A review of the state-of-the-art for stakeholder analysis with regard to environmental management and regulation

被引:40
作者
Bendtsen, Elise Broe [1 ]
Clausen, Lauge Peter Westergaard [1 ]
Hansen, Steffen Foss [1 ]
机构
[1] Tech Univ Denmark, Dept Environm Engn, Bygningstorvet Bldg 115, DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark
关键词
Stakeholder analysis; Review; Environmental management; Environmental; Regulation; Stakeholder theory; SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS; PARTICIPATION; EXPERIENCES; INSIGHTS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111773
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Stakeholder analysis (SA) is a widely used decision-support tool. This paper reviews the state-of-the-art of SA within environmental management and regulation. In total, 48 SA studies from the peer-reviewed literature were investigated according to 7 aspects: Topic and purpose; Elements included; Geographical area; Definition of key terms; Methods used; Authors self-evaluation and Inclusion. We find that the SAs conducted cover a broad spectrum of environmental issues. The most applied data-collection methods are snowball-sampling (26 studies, 54%), interviews (30 studies, 63%) and literature reviews (26 studies, 54%). The most examined stakeholder attributes were interests (41 studies, 85%) and influence (34 studies, 71%). We find that there is a lack of clear definitions of key-terms such as "Stakeholder" (19 studies, 40%) and "Influence" (14 studies, 29%). SAs are often conducted by authors from other geographical areas than the case study, which could explain why marginalised stakeholders are only considered in 21 of the studies (44%). In only half of the studies (24 studies, 50%), the authors reflect upon limitations and biases of their own analysis. Among others, three important lessons learned from our study are: 1) Transparency with regard to methodology, results and decisions made is of paramount importance as it otherwise undermines the credibility of SA; 2) Definition of key-terms such as "stakeholder" and "influence" need to be provided in future SAs to avoid misunderstandings; and finally, 3) Clear guidelines on how to perform SA are needed, including how to determine interests and power, and how to document and report findings.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 51 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2019, Final Report
  • [2] Borgatti SP, 2014, RES SOCIOL ORGAN-RES, V40, P1, DOI 10.1108/S0733-558X(2014)0000040001
  • [3] Stakeholder Analysis of a Collaborative Watershed Management Process: A Florida Case Study
    Borisova, Tatiana
    Racevskis, Laila
    Kipp, Jennison
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN WATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION, 2012, 48 (02): : 277 - 296
  • [4] Brande L. V. D, 2017, REACHING OUT EU CITI
  • [5] Briner R. B., 2012, OXFORD HDB EVIDENCE, P112, DOI DOI 10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780199763986.013.0007
  • [6] Stakeholder analysis: a review
    Brugha, R
    Varvasovszky, Z
    [J]. HEALTH POLICY AND PLANNING, 2000, 15 (03) : 239 - 246
  • [7] Bryman A., 2016, SOCIAL RES METHODS
  • [8] Buckles D.J., 2008, GUIDE COLLABORATIVEE
  • [9] Using social network and stakeholder analysis to help evaluate infectious waste management: A step towards a holistic assessment
    Caniato, Marco
    Vaccari, Mentore
    Visvanathan, Chettiyappan
    Zurbrugg, Christian
    [J]. WASTE MANAGEMENT, 2014, 34 (05) : 938 - 951
  • [10] Stakeholder analysis with regard to a recent European restriction proposal on microplastics
    Clausen, Lauge Peter Westergaard
    Hansen, Oliver Foss Hessner
    Oturai, Nikoline Bang
    Syberg, Kristian
    Hansen, Steffen Foss
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2020, 15 (06):