Use of the participatory approach to develop sustainability assessments for natural resource management

Abstract

Monitoring progress toward sustainability goals requires a quantitative assessment method including indicators. Indicator sets and goals have typically been developed by experts, which may be scientifically robust but are often difficult to convey to society and may not include all societal values. A participatory assessment approach is emerging as a more holistic method for measuring sustainability. In this approach, local stakeholders play an integral part in the assessment process, assisted by experts. Here we reviewed 13 case studies from around the world that use a participatory approach to achieve sustainable natural resource management. Although similar in approach, most of them diverge in terms of methodology and extent of community engagement. The final set of indicators in each case is reflective of methodology, extent of community engagement, and amount of time and resources involved in the process. While the participatory approach is growing in popularity and increases the potential long-term success of the process (through increasing stakeholder literacy and ownership), the diversity of participatory methodology can complicate policy recommendations.

Using multi‐criteria decision analysis for assessing sustainability of agricultural systems

“…Agricultural sustainability assessment allows for a review of the state of knowledge of farming practices and support as part of the process of monitoring the progress of agricultural sustainability toward its goals (Guijt & Moiseev, ; Vaidya & Mayer, ). It suggests what actions to take in response to past activities (Gibson, ) and facilitates comparisons of the performances of various agriculture systems (von Wirén‐Lehr, ).…”

“…Agricultural sustainability assessment allows for a review of the state of knowledge of farming practices and support as part of the process of monitoring the progress of agricultural sustainability toward its goals (Guijt & Moiseev, 2001;Vaidya & Mayer, 2014). It suggests what actions to take in response to past activities (Gibson, 2012) Where ST = Settings where treatment is available, X i N i = Treatment to attain a score X i ; these are summed and averaged for all treatments, N t = Total number of individuals Sanitation or public health TF = ∑ X i N i ÷ N t % Where TF = Toilet Facilities, X i N i = Number of Toilet facilities to attain a score X i ,; N t = Total number of toilet facilities Women's involvement in decision-making about agricultural activities WPAA = PW aa ÷ 10 % Where WPAA = Women's participation in agricultural activities, PW aa = Percentage of women who participate in agricultural activities, "10" is the best score into a 0 to 10 scale Gender-based wage differentials GBWD = (30 − D)/3 $/person/day Where GBWD = Gender-based wage differentials, D = Wage difference in percentage terms between men and women's labour, "30" is the per cent differential as the poorest value 1 Weighted yield is calculated by summing total production of rice in the corresponding field sizes in a year and dividing by the sum of all the areas (vanLoon et al, 2005); 2 Includes soil tests, pest management, land management, soil fertility management; 3 related to market diversification; 4 protected water; 5 Illiterate (cannot write and read) = 0, primary schooling (from grade 1-5) = 0.5, secondary schooling (from grade 6-10) = 1, tertiary schooling (grade 11 to upper study) =2; 6 Economic hardship is defined as lack of capital for doing agriculture.…”

Ecosystem service trade-offs, perceived drivers, and sustainability in contrasting agroecosystems in central Mexico

“…Spatial and temporal patterns would then be revealed through time for an increasing number of sites. Also, involving stakeholders in monitoring has been shown to have positive effects in changing management practices (Vaidya and Mayer 2014). Participatory monitoring with coarse-scale indicator approaches would need to be complemented by longterm experimental assessments in controlled sites and the use of more precise indicators.…”

The Sustainable Procedure Framework for Disaster Risk Management: Illustrated by the Case of the EU Floods Directive in Sweden

“…Such a procedure also needs to be informed by the knowledge and perspectives of the actors who are affected in different ways by the plan or decision to be made (Pretty 2003;Ostrom 2009;Vaidya and Mayer 2014).…”