Theme: Public Participation RSS Feed

How participation in environmental decision-making contributes to measurable change

Findings Navigation: Browse by Audience; Browse by Theme; Browse by Best Education Practice; Browse by multiple topics

Adams, J., Kraft, S., Ruhl, J. B., Lant, C., Loftus, T., & Duram, L. (2005) Finding 1

As watershed organizations develop, facilitate a form of governance that is democratic and able to generate outcomes considered legitimate by all affected parties:

  • Provide a foundation of accepted scientific knowledge about the scope of the problems and the underlying biological-chemical-physical-socio-economic factors at work;
  • Develop rules to inform the planning process that are accepted as ‘‘right’’ and just by the stakeholders and provide for a process through which interested individuals (stakeholders)develop, debate, reject, and accept plans to deal withthe identified problems while promising to reach stipulated goals including a process for making the plan known to all affected parties;
  • Establish an accepted process for implementation, monitoring, and enforcement of the plan and its recommendations in an impartial way including a way to amend the plan or recommendation in light of new scientific information or changingsocial and/or environmental conditions.

Continue reading →

Ambrose, N. E., Fitch, L., & Bateman, N. G. (2006) Finding 3

When working on riparian issues, employ multiple interactions and a mix of many extension methods to offer opportunities for diverse information and ideas and methods of providing them, and to meet individualized learning needs. Methods may include presentations, field days, workshops, individual landowner visits, riparian health inventories and reports, written materials, technical advice, and web site information on riparian areas and grazing management. Continue reading →

Bidwell, R. D., & Ryan, C. M. (2006) Finding 1

To assure that watershed groups can play a valuable substantive role in states’ watershed management programs, encourage and maintain heterogeneous participation in watershed partnerships as they work through assessment, planning or day-to-day operations of the partnership, wrestle with internal differences, and establish new collective goals and strategies to achieve them. Continue reading →

Bidwell, R. D., & Ryan, C. M. (2006) Finding 2

To assure that watershed groups can play a valuable substantive role in states’ watershed management programs, encourage active recruiting to include a variety of perspectives. As collaborative policies are developed, sponsors must strike a balance to achieve an appropriate balance of participants to address each concern. Continue reading →

Ferreyra, C., & Beard, P. (2007) Finding 2

To integrate different types of knowledge in watershed management, such as experiential knowledge with technical/scientific knowledge, provide group members and resource people (technical expert) with a forum where each can give their input on an equal basis, maximizing the depth of input from each type of expertise. Continue reading →

Ferreyra, C., & Beard, P. (2007) Finding 3

Develop collaborative advantage in watershed management by working to develop and emphasize benefits not only for the partnership as a whole, but also for every individual and organization involved (e.g. access to credible data, learning opportunities, support for individual initiatives, local relevance, etc). Continue reading →

Ferreyra, C., & Beard, P. (2007) Finding 4

Build interorganizational leadership skills among watershed management team members that addresses the inherent tension between the nurturing and steering functions of leadership in network settings. Focus on an effective but at the same time democratic leadership style that empowers participants to respectfully engage during discussions, allowing for constructive disagreement to enrich both dialogue and action. Continue reading →