Comparing Approaches for the Integration of Stakeholder Perspectives in Environmental Decision Making

Anna Scolobig and Johan Lilliestam
Additional contact information
Anna Scolobig: Climate Policy Group, Department of Environmental Systems Science, ETH Zurich (Swiss Federal Institute of Technology), Zurich 8092, Switzerland
Johan Lilliestam: Climate Policy Group, Department of Environmental Systems Science, ETH Zurich (Swiss Federal Institute of Technology), Zurich 8092, Switzerland

Resources, 2016, vol. 5, issue 4, 1-16

Abstract: Including stakeholder perspectives in environmental decision making is in many countries a legal requirement and is widely seen as beneficial as it can help increase decision legitimacy, likelihood of implementation, and quality of the outcome. Whereas the theoretical literature on stakeholder engagement is large, less attention has been devoted to comparing and discussing different methodological approaches. Here, we compare three approaches—multi-criteria analysis, plural rationality theory, and scenario construction—that include stakeholders’ perspectives in environmental decision making. We find differences between the approaches concerning the assumptions about stakeholder rationality and whether experts and/or stakeholders are in charge of framing the problem. Further differences concern the type of data input from stakeholders and how it is used by the experts, as well as the role of stakeholders and whether they are involved early—already for identifying options—or later in the process, for evaluating or ranking alternatives analyzed by the experts. The choice of approach thus predetermines the type and depth of stakeholder engagement. No approach is “better” than another, but they are suited for different problems and research aims: the choice of the approach, however, has a large impact on the results.

Keywords: multi-criteria analysis; plural rationality theory; scenario analysis; knowledge co-production; stakeholder engagement; participatory processes; environmental decisions (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/5/4/37/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/5/4/37/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jresou:v:5:y:2016:i:4:p:37-:d:82327

Access Statistics for this article

Resources is currently edited by Ms. Donchian Ma

More articles in Resources from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().