TY - JOUR
T1 - Advancing the scholarship and practice of stakeholder engagement in working landscapes
T2 - a co-produced research agenda
AU - Eaton, Weston M.
AU - Burnham, Morey
AU - Robertson, Tahnee
AU - Arbuckle, J. G.
AU - Brasier, Kathryn J.
AU - Burbach, Mark E.
AU - Church, Sarah P.
AU - Hart-Fredeluces, Georgia
AU - Jackson-Smith, Douglas
AU - Wildermuth, Grace
AU - Canfield, Katherine N.
AU - Córdova, S. Carolina
AU - Chatelain, Casey D.
AU - Fowler, Lara B.
AU - Hendawy, Mennatullah Mohamed Zein el Abdeen
AU - Kirchhoff, Christine J.
AU - Manheim, Marisa K.
AU - Martinez, Rubén O.
AU - Mook, Anne
AU - Mullin, Cristina A.
AU - Murrah-Hanson, A. Laurie
AU - Onabola, Christiana O.
AU - Parker, Lauren E.
AU - Redd, Elizabeth A.
AU - Schelly, Chelsea
AU - Schoon, Michael L.
AU - Sigler, W. Adam
AU - Smit, Emily
AU - van Huysen, Tiff
AU - Worosz, Michelle R.
AU - Eberly, Carrie
AU - Rogers, Andi
N1 - Funding Information: This workshop series was supported by the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) Advancing scholarship and practice of stakeholder engagement in working landscapes grant no. 2020-01551 project accession no. 1023309 from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture. All opinions expressed in this paper are the authors’ and do not necessarily reflect the policies and views of the US Environmental Protection Agency. This contribution is identified by tracking number ORD-045437 of the Atlantic Coastal Environmental Sciences Division, Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Funding Information: These workshops were supported by the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) Advancing scholarship and practice of stakeholder engagement in working landscapes grant no. 2020-01551 project accession no. 1023309 from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture. Funding Information: The authors thank the over 160 participants in the Advancing the Scholarship and Practice of Stakeholder Engagement in Working Landscapes workshop series for their active involvement in co-producing the research agenda presented in this paper. We also thank the Haub School of Environment and Natural Resources at the University of Wyoming for providing funding for this article to be published open access. Publisher Copyright: © 2022, The Author(s).
PY - 2022/12
Y1 - 2022/12
N2 - Participatory approaches to science and decision making, including stakeholder engagement, are increasingly common for managing complex socio-ecological challenges in working landscapes. However, critical questions about stakeholder engagement in this space remain. These include normative, political, and ethical questions concerning who participates, who benefits and loses, what good can be accomplished, and for what, whom, and by who. First, opportunities for addressing justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion interests through engagement, while implied in key conceptual frameworks, remain underexplored in scholarly work and collaborative practice alike. A second line of inquiry relates to research–practice gaps. While both the practice of doing engagement work and scholarly research on the efficacy of engagement is on the rise, there is little concerted interplay among ‘on-the-ground’ practitioners and scholarly researchers. This means scientific research often misses or ignores insight grounded in practical and experiential knowledge, while practitioners are disconnected from potentially useful scientific research on stakeholder engagement. A third set of questions concerns gaps in empirical understanding of the efficacy of engagement processes and includes inquiry into how different engagement contexts and process features affect a range of behavioral, cognitive, and decision-making outcomes. Because of these gaps, a cohesive and actionable research agenda for stakeholder engagement research and practice in working landscapes remains elusive. In this review article, we present a co-produced research agenda for stakeholder engagement in working landscapes. The co-production process involved professionally facilitated and iterative dialogue among a diverse and international group of over 160 scholars and practitioners through a yearlong virtual workshop series. The resulting research agenda is organized under six cross-cutting themes: (1) Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion; (2) Ethics; (3) Research and Practice; (4) Context; (5) Process; and (6) Outcomes and Measurement. This research agenda identifies critical research needs and opportunities relevant for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers alike. We argue that addressing these research opportunities is necessary to advance knowledge and practice of stakeholder engagement and to support more just and effective engagement processes in working landscapes.
AB - Participatory approaches to science and decision making, including stakeholder engagement, are increasingly common for managing complex socio-ecological challenges in working landscapes. However, critical questions about stakeholder engagement in this space remain. These include normative, political, and ethical questions concerning who participates, who benefits and loses, what good can be accomplished, and for what, whom, and by who. First, opportunities for addressing justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion interests through engagement, while implied in key conceptual frameworks, remain underexplored in scholarly work and collaborative practice alike. A second line of inquiry relates to research–practice gaps. While both the practice of doing engagement work and scholarly research on the efficacy of engagement is on the rise, there is little concerted interplay among ‘on-the-ground’ practitioners and scholarly researchers. This means scientific research often misses or ignores insight grounded in practical and experiential knowledge, while practitioners are disconnected from potentially useful scientific research on stakeholder engagement. A third set of questions concerns gaps in empirical understanding of the efficacy of engagement processes and includes inquiry into how different engagement contexts and process features affect a range of behavioral, cognitive, and decision-making outcomes. Because of these gaps, a cohesive and actionable research agenda for stakeholder engagement research and practice in working landscapes remains elusive. In this review article, we present a co-produced research agenda for stakeholder engagement in working landscapes. The co-production process involved professionally facilitated and iterative dialogue among a diverse and international group of over 160 scholars and practitioners through a yearlong virtual workshop series. The resulting research agenda is organized under six cross-cutting themes: (1) Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion; (2) Ethics; (3) Research and Practice; (4) Context; (5) Process; and (6) Outcomes and Measurement. This research agenda identifies critical research needs and opportunities relevant for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers alike. We argue that addressing these research opportunities is necessary to advance knowledge and practice of stakeholder engagement and to support more just and effective engagement processes in working landscapes.
KW - Community and stakeholder engagement
KW - Engagement outcomes
KW - Knowledge co-production
KW - Process design
KW - Research-practice gaps
KW - Working lands
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85141956277&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85141956277&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s42532-022-00132-8
DO - 10.1007/s42532-022-00132-8
M3 - Review article
SN - 2524-5279
VL - 4
SP - 283
EP - 304
JO - Socio-Ecological Practice Research
JF - Socio-Ecological Practice Research
IS - 4
ER -