Using Q Method for the Formative Evaluation of Public Participation Processes

Danielson, Stentor; Webler, Thomas; Tuler, Seth

doi:10.1080/08941920802438626

Cited by 29 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Q-sorting is a qualitative method used to analyse the subjective perception of individuals in relation to a particular situation or phenomenon. Q-sorting helps identify trends and convergences of opinions (14), and has been used in a wide variety of research areas, such as political subjectivity (14), public health (15, 16), veterinary science (17), and rural sociology (18, 19).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Drivers of Antimicrobial Usage in Poultry Farms in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam: A Combined Participatory Epidemiology and Q-Sorting Approach

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the Mekong Delta of Vietnam, poultry farmers use high amounts of antimicrobials, but little is known about the drivers that influence this usage. We aimed to identify these drivers using a novel approach that combined participatory epidemiology (PE) and Q-sorting (a methodology that allows the analysis of the subjectivity of individuals facing a common phenomenon). A total of 26 semi-structured collective interviews were conducted with 125 farmers representative of the most common farming systems in the area (chickens, meat ducks, and mobile grazing ducks), as well as with 73 farmers' advisors [veterinarians, veterinary drug shop owners, and government veterinarians/commune animal health workers (CAHWs)] in five districts of Dong Thap province (Mekong Delta). Through these interviews, 46 statements related to the antimicrobials' perceived reliability, costs, and impact on flock health were created. These statements were then investigated on 54 individuals (28 farmers and 26 farmers' advisors) using Q-sorting interviews. Farmers generally indicated a higher propensity for antimicrobial usage (AMU) should their flocks encounter bacterial infections (75.0–78.6%) compared with viral infections (8.3–66.7%). The most trusted sources of advice to farmers were, in decreasing order: government veterinarian/CAHWs, their own knowledge/experience, veterinary drug shop owners, and sales persons from pharmaceutical and feed companies. The highest peak of AMU took place in the early phase of the production cycle. Farmers and their advisors showed considerable heterogeneity of attitudes with regards to AMU, with, respectively, four and three discourses representing their views on AMU. Overall, farmers regarded the cost of AMU cheaper than other disease management practices implemented on their farms. However, they also believed that even though these measures were more expensive, they would also lead to more effective disease prevention. A key recommendation from this finding would be for the veterinary authorities to implement long-term sustainable training programs aiming at reducing farmers' reliance on antimicrobials.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Drivers of Antimicrobial Usage in Poultry Farms in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam: A Combined Participatory Epidemiology and Q-Sorting Approach

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It helps to identify trends and convergences of opinions and patterns within social groups and can be very useful for operators that intend to explore and describe subjective opinions about a particular phenomenon. This method is used in research areas, such as policy ( 18 ), public health ( 19 – 21 ), and rural sociology ( 22 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Q Method Approach to Evaluating Farmers’ Perceptions of Foot-and-Mouth Disease Vaccination in Vietnam

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to explore the farmers’ perceptions of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) vaccination using a reflexive research method called Q methodology. A structured sample was composed of 46 farmers selected according to gender, farming experience, level of education, and production type. Statements relevant to the farmers’ perceptions of and attitudes toward FMD vaccination, related to confidence, logistics, costs, and impacts of vaccination were developed. Results were analyzed by principal component analysis and factor analysis. The influence of demographics and characterized variables on the respondent’s contribution to each factor was also tested. Regarding the different beliefs and behavior toward FMD vaccination, the common perceptions held by Vietnamese cattle and pig farmers were divided into three discourses named Confidence (24 subjects), Belief (12 subjects), and Challenge (6 subjects). The identified discourses represented 57.3% of the variances. Consensus points were found, such as the feeling of being more secure after FMD vaccination campaigns; the fact that farmers take vaccination decisions themselves without being influenced by other stakeholders; the opinion that FMD vaccination is cheaper than the costs of treating a sick animal; and that vaccines provided by governmental authorities are of high quality. Part of the studied population did not consider vaccination to be the first choice strategy in prevention. This raises the question of how to improve the active participation of farmers in the FMD vaccine strategy. Taking into consideration farmers’ perceptions can help to implement feasible vaccination strategies at the local level.

show abstract

“…This is done through a variety of research tools such as ethnographic approaches involving observation [Moote et al, 1997;Tam, 2006], unstructured and semistructured interviews [Clarke, 2008;McCool and Guthrie, 2001], card sorting [Hare and Pahl-Wostl, 2002] and Q methodology [Chess and Johnson, 2006;Danielson et al, 2010;Tuler and Webler, 2010;Webler et al, 2003]. Q methodology is an approach where interviewees sort a range of statements such as, ''the process should be cost-effective,'' ''a fixed deadline is important,'' according to the weighting the individual gives to each.…”

Section: Timing Of Involvement (T)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating participation in water resource management: A review

Carr

Blöschl

Loucks

2012

Water Resources Research

151

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

.[1] Key documents such as the European Water Framework Directive and the U.S. Clean Water Act state that public and stakeholder participation in water resource management is required. Participation aims to enhance resource management and involve individuals and groups in a democratic way. Evaluation of participatory programs and projects is necessary to assess whether these objectives are being achieved and to identify how participatory programs and projects can be improved. The different methods of evaluation can be classified into three groups: (i) process evaluation assesses the quality of participation process, for example, whether it is legitimate and promotes equal power between participants, (ii) intermediary outcome evaluation assesses the achievement of mainly nontangible outcomes, such as trust and communication, as well as short-to medium-term tangible outcomes, such as agreements and institutional change, and (iii) resource management outcome evaluation assesses the achievement of changes in resource management, such as water quality improvements. Process evaluation forms a major component of the literature but can rarely indicate whether a participation program improves water resource management. Resource management outcome evaluation is challenging because resource changes often emerge beyond the typical period covered by the evaluation and because changes cannot always be clearly related to participation activities. Intermediary outcome evaluation has been given less attention than process evaluation but can identify some real achievements and side benefits that emerge through participation. This review suggests that intermediary outcome evaluation should play a more important role in evaluating participation in water resource management.

show abstract

Using Q Method for the Formative Evaluation of Public Participation Processes

Cited by 29 publications

References 3 publications

Assessment of Drivers of Antimicrobial Usage in Poultry Farms in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam: A Combined Participatory Epidemiology and Q-Sorting Approach

Assessment of Drivers of Antimicrobial Usage in Poultry Farms in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam: A Combined Participatory Epidemiology and Q-Sorting Approach

A Q Method Approach to Evaluating Farmers’ Perceptions of Foot-and-Mouth Disease Vaccination in Vietnam

Evaluating participation in water resource management: A review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About