Environment, Development and Sustainability

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 79–93 | Cite as

Engaging a rural agricultural community in sustainability indicators and future scenario identification: case of San Luis Valley

  • Jonathan Dubinsky
  • Elizabeth Baker-Jennings
  • Tamara Chernomordik
  • Deborah S. Main
  • Arunprakash T. KarunanithiEmail author


This paper describes a process of engagement with representative community stakeholders in a rural agricultural region—San Luis Valley (SLV) in southern Colorado—that helped identify locally relevant future sustainability scenarios to model and analyze using sustainability indicators. Over the course of two years, researchers and the community advisory board identified, deliberated, and, based on their input, conceptually framed future scenarios for modeling and analysis. The suggested scenarios (for modeling) that emerged through this engagement process were future solar energy development in the region, and changes to the cropping regime in the valley. SLV is a unique, geographically isolated agricultural region that has been looked at both by EPA and the state of Colorado as an ideal location for implementing sustainability measures. As a result of the present research, SLV now has the capacity to use local data to update region-specific greenhouse gas emissions and consumptive water use models. We find the community engagement process was successful both in terms of its usefulness in steering the research direction as well as its impact on community stakeholders involved in this project. Based on our experience, we recommend this community engagement approach to researchers seeking to improve the relevance and impact of region-specific sustainability analyses.


Community engagement Sustainability Community advisory board San Luis Valley Scenarios 



This research was funded by United States Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Research and Development. We would like to thank our Community Advisory Board for providing support and insights that made this work possible. The authors would also like to acknowledge useful discussions with Dr. Matthew Heberling and Dr. Matthew Hopton from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Special thanks to Dr. Matthew Hopton who provided detailed suggestions on preparing this manuscript.


