Stakeholder integrated research (STIR): a new approach tested in climate change adaptation research

Abstract

Ensuring active participation of stakeholders in scientific projects faces many challenges. These range from adequately selecting stakeholders, overcoming stakeholder fatigue, and dealing with the limited time available for stakeholder engagement, to interacting with, and integrating, the research itself. At the same time, stakeholder participation is seen as a key component in developing research results that are conclusive to political and societal decision-making, and conducive to practical application. This article puts forward the Stakeholder Integrated Research (STIR) approach, designed to address these challenges by proving a structured method for stakeholder engagement in research. An assessment of the stakeholder engagement process within the CLIMSAVE project, including evaluations by participating stakeholders, is used to illustrate the STIR approach, highlighting its value for improving stakeholder involvement within two case studies of a highly complex climate change adaptation project. In comparison to other approaches, STIR directly addresses major stakeholder engagement challenges and simultaneously covers new ground to provide an encompassing and structured approach for integrating stakeholder engagement in research. Further attention needs to be given to involving stakeholder in project set-up and over the course of multiple years, as well as to improving stakeholder-science data translation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. 1.

    “Climate change integrated methodology for cross-sectoral adaptation and vulnerability in Europe”, CLIMSAVE was a multinational research project funded under the European Union 7th Framework Programme.

  2. 2.

    All quotes used in this paper are taken from the stakeholder evaluations, which were conducted as described in section “Stakeholder integrated research (STIR): implementation and evaluation”.

References

  1. Alcamo J (2008) The SAS approach: combining qualitative and quantitative knowledge in environmental scenarios. In: Alcamo J (ed) Environmental futures: the practice of environmental scenario analysis. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 123–150

    Google Scholar 

  2. Alcamo J, Henrichs T (2008) Towards guidelines for environmental scenario analysis. In: Alcamo J (ed) Environmental futures: the practice of environmental scenario analysis. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 13–35

    Google Scholar 

  3. Chambers S (2003) Deliberative democratic theory. Annu Rev Sci 6:307–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cohen J (1997) Procedure and substance in deliberative democracy. In: Bohman J, Rehg W (eds) Deliberative democracy: essays on reason and politics. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 406–437

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gramberger M (2001) Citizens as partners: OECD handbook on information, consultation and public participation in policy-making, governance. OECD, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gramberger M (2008) The Prospex-CQI method for stakeholder identification and selection. Manuscript.

  7. Haasnoot M, Middelkoop H (2012) A history of futures: a review of scenario use in water policy studies in the Netherlands. Environ Sci Policy 19–20:108–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Harrison PA, Holman IP, Cojocaru G, Kok K, Kotnogianni A, Metzger MJ, Gramberger M (2013) Combining qualitative and quantitative understanding for exploring cross-sectoral climate change impacts, adaptation and vulnerability in Europe. Regional Environmental Change 13:761–780

  9. Harrison PA, Holman IP, Berry PM (submitted for this issue) Assessing cross-sectoral climate change impacts, vulnerability and adaptation: an introduction to the CLIMSAVE project. Climatic Change

  10. Henrichs T, Zurek M, Eickhout B, Kok K, Raudsepp-Hearne C, Ribeiro T, Van Vuuren D, Volkery A (2010) Scenario development and analysis for forward-looking ecosystem assessments. In: Ash N, Blanco H, Brown C, Garcia K, Henrichs T, Lucas N, Raudsepp-Hearne C, Simpson RD, Scholes R, Tomich TP, Vira B (eds) Zurek M (ed) Ecosystems and human well-being: a manual for assessment practitioners. Island, Washington, DC, pp 151–220

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hirsch Hadorn G, Biber-Klemm S, Grossenbacher-Mansuy W, Joye D, Pohl C, Wiesmann U, Zemp E, Hoffmann-Riem H (2008) Handbook of transdisciplinary research. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  12. Holman IP, Harrison PA, Metzger MJ (2014) Cross-sectoral impacts of climate and socio-economic change in Scotland: implications for adaptation policy. Reg Environ Change. doi:10.1007/s10113-014-0679-8

  13. Hoppe R (2011) Institutional constraints and practical problems in deliberative and participatory policy making. Policy Polit 39:163–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Jolibert C, Wesselink A (2012) Research impacts and impact in research in biodiversity conservation: the influence of stakeholder engagement. Environ Sci Policy 22:100–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kasemir B, Schibli D, Stoll S, Jaeger CC (2000) Involving the public in climate and energy decisions. Environ 42:32–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kok K, Patel M, Rothman DS, Quaranta G (2006) Multi-scale narratives from an IA perspective: part II, participatory local scenario development. Futures 38:285–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kok K, Van Vliet M, Bärlund I, Dubel A, Sendzimir J (2011) Combining participative backcasting and explorative scenario development: experiences from the SCENES project. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 78:835–851

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kok K, Bärlund I, Flörke M, Holman I, Gramberger M, Sendzimir J, Stuch B, Zellmer K (2014) European participatory scenario development: strengthening the link between stories and models. Clim Chang. doi:10.1007/s10584-014-1143-y

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lebel L, Thongbai P, Kok K (2006) Sub-global scenarios. In: Capistrano D, Samper CK, Lee MJ, Rauseppe-Hearne C (eds) Ecosystems and human well-being (vol 4): multiscale assessments. Findings of the Sub-global Assessments Working Group of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Island, Washington, DC, pp 229–259

  20. Lemos MC, Morehouse BJ (2005) The co-production of science and policy in integrated climate assessments. Glob Environ Chang 15:57–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Lövbrand E (2011) Co-producing European climate science and policy: a cautionary note on the making of useful knowledge. Sci Public Policy 38:225–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Phillipson J, Lowe P, Proctor A, Ruto E (2012) Stakeholder engagement and knowledge exchange in environmental research. J Environ Manag 95:56–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Priess JA, Hauck J (2014) Integrative scenario development. Ecol Soc 19:12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Rounsevell MDA, Metzger MJ (2010) Developing qualitative scenario storylines for environmental change assessment. Wiley Interdisciplin Rev: Clim Chang 1:606–619

  25. UK NEA (2011) The United Kingdom national ecosystem assessment: technical report. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK

  26. Van Notten PWF, Rotmans J, Van Asselt MBA, Rothman DS (2003) An updated scenario typology. Futures 35:423–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Vervoort J, Thorton PK, Kristjansson P, Foerch W, Ericksen PJ, Kok K, Ingram JS, Herrero M, Palazzo A, Helfgott AES, Wilkinson A, Havlik P, Mason-D’Croz D, Jost C (2014) Challenges to scenario-guided adaptive action on food security under climate change. Glob Environ Change. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.03.001

  28. Walz A, Lardelli C, Behrendt H, Grêt-Regamey A, Lundström C, Kytzia S, Bebi P (2007) Participatory scenario analysis for integrated regional modelling. Landsc Urban Plan 81:114–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Wesselink A, Paavola J (2011) Rationales for public participation in environmental policy and governance: practitioners’ perspectives. Environ Plan A 43:2688–2704

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their thanks to the participating stakeholders for their active and continued engagement.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marc Gramberger.

Additional information

This article is part of a Special Issue on “Regional Integrated Assessment of Cross-sectoral Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability” with Guest Editors Paula A. Harrison and Pam M. Berry.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(DOCX 25 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gramberger, M., Zellmer, K., Kok, K. et al. Stakeholder integrated research (STIR): a new approach tested in climate change adaptation research. Climatic Change 128, 201–214 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-014-1225-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Climate Change Adaptation
  • Adaptation Option
  • Stakeholder Engagement
  • Engagement Process
  • Workshop Series