Year 1 Status Report:
Extension & Communication
December 2, 2011
Analyzing co-PIs’ perceptions of
stakeholder engagement in the
development and application of a
regional earth systems model
Elizabeth Allen1, Jennie Stephens1, Chad Kruger2 & Fok-Yan Leung3
1
Environmental Science and Policy Department, IDCE, Clark University, Worcester MA
2 Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources, Washington State University
3 Laboratory for Atmospheric Research, Washington State University
Extension and Communication
Objectives:
1. Develop frequent, regular, two-way interactive
communication between model developers and
decision-making stakeholders via workshops,
meetings and a virtual internet forum.
2. Analyze the perceptions of stakeholders and
scientists concerning their respective roles in the
development and application of the BioEarth model.
Today’s presentation covers
the initial phase of this
research
Analysis of scientist’s perceptions of
stakeholder engagement, based on a
questionnaire and interview
conducted with each of the 18 co-PIs
Questionnaire Analysis
• 5 brief quantitative questions answered by each co-PI
• This was the first of several questionnaires to be
administered throughout the research process
• Intent was to gather baseline information on co-PIs’
backgrounds and attitudes
Interview Analysis
• 12 semi-structured questions, conducted over the phone or in person
• Based on questionnaires and interview transcripts we outlined
continuums representing researcher perceptions of:
a) who the primary stakeholders are
b) respective roles within the research process
c) challenges to be overcome
• There is a diversity of modes of thinking about the role of stakeholders in
the creation and application of a regional earth systems model
• This analysis, along with an analysis of stakeholder engagement in other
research projects, will assist in the design of future communication and
extension efforts
Thank you for participating in
these interviews over the
summer!
Continuums Representing Researcher Perceptions
a) Which groups constitute stakeholders?
Narrow definition of stakeholders,
members of academia are identified
as primary stakeholders.
Broad definition of stakeholders
that encompasses every
inhabitant of the region, includes
members of the general public.
b) What defines a successful outcome for the research project?
A successful outcome will advance
technical modeling capabilities and
contribute to scientific knowledge.
Resource management decisions
are made on the basis of the
model, stakeholders may actively
use and apply the model.
c) What are the project’s major challenges?
Challenges are technical in nature;
the focus is on integrating model
components that focus on multiple
spatial and temporal scales.
The primary challenges are related to
communication, ensuring stakeholder
participation, and appropriate integration of
stakeholder input in the model.
Conclusions
•
There is a range of perceptions among researchers regarding the kind of
involvement and degree of influence that stakeholders may have in the
model development process.
• An association emerged between how broadly stakeholders are defined
and how expected project outcomes are conceptualized.
a) PIs who described primary stakeholders as members of academia were more likely to focus on
the capacity of the research to build knowledge in the scientific community.
b) PIs who defined stakeholders broadly were likely to discuss the model’s possible application as a
decision support tool.
• Attitudes about the major challenges for the project correspond to
perceptions of who stakeholders are and successful project outcomes.
a) Those with broad definitions of the stakeholders tend to focus on possible barriers to
communicating with stakeholders as a central challenge for the BioEarth research team.
b) In instances where stakeholders were more narrowly defined and success was defined in terms
of contribution to technical capacities, model integration was the primary challenge identified
• It is important to analyze baseline expectations and experiences of PIs in
order to maximize the effectiveness of future stakeholder engagement
efforts and adequately prepare for challenges.
We look forward to hearing more of your ideas,
expectations and suggestions as we begin to prepare
for the first round of stakeholder workshops