholder Engagement in Remote Regions," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2009-11, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:jenpmg:v:43:y:2000:i:6:p:769-784. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20 .

    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.