Visualizing stakeholders’ willingness for collective action in participatory scenario planning

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Authors

  • María D. López-Rodríguez
  • Elisa Oteros-Rozas
  • Isabel Ruiz-Mallén
  • Hug March
  • Andra I. Horcea-Milcu
  • Maria Heras
  • Miguel A. Cebrián-Piqueras
  • Riley Andrade
  • Veronica B. P. G. Lo
  • Concepción Piñeiro
Participatory scenario planning is a powerful approach to guide diverse stakeholders in creating and reflecting on visions of plausible and desired futures. However, this process requires tools to guide collective action to implement such visions within management agendas. This study develops, applies, and analyzes a novel visual tool within a virtual participatory scenario planning process about the Sierra de Guadarrama National Park (Madrid, Spain). Building on the identification of stakeholders who might engage in scenario strategies, the visual tool guided them in defining tasks to be developed and envisioning their willingness to collaborate in their implementation. We qualitatively analyzed data from recordings, online field observations, a post-survey from the scenario planning process, and a successive policy workshop. Our findings show that the visual tool fosters dialogue between stakeholders to redistribute tasks for working together on needed strategies in the protected area while promoting reflection on their willingness to collaborate as a group to implement them. The visual tool provided graphic outcomes for nine strategies corresponding to pictures of who may or may not be willing to engage in implementing such strategies. We argue that the visual tool is a robust method that can complement participatory scenario planning processes by providing a useful starting point for creating action networks to incorporate the resulting scenario strategies into management agendas. We deliberate on the nature of the visual tool as a boundary object and discuss its role as a decision-support tool. In particular, we reflect on the potential contributions and limitations of the visual tool to four dimensions of participatory conservation governance during participatory scenario planning processes: inclusivity, integration, adaptation, and pluralism. Our study provides a practical orientation to adapt the tool to other contexts and knowledge co-creation processes.
Original languageEnglish
Article number5
JournalEcology and Society
Volume28
Issue number2
Number of pages23
ISSN1708-3087
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 05.2023

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
We are very grateful to the participants involved in the two workshops and surveys. We thank all the collaborators of the online PSP workshop for their valuable time, effort, and support: Cristina Quintas-Soriano, Federica Ravera, and Marina García-Llorente from FRACTAL Collective; Jorge Sánchez-Cruzado, Hugo Navascués, Leticia de Siles, Marien González-Hidalgo, and Olga Millán. Thanks are also extended to the creators of Streamline (Metzger and De Vries 2018) and the ScienSeed for adapting some of the infographic images from Streamline to the SGNP context. This research was supported by the ENVISION project, funded through the 2017-2018 Belmont Forum and BiodivERsA joint call for research proposals, under the BiodivScen ERA-Net COFUND programme, and with the support of the following national funders: Grant PCI2018-092958 funded by MCIN/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033, Swedish Research Council for Sustainable Development (FORMAS), German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (Grant Number: 01LC18064), Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO), National Science Foundation, United States (NSF), and National Park Service, United States (NPS). IRM acknowledges the support of the grant RYC-2015-17676 funded by MCIN/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033 and by “ESF Investing in your future.” EOR acknowledges the support of the grant IJCI-2017-34334 funded by MCIN/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033. AIHM acknowledges EU funding through the Marie Sklodowska‐ Curie grant number 840207.

Funding Information:
We are very grateful to the participants involved in the two workshops and surveys. We thank all the collaborators of the online PSP workshop for their valuable time, effort, and support: Cristina Quintas-Soriano, Federica Ravera, and Marina García-Llorente from FRACTAL Collective; Jorge Sánchez-Cruzado, Hugo Navascués, Leticia de Siles, Marien González-Hidalgo, and Olga Millán. Thanks are also extended to the creators of Streamline (Metzger and De Vries 2018) and the ScienSeed for adapting some of the infographic images from Streamline to the SGNP context. This research was supported by the ENVISION project, funded through the 2017-2018 Belmont Forum and BiodivERsA joint call for research proposals, under the BiodivScen ERA-Net COFUND programme, and with the support of the following national funders: Grant PCI2018-092958 funded by MCIN/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033, Swedish Research Council for Sustainable Development (FORMAS), German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (Grant Number: 01LC18064), Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO), National Science Foundation, United States (NSF), and National Park Service, United States (NPS). IRM acknowledges the support of the grant RYC-2015-17676 funded by MCIN/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033 and by “ESF Investing in your future.” EOR acknowledges the support of the grant IJCI-2017-34334 funded by MCIN/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033. AIHM acknowledges EU funding through the Marie Sklodowska Curie grant number 840207.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 by the author(s). Published here under license by the Resilience Alliance.

    Research areas

  • action networks, backcasting, decision-support tool, future scenarios, participatory governance, protected areas
  • Biology

DOI

Recently viewed

Publications

  1. Action theory
  2. Time Use and Time Budgets
  3. Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning
  4. No need for new natural gas pipelines and LNG terminalsin Europe
  5. Das Problem der Unbestimmtheit des Rechts
  6. Effect of salinity-changing rates on filtration activity of mussels from two sites within the Baltic Mytilus hybrid zone
  7. Politics after Networks
  8. Leaf Nutritional Content, Tree Richness, and Season Shape the Caterpillar Functional Trait Composition Hosted by Trees
  9. Step back from the forest and step up to the Bonn Challenge
  10. Intermediate `time-spaces' - The rediscovery of transition in spatial planning and environmental planning
  11. The role of human resource practices for including persons with disabilities in the workforce
  12. Genetically based differentiation in growth of multiple non-native plant species along a steep environmental gradient
  13. Watch out, pothole! Featuring Road Damage Detection in an End-to-end System for Autonomous Driving
  14. Negotiation complexity
  15. Exploring the motivations of protesters in contingent valuation
  16. Modelling and simulation of dynamic microstructure evolution of aluminium alloys during thermomechanically coupled extrusion process
  17. Automated text analyses of sustainability & integrated reporting.
  18. Learning to collaborate while collaborating
  19. External rotation of the auditor
  20. Local levers for change
  21. Three schools of transformation thinking
  22. Depoliticising EU migration policies
  23. Combined experimental–numerical study on residual stresses induced by a single impact as elementary process of mechanical peening
  24. Philosophie in Metropolen?
  25. Søren Kierkegaard in deutscher Sprache
  26. Thermodynamic description of reactions between Mg and CaO
  27. Conceptual frameworks and methods for advancing invasion ecology
  28. Das Wahre im Künstlichen
  29. Responsibility and environment
  30. Relative and absolute scarcity of biodiversity
  31. Altruism and egoism of the social planner in a dynamic context
  32. Variable annuities and the option to seek risk
  33. Differential Steering System for Vehicular Yaw Tracking Motion with Help of Sliding Mode Control