Does stakeholder participation improve environmental governance? Evidence from a meta-analysis of 305 case studies

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Standard

Does stakeholder participation improve environmental governance? Evidence from a meta-analysis of 305 case studies. / Newig, Jens; Jager, Nicolas Wilhelm; Challies, Edward R.T. et al.
In: Global Environmental Change : Human and Policy Dimensions, Vol. 82, 102705, 01.09.2023.

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{aef299afc4e046cca774d02947dc9e12,
title = "Does stakeholder participation improve environmental governance? Evidence from a meta-analysis of 305 case studies",
abstract = "Participation and collaboration of citizens and organized stakeholders in public decision-making is widely believed to improve environmental governance outputs. However, empirical evidence on the benefits of participatory governance is largely scattered across small-N case studies. To synthesize the available case-based evidence, we conducted a broad case-based meta-analysis across 22 Western democracies, including 305 individual cases of public environmental decision-making. We asked: How do {\textquoteleft}more{\textquoteright} participatory decision-making processes compare against {\textquoteleft}less{\textquoteright} participatory ones in fostering – or hindering – strong environmental governance outputs, (i.e. environmental provisions in plans, agreements or permits)? Which design features make a difference? What role does the decision-making context play? How do results change if we control for the intentions of the leading governmental agency? To capture the central design features of decision-making processes, we distinguish three dimensions of participation: the intensity of communication among participants and process organizers; the extent to which participants can shape decisions (“power delegation”); and the extent to which different stakeholder groups are represented. Our regression analysis yields robust evidence that these three design features of participation impact upon the environmental standard of governance outputs, even when controlling for the goals of governmental agencies. Power delegation is shown to be the most stable predictor of strong environmental outputs. However, communication intensity only predicts the conservation-related standard of outputs, but not the environmental health-related standard of outputs. Participants{\textquoteright} environmental stance was another strong predictor, with considerable variation across different contexts. While our results remain broadly stable across a wide range of contexts, certain contextual conditions stood out in shaping the relation between participation and environmental outputs. Overall, our findings can inform the design of participatory processes that deliver governance outputs of a high environmental standard.",
keywords = "Collaborative governance, Context, Effectiveness, Environmental governance, Meta-analysis, Participatory governance, Environmental Governance, Sustainability Governance",
author = "Jens Newig and Jager, {Nicolas Wilhelm} and Challies, {Edward R.T.} and Elisa Kochsk{\"a}mper",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2023 The Author(s)",
year = "2023",
month = sep,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2023.102705",
language = "English",
volume = "82",
journal = "Global Environmental Change : Human and Policy Dimensions",
issn = "0959-3780",
publisher = "Elsevier Ltd",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Does stakeholder participation improve environmental governance? Evidence from a meta-analysis of 305 case studies

AU - Newig, Jens

AU - Jager, Nicolas Wilhelm

AU - Challies, Edward R.T.

AU - Kochskämper, Elisa

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2023 The Author(s)

PY - 2023/9/1

Y1 - 2023/9/1

N2 - Participation and collaboration of citizens and organized stakeholders in public decision-making is widely believed to improve environmental governance outputs. However, empirical evidence on the benefits of participatory governance is largely scattered across small-N case studies. To synthesize the available case-based evidence, we conducted a broad case-based meta-analysis across 22 Western democracies, including 305 individual cases of public environmental decision-making. We asked: How do ‘more’ participatory decision-making processes compare against ‘less’ participatory ones in fostering – or hindering – strong environmental governance outputs, (i.e. environmental provisions in plans, agreements or permits)? Which design features make a difference? What role does the decision-making context play? How do results change if we control for the intentions of the leading governmental agency? To capture the central design features of decision-making processes, we distinguish three dimensions of participation: the intensity of communication among participants and process organizers; the extent to which participants can shape decisions (“power delegation”); and the extent to which different stakeholder groups are represented. Our regression analysis yields robust evidence that these three design features of participation impact upon the environmental standard of governance outputs, even when controlling for the goals of governmental agencies. Power delegation is shown to be the most stable predictor of strong environmental outputs. However, communication intensity only predicts the conservation-related standard of outputs, but not the environmental health-related standard of outputs. Participants’ environmental stance was another strong predictor, with considerable variation across different contexts. While our results remain broadly stable across a wide range of contexts, certain contextual conditions stood out in shaping the relation between participation and environmental outputs. Overall, our findings can inform the design of participatory processes that deliver governance outputs of a high environmental standard.

