Learning from doing participatory rural research: Lessons from the Peak District National Park

被引:118
作者
Dougill, A. J. [1 ]
Fraser, E. D. G.
Holden, J.
Hubacek, K.
Prell, C.
Reed, M. S.
Stagl, S.
Stringer, L. C.
机构
[1] Univ Leeds, Sch Earth & Environm, Sustainabil Res Inst, Leeds LS2 9JT, W Yorkshire, England
[2] Univ Leeds, Sch Geog, Leeds LS2 9JT, W Yorkshire, England
[3] Univ Sheffield, Dept Sociol Studies, Sheffield, S Yorkshire, England
[4] Univ Sussex, Freeman Ctr, Sci & Technol Policy Res Unit, Brighton BN1 9RH, E Sussex, England
[5] Univ Manchester, Sch Environm & Dev, Inst Dev Policy & Management, Manchester, Lancs, England
关键词
adaptive learning; moorland burning; Peak District National Park; rural land use; social network analysis;
D O I
10.1111/j.1477-9552.2006.00051.x
中图分类号
F3 [农业经济];
学科分类号
0202 ; 020205 ; 1203 ;
摘要
Understanding the socio-economic and environmental implications of rural change requires the active participation of many research disciplines and stakeholders. However, it remains unclear how to best integrate participatory and biophysical research to provide information useful to land managers and policy makers. This paper presents findings of a RELU scoping study that has formulated and applied a research framework based on stakeholder participation and adaptive learning to model rural change in the Peak District National Park in the north of England. The paper describes a learning process that integrates different types of knowledge to produce future scenarios that describe possible economic and environmental changes due to a national review of burning practices on heather moorland and blanket bogs. We stress the need for using social network analysis to structure stakeholder engagement and outline how a range of participatory approaches can facilitate more inclusive environmental planning and policy development.
引用
收藏
页码:259 / 275
页数:17
相关论文
共 40 条
[1]   Deliberations about deliberative methods: issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes [J].
Abelson, J ;
Forest, PG ;
Eyles, J ;
Smith, P ;
Martin, E ;
Gauvin, FP .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2003, 57 (02) :239-251
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2003, Diffusion of Innovations
[3]  
[Anonymous], METHODS KNOWLEDGE PO
[4]  
[Anonymous], COMM STAND MON GUID
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2005, IDEAS DEV, DOI DOI 10.4324/9781849771665
[6]   Deliberation and inclusion: vehicles for increasing trust in UK public governance? [J].
Bloomfield, D ;
Collins, K ;
Fry, C ;
Munton, R .
ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING C-GOVERNMENT AND POLICY, 2001, 19 (04) :501-513
[7]   PARTICIPATORY RURAL APPRAISAL (PRA) - ANALYSIS OF EXPERIENCE [J].
CHAMBERS, R .
WORLD DEVELOPMENT, 1994, 22 (09) :1253-1268
[8]   GROUNDED THEORY RESEARCH - PROCEDURES, CANONS AND EVALUATIVE CRITERIA [J].
CORBIN, J ;
STRAUSS, A .
ZEITSCHRIFT FUR SOZIOLOGIE, 1990, 19 (06) :418-427
[9]  
CORNWALL A, 2003, PATHWAYS PARTICIPATI
[10]   Soil degradation assessment in mixed farming systems of southern Africa: use of nutrient balance studies for participatory degradation monitoring [J].
Dougill, AJ ;
Twyman, C ;
Thomas, DSG ;
Sporton, D .
GEOGRAPHICAL JOURNAL, 2002, 168 :195-210