Framing the change and changing frames: Tensions in participative strategy development

Abstract

Participative strategy development serves to integrate the interests and perspectives of multiple stakeholders involved in today's complex environmental challenges, aiming at a better-informed strategy for tackling these challenges, increased stakeholder ownership, and more democratic decision making. Prior research has observed inherent tensions between the need for participative strategy to be open to stakeholders' input and the need for closure and guidance. We extend this reasoning using a framing perspective. Our evidence from the development of the England Peat Action Plan suggests that tensions can emerge between the necessary ambiguous initial framing of intended change and the persistence of stakeholders' different framings of this change as well as perceptions of lacking knowledge, guidance, and control. We argue that strategy openness can thereby impede stakeholders' willingness and ability to change and counteract the strategy's aim for major transformation. Interactive spaces help mitigate the tensions and facilitate stakeholders' willingness and ability for change.

Participant perceptions of different forms of deliberative monetary valuation: Comparing democratic monetary valuation and deliberative democratic monetary valuation in the context of regional marine planning

“…In addition to the theoretical difficulties, valuation as part of the policy process is complicated by inherent uncertainties over the impact of policy decisions on socio-ecological systems (Sagoff, 2011; Schultz et al, 2015; Zimmermann & Kenter, 2023). Although valuations can take place with hypothetical future states, in reality, public policy makers are faced with a range of potential and uncertain outcomes.…”

“…DDMV recognises the uncertainties of environmental decision-making and the inherently political nature of the valuation process (Ainscough et al, 2018; Ainscough et al, 2019; Lo & Spash, 2013; Orchard-Webb et al, 2016; Zimmermann et al, 2021; Zimmermann & Kenter, 2023). Rather than drawing an artificial divide between the valuation and the context, DDMV allows valuation to be situated in context as a point of contestation open to differing rationales and forms of reason.…”

Note from the Editors

“…Next, Zimmermann and Kenter (2023) tackle democratic decision making and participative strategy development with a focus on contemporary environmental concerns (see also Brant et al, 2017; Bryson et al, 2008). Using the case of the England Peat Action Plan, the authors contend that tensions can appear between the initial framing of intended change, the persistence of stakeholders' different framings of it, and participants' perceptions of lacking knowledge, guidance, and control.…”