AB - Participation and collaboration of citizens and organized stakeholders in public decision-making is widely believed to improve environmental governance outputs. However, empirical evidence on the benefits of participatory governance is largely scattered across small-N case studies. To synthesize the available case-based evidence, we conducted a broad case-based meta-analysis across 22 Western democracies, including 305 individual cases of public environmental decision-making. We asked: How do ‘more’ participatory decision-making processes compare against ‘less’ participatory ones in fostering – or hindering – strong environmental governance outputs, (i.e. environmental provisions in plans, agreements or permits)? Which design features make a difference? What role does the decision-making context play? How do results change if we control for the intentions of the leading governmental agency? To capture the central design features of decision-making processes, we distinguish three dimensions of participation: the intensity of communication among participants and process organizers; the extent to which participants can shape decisions (“power delegation”); and the extent to which different stakeholder groups are represented. Our regression analysis yields robust evidence that these three design features of participation impact upon the environmental standard of governance outputs, even when controlling for the goals of governmental agencies. Power delegation is shown to be the most stable predictor of strong environmental outputs. However, communication intensity only predicts the conservation-related standard of outputs, but not the environmental health-related standard of outputs. Participants’ environmental stance was another strong predictor, with considerable variation across different contexts. While our results remain broadly stable across a wide range of contexts, certain contextual conditions stood out in shaping the relation between participation and environmental outputs. Overall, our findings can inform the design of participatory processes that deliver governance outputs of a high environmental standard.

KW - Collaborative governance

KW - Context

KW - Effectiveness

KW - Environmental governance

KW - Meta-analysis

KW - Participatory governance

KW - Environmental Governance

KW - Sustainability Governance

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85161530556&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2023.102705

DO - 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2023.102705

M3 - Journal articles

C2 - 37829149

VL - 82

JO - Global Environmental Change : Human and Policy Dimensions

JF - Global Environmental Change : Human and Policy Dimensions

SN - 0959-3780

M1 - 102705

ER -

Recently viewed

Publications

  1. The Sound Culture of Dubstep in London
  2. Empirical Identification of Corporate Environmental Strategies
  3. Eine ökonomische Analyse der Verbrauchsgüterkaufrichtlinie zum Gewährleistungsrecht
  4. Kontinuität vs. kontinuierlicher Wandel?
  5. Natural habitat does not mediate vertebrate seed predation as an ecosystem dis-service to agriculture
  6. „Wir wünschen uns, dass Ihr, weil es ja so bitter nötig ist, auch in Zukunft Widerstand leistet."
  7. Narratives of Independent Production in Video Game Culture
  8. Unternehmerische Nachhaltigkeitskommunikation
  9. Sustainability Accounting and Reporting
  10. Fundamental social motives measured across forty-two cultures in two waves
  11. Schreibdidaktik und Hochschuleinrichtungen gemeinsam auf dem Weg zu einer akademischen Schreibkultur - Kooperationsmöglichkeiten von Hochschuleinrichtungen zur Förderung studentischen Schreibens
  12. Canada – Country of Superlatives
  13. Gravierende Irrtümer der Flusskonferenz vom 15. September 2002
  14. Unterrichtsdiagnostik – Voraussetzung für die Verbesserung der Unterrichtsqualität
  15. Accounting towards Sustainability in Production and Supply Chains
  16. Mindestanforderungen an das Betreiben von Handelsgeschäften.
  17. Radverkehrsförderung 3.0
  18. Geschlechterunterschiede beim Einsatz von Lernstrategien in Mathematikveranstaltungen
  19. Online-Spiele in der Adoleszenz
  20. Before-after differences in labor market outcomes for participants in medical rehabilitation in Germany
  21. The Image of Germany in British Juvenile Fiction
  22. Gründungsmythen in Paarbeziehungen
  23. Metaphilologisches Erzählen
  24. On Gender Statistics in the Art Field and Leading Positions in the International Sphere
  25. Versorgungslogistik in der Zigarettenindustrie: Das Distributionskonzept der Reemtsma Cigarettenfabriken GmbH
  26. Corrigendum to "Integrated assessment of bioelectricity technology options"
  27. R&D Activities and Extensive Margins of Exports in Manufacturing Enterprises
  28. Keine Qualität ohne Qualifizierung des Personals
  29. § 354 Verwirkungsklausel