Suchergebnisse

This paper questions the adequacy of the process dimensions of the earlier version of the participatory framework. Their ongoing analysis of process dimensions reveals that the stakeholder selection dimension is problematic and needs reconsideration. This paper represents the framework and describes enhancements to the process dimension component. By way of illustration, the framework is applied to two separate case examples of practical participatory evaluation.

With the increasing interest of local governments in civic participation, it becomes important to address inherent asymmetries in existing public participation processes, such as inclusion, time availability and long-term commitment, and knowledge and power differentials. Game-based participation has the potential to enhance public participation processes and lead to civic learning. At the same time, games tend to reproduce and even reinforce existing assumptions about stakeholder roles, procedures and political agency and social dynamics. We argue that urban planners will be able to improve the coherence and overall experience of participatory processes by thinking in terms of separate game mechanics, which when used in balance, create a successful player/participant experience. In doing so, some of the asymmetries observed in the existing participatory framework can be addressed. The potentials and challenges of game elements' applications are discussed in the framework of three case studies in the Netherlands, Austria and Belgium.

The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) mandates to incorporate the participation of stakeholders and the general public in the development and updating of the river basin management plans. So far, the WFD implementation has been mainly focused on perennial rivers without considering temporary rivers properly, neither in biomonitoring programs nor participatory processes. This paper aims at adapting participatory processes in river basin management to enhance the inclusion of ecosystems with poor or no social recognition such as temporary rivers. To do so, we examined previous experiences of participatory processes conducted in the WFD and adapted them to propose and implement an approach for promoting stakeholders' engagement in temporary rivers. The approach is based on a collaborative leadership, includes multiple participatory engagement mechanisms, uses future global change scenarios and the concept of ecosystem services at different stages of the process, and aims at involving stakeholders not only in the proposal of measures stage but in the diagnosis of the ecological status. It also includes an evaluation of participants' satisfaction on the process. We tested our approach in temporary rivers from the Mediterranean region. We found that the combination of environmental education and citizen science activities, together with the inclusion of the ecosystem services concept, was the most useful way to raise awareness on the biodiversity and ecological value of temporary rivers and to promote stakeholders' engagement. Workshops conducted during the diagnosis stage played an important role in both including stakeholders' suggestions and increasing their knowledge on temporary rivers. Further, envisaging climate-related future scenarios allowed participants to incorporate measures that could tackle new and emerging pressures on these ecosystems. As future environmental changes will increase the proportion of rivers with temporary flow regimes, our approach can contribute to adapt current participatory processes to future needs.

Purpose
– This paper aims to connect participatory sustainability implementation with sustainability assessment, exploring learning theories, the principles of Higher Education for Sustainable Development (HESD) and respective indicators applied in the university context. Even though participation is partly considered in existing assessment practices, it is still unclear what and how to measure participatory processes that envision implementing sustainability principles in higher education institutions. Holistic approaches are often proclaimed, but reductionist assessment methods are frequently followed.


Design/methodology/approach
– The study followed a qualitative approach, inspired by the Delphi method, and includes semi-structured expert interviews (N = 15) and two focus group discussions (N = 23), with participants coming from a total of 17 different countries. Data were analysed and compared according to qualitative content analysis and systemized according to the underlying theoretical strands.


Findings
– The findings suggest that participatory processes can be better assessed from a social learning and organisational learning perspective, emphasizing non-linear criteria for the quality of the process in terms of depth and meaningfulness as well as criteria for the quality of the outcome in terms of knowledge generation and innovation. The findings also point implicitly to the need of considering double- and triple-loop learning, if a culture of participation towards sustainability is to be pursued, and underline the high impact of institutional governance.


Originality/value
– Although a great volume of literature about sustainability implementation in higher education exists, studies focusing on participatory processes in this context are rather scarce. This research pays attention to sustainability experts working in universities rarely heard in a more systemic manner and also applies a reflective participatory approach itself by using qualitative methods.

This study examined potential opportunities and constraints related to the development and deployment of technology in participation processes, including resources available, benefits and outcomes of technology, and technology implementation. On the basis of a survey of planners relative to eleven technology scenarios, varied access to staff, hardware, and software resources was reported. Potential perceived benefits of technology use included providing information and, to a lesser extent, fostering discussion and attracting additional participants. The findings suggest the greatest potential is for more basic technologies including websites that provide information, as opposed to more advanced technologies that would have greater potential to enhance collaborative and interactive participation approaches. Concerns about equitable access to technology for both planners and participants are also noted by survey respondents. The findings emphasize the importance of using technology as an enhancement to, rather than a replacement for, more traditional participation efforts.

AbstractThis study examines how characteristics of participatory processes affect citizens' evaluations of such processes and thereby establish what kind of participatory process citizens demand. The literature on democratic innovations has proposed different criteria for evaluating participatory innovations. What remains unclear, however, is how citizens evaluate these participatory mechanisms. This is here examined in a conjoint analysis embedded in a representative survey of the Finnish population (n= 1050). The conjoint analysis examines the impact of inclusiveness, popular control, considered judgment, transparency, efficiency, and transferability on citizens' evaluations of participatory processes. Furthermore, it is examined whether the evaluations differ by the policy issues and process preferences of the respondents. The results show that people want transparent participatory processes with face-to-face interaction among participants and expert advice to deal with complicated issues. The participatory processes should also be advisory and should not include too many meetings. These effects appear to be uniform across policy issues and do not depend on the process preferences of citizens.

The need for democratic control of the application of expert knowledge is a common refrain in debates on the democratization of policy making. However, there has been relatively little attention empirically to how expert knowledge is integrated into local participatory processes. This paper analyzes how the assessments of local officers and external consultants are incorporated in a diversity of local participatory processes in Spain between 2007 and 2011. Our interest is in whether expert assessments of the feasibility of participants¿ proposals takes place; and if so, whether there is transparent oversight of the application of these judgements. The paper combines qualitative and quantitative approaches to show the importance of institutional design when dealing with the timing, style and impact of expert knowledge in participatory processes

In response to the accelerating potential of artificial intelligence (AI) to transform our lives, various governments, multilateral bodies, and other organizations have produced high-level principles and guidelines for the ethical use of AI in recent years. Despite the staggering number of such documents (over 90 by October 2019), there appears to be a relatively high degree of convergence on the level of principles. «Inclusiveness» is one of just a handful of principles that most actors seem to agree upon. However, a closer look reveals that the principle is interpreted very differently in terms of the domain, scope and actors it pertains to. As the global community now works on transitioning from principle to practice, there is a clear need to specify what the principles mean in context and how they can be operationalized and evaluated. To respond to this gap, the swissnex Network, foraus, and AI Commons launched the global campaign «Towards an Inclusive Future in AI» with foraus' new Policy Kitchen methodology. This joint experiment resulted in 11 workshops in 8 countries, involving 10 partner organizations and about 120 participants from a wide range of perspectives, who collaboratively generated 43 ideas for an inclusive future in AI. The preliminary output was presented at the AI for Good Global Summit 2019. This paper presents a more in-depth exploration of ideas and proposals on inclusion collected during the participatory process.