Civil Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Joint fact-finding is a collaborative technique for achieving acceptance of
data. The concepts of 'joint fact finding', 'co-production of knowledge', and
joint problem-solving are made possible by adoption of a consensus building
approach whereby knowledge is jointly constructed by stakeholders and
experts instead of just reported by experts to stakeholders (Amengual 2006;
Ehrmann and Stinson 2006). Effective resource management needs to be based
on sound knowledge. Yet ecosystem-human interactions are highly complex,
continually changing and characterised by uncertainty, and even more so
because of climate change. Cullen (2004: 1) refers to the global knowledge
bazaar and the need to obtain the right knowledge at the right time. He
argues the need for three clusters of knowledge to interact: local, scientific
and Indigenous knowledge, in order to achieve sustainable management.
Other process steps such as identifying a range of options are crucial.
While this and the ability of making trade-offs is discussed in greater detail
in chapters 7 and 8, a transparent and thorough review of options (i.e. an
expanded 'pie') enables a greater range of possible solutions to address diverse
needs.
Evaluation of community engagement
Because participation now plays an essential role in water management and
infrastructure development, an evaluation of the participation is essential if
practitioners are to support their claims about its benefits with clear evidence.
Yet it is seldom done. The absence of objective evaluation means a much-
reduced ability to learn, manage adaptively, and continually improve practice.
Approaches to evaluating participation generally centre around whether it
meets the good principles for engagement mentioned previously. Based on
literature on evaluation of participation (Mackenzie
et al.
2009; Laurian and
Shaw 2008; Baldwin and Twyford 2007; Michels and De Graaf 2010; Rowe
and Frewer 2000), we propose a framework for evaluating participation that
includes assessment criteria categorised as process, output, outcome, and
impact indicators. Examples of these types of criteria follow:
Process
criteria tend to include:
O
the nature and extent of involvement by appropriate stakeholders - was it
inclusive, flexible to needs of participants with relevant information shared
(i.e. information access)?
O
the existence and strength of rules supporting the effective sharing of
views - were all key stakeholders able to voice their concerns and join in
discussion (i.e. deliberative and fair)?
O
the introduction of participation early in the decision-making process;
O
the commitment of the agency to the process and its response to public
input - was it made clear to participants how their input influenced the
decision (i.e. transparent)?
O
being cost-effective.