  1. Borda, F., & Orland Rahman, M. A. (1991). Action and knowledge: Breaking the monopoly with participatory action research. New York: Technol. Publ/Apex.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brown, R. E. (1991). Community action for health promotion: A strategy to empower individuals and communities. International Journal of Health Services, 21(3), 441–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brugmann, J. (1996). Planning for sustainability at the local government level. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 9255(96), 363–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burch, S. (2010). Transforming barriers into enablers of action on climate change: Insights from three municipal case studies in British Columbia, Canada. Global Environmental Change, 20(2), 287–297. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.11.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Campbell, D. E., & Garmestani, A. S. (2012). An energy systems view of sustainability: Emergy evaluation of the San Luis Basin, Colorado. Journal of Environmental Management, 95(1), 72–97. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.07.028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. CDWR. (2015). Rules governing the withdrawal of groundwater in water division No. 3 (The Rio Grande Basin) and establishing Criteria for the beginning and end of the irrigation season in water division No. 3 for all irrigation water rights, Pub. L. No. 37–80–104 and 37–92–501, C.R.S (2015). Denver, CO. Retrieved from Groundwater Rules for Division 3 September 23 2015 2.pdf.
  7. CDWR. (2015b). Statement of basis and purpose. Retrieved November 15, 2015 from
  8. Colorado Geological Survey. (2016). Mountainous region aquifers. Retrieved September 12, 2016 from
  9. DOE/BLM. (2012). Final programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS) for solar energy development in six southwestern states: Chapter 10 Colorado proposed solar energy zones (Vol. 3). Bureau of Land Management & Department of Energy. Retrieved from
  10. Dubinsky, J., & Karunanithi, A. T. (2017a). Consumptive water use analysis of upper Rio Grande Basin in Southern Colorado. Environmental Science and Technology, 51, 4452–4460. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.6b01711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dubinsky, J., & Karunanithi, A. T. (2017b). Greenhouse gas accounting of rural Agrarian regions: The case of San Luis Valley. ACS Sustainable Chemistry and Engineering, 5, 261–268. doi: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.6b01424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Eason, T., & Cabezas, H. (2012). Evaluating the sustainability of a regional system sing Fisher information in the San Luis Basin, Colorado. Journal of Environmental Management, 94(1), 41–49. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.08.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Entz, C., Grossman, P., Taylor, & Teek. (2004). Senate bill 04-222. Alamosa, CO. Retrieved from Luis Valley Advisory Committee/Tab C - Senate Bill 04-222.pdf.
  14. Fraser, E. D. G., Dougill, A. J., Mabee, W. E., Reed, M., & McAlpine, P. (2006). Bottom up and top down: Analysis of participatory processes for sustainability indicator identification as a pathway to community empowerment and sustainable environmental management. Journal of Environmental Management, 78(2), 114–127. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.04.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.Google Scholar
  16. Freire, P. (1982). Creating alternative research methods: Learning to do it by doing it. In B. Hall, A. Gillette, & R. Tandon (Eds.), Creating knowledge: A monopoly? (pp. 29–37). Khanpur, New Delhi: Society for Participatory Research in Asia.Google Scholar
  17. Gibson, M. et al. (2015). Rio Grande Basin implementation plan. Alamosa, CO. Retrieved from
  18. Heberling, M. T., & Hopton, M. E. (2012). Introduction to the special collection of papers on the San Luis Basin sustainability metrics project: A methodology for evaluating regional sustainability. Journal of Environmental Management, 111, 272–278. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.03.055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Heberling, M. T., Templeton, J. J., & Wu, S. (2012). Green net regional product for the San Luis Basin, Colorado: An economic measure of regional sustainability. Journal of Environmental Management, 111, 287–297. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.02.035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hopton, M. E., Cabezas, H., Campbell, D., Eason, T., Garmestani, A. S., Heberling, M. T., et al. (2010). Development of a multidisciplinary approach to assess regional sustainability. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 17(1), 48–56. doi: 10.1080/13504500903488297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hopton, M. E., & White, D. (2012). A simplified ecological footprint at a regional scale. Journal of Environmental Management, 111, 279–286. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.07.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Israel, B. A., Schulz, A. J., Parker, E. A., & Becker, A. B. (1998). Review of community-based research: Assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annual Review of Public Health, 19, 173–202. doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.19.1.173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Iwaniec, D., & Wiek, A. (2014). Advancing sustainability visioning practice in planning—The general plan update in Phoenix, Arizona. Planning, Practice & Research, 29(5), 543–568. doi: 10.1080/02697459.2014.977004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kishita, Y., Hara, K., Uwasu, M., & Umeda, Y. (2016). Research needs and challenges faced in supporting scenario design in sustainability science: A literature review. Sustainability Science, 11(2), 331–347. doi: 10.1007/s11625-015-0340-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kuzdas, C., Warner, B. P., Wiek, A., Vignola, R., Yglesias, M., & Childers, D. L. (2016). Sustainability assessment of water governance alternatives: The case of Guanacaste Costa Rica. Sustainability Science, 11(2), 231–247. doi: 10.1007/s11625-015-0324-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kuzdas, C., & Wiek, A. (2014). Governance scenarios for addressing water conflicts and climate change impacts. Environmental Science & Policy, 42, 181–196. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2014.06.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McKinlay, J. B. (1993). The promotion of health through planned sociopolitical change: Challenges for research and policy. Social Science and Medicine, 36(2), 109–117. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(93)90202-F.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Petrow, S., Franks, P., & Wolfred, T. R. (1990). Ending the HIV epidemic: Community strategies in disease prevention and health promotion. Santa Cruz, CA: Network Publications.Google Scholar
  29. Postma, T. J. B. M., & Liebl, F. (2005). How to improve scenario analysis as a strategic management Tool? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 72, 161–173. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2003.11.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ramaswami, A., Main, D., Bernard, M., Chavez, A., Davis, A., Thomas, G., et al. (2014). Planning for low-carbon communities in U.S. cities: A participatory process model between academic institutions, local governments and communities in Colorado. Carbon Management, 2(4), 397–411. doi: 10.4155/cmt.11.34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Reed, M. S. (2008). Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review. Biological Conservation, 141(10), 2417–2431. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Reed, M. S., Fraser, E. D. G., & Dougill, A. J. (2006). An adaptive learning process for developing and applying sustainability indicators with local communities. Ecological Economics, 59(4), 406–418. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.11.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Reed, M. S., Graves, A., Dandy, N., Posthumus, H., Hubacek, K., Morris, J., et al. (2009). Who’s in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. Journal of Environmental Management, 90, 1933–1949. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.01.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2000). Public participation methods: A framework for evaluation. Science, Technology and Human Values, 25(1), 3–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shaw, A., Sheppard, S., Burch, S., Flanders, D., Wiek, A., Carmichael, J., et al. (2009). Making local futures tangible—synthesizing, downscaling, and visualizing climate change scenarios for participatory capacity building. Global Environmental Change, 19, 447–463. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.04.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sheppard, S. R. J., Shaw, A., Flanders, D., Burch, S., Wiek, A., Carmichael, J., et al. (2011). Future visioning of local climate change: A framework for community engagement and planning with scenarios and visualisation. Futures, 43(4), 400–412. doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2011.01.009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. SLV Development Resources Group. (2013). Comprehensive economic development strategy (CEDS). Retrieved January 10, 2015 from
  38. SLVEC. (2012). SLV renewable energy master plan position paper. Alamosa, CO. Retrieved from
  39. Swart, R. J., Raskin, P., & Robinson, J. (2004). The problem of the future: Sustainability science and scenario analysis. Global Environmental Change, 14, 137–146. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2003.10.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Trochim, W. M. K., & Cabrera, D. (2005). The complexity of concept mapping for policy analysis. Policy Analysis and Management, 7(1), 11–22.Google Scholar
  41. Trutnevyte, E., Stauffacher, M., & Scholz, R. W. (2011). Supporting energy initiatives in small communities by linking visions with energy scenarios and multi-criteria assessment. Energy Policy, 39(12), 7884–7895. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.09.038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. U.S. EPA. (2010). San Luis Basin sustainability metrics project: a methodology for evaluating regional sustainability. In M. T. Heberling & Hopton, M.E. (Eds.), Cincinnati, OH.Google Scholar
  43. Whyte, W. (1991). Participatory action research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publictions.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wiek, A., & Iwaniec, D. (2014). Quality criteria for visions and visioning in sustainability science. Sustainability Science, 9(512), 497–512. doi: 10.1007/s11625-013-0208-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wilmsen, C. (2008). Partnerships for empowerment: Participatory research for community-based natural resource management. Sterling, VA, London: Earthscan.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonathan Dubinsky
    • 1
  • Elizabeth Baker-Jennings
    • 1
  • Tamara Chernomordik
    • 1
  • Deborah S. Main
    • 2
  • Arunprakash T. Karunanithi
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Center for Sustainable Infrastructure Systems, University of Colorado DenverDenverUSA
  2. 2.Health and Behavioral SciencesUniversity of Colorado DenverDenverUSA

Personalised recommendations