Combining participatory mapping with Q-methodology to map stakeholder perceptions of complex environmental problems

Forrester, John; Cook, Brian R.; Bracken, Louise; Cinderby, Steve; Donaldson, Andrew

doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2014.11.019

Cited by 83 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 55 publications

(35 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The entire selection process presented in this paper can be qualified as semi-qualitative , that is one with concise structured outputs rather than wordy transcripts. This process has the advantage that the output is apparently simple and the process short (Forrester et al, 2015). Our protocol can be confronted with several methods.…”

Section: Figure 4 Iterative Process Leading To the Final Selection Omentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a more structured selection process for attributes and levels in choice experiments: A study in a Belgian protected area

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The process of selecting attributes for inclusion in choice experiments frequently involves qualitative methods such as focus groups and interviews. In order for a choice experiment to be successful and the results to be valid, this qualitative selection process is essential. It often lacks rigour and is poorly described, particularly in environmental choice experiments. We propose a meticulous attribute and attribute-level selection process consisting of a scoring exercise and an interactive discussion. This paper provides a case study describing how attributes and attribute-levels were identified and selected for the National Park Hoge Kempen in Belgium. We carried out four focus groups and thirteen semi-structured interviews with various park stakeholders to select attributes from six categories: the four categories of ecosystem services (supporting, provisioning, regulating, cultural), infrastructure, and land use types. The top-ranked characteristics were nature conservation, natural forests, biodiversity refuge, wetlands, landscape variety, heathlands, air purification, and education.Both the scoring exercise and the interactive discussion contributed to the attributes selected for the CE. Following these, an ultimate expert consultation stage is recommended to approve both the attribute and attribute-level selection. The semi-qualitative protocol proposed in this paper can help practitioners and demonstrates how the results guide choice experiment design.

show abstract

Section: Figure 4 Iterative Process Leading To the Final Selection Omentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a more structured selection process for attributes and levels in choice experiments: A study in a Belgian protected area

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To do this we used a combination of interviews, Q methodology and participatory mapping to collect data on how different groups explored and made decisions on flood management. A suite of approaches was used to better understand technical and locally popular implementation options for flood risk management and to explore which method was likely to capture and represent the range of diverse-and sometimes divergent-views amongst stakeholders (Forrester et al 2015).…”

Section: Organisational Bordersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flood risk management, an approach to managing cross-border hazards

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

River flooding is a serious hazard in the UK with interest driven by recent widespread events. This paper reviews different approaches to flood risk management and the borders (physical, conceptual and organisational) that are involved. The paper showcases a multi-method approach to negotiating flood risk management interventions. We address three fundamental issues around flood risk management: differences and similarities between a variety of approaches; how different approaches work across borders between professionals, lay people, organisations and between different planning regimes; and, whether the science evidence base is adequate to support different types of flood risk management. We explore these issues through a case study on the River Tweed using Q methodology, community mapping and focus groups, participatory GIS, and interviews, which enabled co-production of knowledge around possible interventions to manage flooding. Our research demonstrated that excellent networks of practice exist to make 123Nat Hazards (2016) 82:S217-S240 DOI 10.1007/s11069-016-2284-2 decisions about flood risk management in the Scottish-English borders. Physical and organisational borders were continually traversed in practice. There was an overwhelming desire from professional flood managers and local communities for an alternative to simply structural methods of flood management. People were keen to make use of the ability of catchments to store water, even if land needed to be sacrificed to do so. There was no difference in the desire to embrace natural flood management approaches between people with different roles in flood management, expertise, training or based in different locations. Thus conceptual borders were also crossed effectively in practice.

show abstract

“…Drawing upon such advantages of Q methodology, a few studies have attempted to map the interest relationship with respect to spaces. Bicycle lanes [18] and danger points in floods [19] were argued using Q methodology mapping. These studies, however, only mapped the presence or absence of preference, and they did not compare differences in perspectives in the mapping to investigate interests or suggest spatial planning that would reduce conflict and induce cooperation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping Interests by Stakeholders’ Subjectivities toward Ecotourism Resources: The Case of Seocheon-Gun, Korea

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecotourism spatial planning requires the balance of both development and conservation. Through environmental data analysis, many researchers have suggested spatial planning that falls between these two polarizing concepts. Nonetheless, ecotourism development has been criticized as inconsiderate of places that are precious to local residents. The purpose of this study is to map local stakeholders' perspectives for collaborative planning based on interests regarding ecotourism. Q methodology was used to analyse interest in space and conduct mapping. Upon analysis of a Seocheon ecotourism site, four preference factors that focus on (i) large-scale ecotourism resources and facilities; (ii) mud-flat ecotour villages; (iii) inland agricultural ecotour villages; and (iv) traditional ecotour villages were identified. Additionally, there was a consensus to conserve the harbours and reservoirs actually used by residents. However, there were differing opinions about coastal region development, and thus design alternatives are required. These results are significant because they enable spatial planning by theme and consider the lives of local residents beyond spatial planning based on physical data.

show abstract

Combining participatory mapping with Q-methodology to map stakeholder perceptions of complex environmental problems

Cited by 83 publications

References 55 publications

Towards a more structured selection process for attributes and levels in choice experiments: A study in a Belgian protected area

Towards a more structured selection process for attributes and levels in choice experiments: A study in a Belgian protected area

Flood risk management, an approach to managing cross-border hazards

Mapping Interests by Stakeholders’ Subjectivities toward Ecotourism Resources: The Case of Seocheon-Gun, Korea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About