| Home | << 1 2 3 4 5 >> |
|
König, H. J., Helming, K., Seddaiu, G., Kipling, R., Köchy, M., Graversgaard, M., et al. Stakeholder participation in agricultural research: Who should be involved, why, and how?.
Abstract: Research in sustainable agricultural management requires appropriate participatory processes and tools enabling efficient dialogue and cooperation to allow researchers and stakeholders to co-produce knowledge. Research approaches that encourage stakeholder participation are in high demand because they allow a better understanding of human-nature interactions and interdependencies between actors. Participatory approaches also support multiple goals of agricultural management: improved productivity, food security, climate change adaptation, environmental conservation, rural development and policy decision making. Approaches to stakeholder engagement in the field of agricultural management research are manifold. Therefore, selecting the “right” approach depends on the specific purpose and contextualized issues at stake. We analyzed ten stakeholder approaches and propose a new framework with which to identify and select appropriate approaches for stakeholder engagement. The framework consists of three components: whom to engage (i.e., stakeholder type and mandate), why to engage (i.e., research purpose: consult, inform, collaborate), and how to engage (i.e., different methodological approaches). We identified different stakeholder groups (who?): farmers, agricultural actors, land users, and policymakers; different purposes (why?): facilitate engagement process, inform stakeholders, and obtain stakeholder perceptions; and different types of engagement methods (how?): participatory field experiments, desk simulations, interviews, panel discussions and different types of workshops. The framework was applied to arrange these approaches, organize them to improve understanding of their main strengths, weaknesses and supports for identifying and selecting an appropriate approach. We conclude that understanding the different facets of available approaches is crucial for selecting an appropriate stakeholder engagement approach. ;
|
|
Seddaiu, G., Ruiu, M. L., & Kipling, R. P. (2015). Report on Stakeholder Engagement Methodologies (Vol. 4).
Abstract: Stakeholder engagement in research projects can take a number of forms according to the scope of the project and the purpose of the interaction. L4.2. has focused on comparing different approaches to stakeholder engagement in collaborative projects. This report presents a synthesis of the experiences and lessons learnt through the stakeholder engagement activities of LiveM researchers within MACSUR, within an Italian (Oristano) case study, and within the SOLID (Sustainable, Organic and Low Input Dairying) project. An overview of these examples, and some of the lessons drawn from them, can also be found in the MACSUR paper on stakeholder engagement methods being developed by researchers from all three MACSUR themes (Koenig et al. under production). The first part of this report describes the stakeholder engagement strategy within the SOLID project. Stakeholder engagement methods are analysed through observations of activities and using semi-structured interviews with researchers and stakeholders. Two aspects of the SOLID approach are described – the stakeholder panel and the Future Dairying workshop. Transcripts of the workshop and the contribution of the stakeholder panel to the SOLID annual meeting in Helsinki are included (Appendices 1 and 2), as a contribution to the analysis of workshop outcomes being undertaken within the SOLID project. As part of a wider suite of stakeholder engagement activities, the SOLID stakeholder panel provided an example of how ongoing oversight of scientific outputs and direction by stakeholders can be effective in identifying weaknesses in approach and communication, and in suggesting relevant and effective directions for research activities. The stakeholder workshop demonstrated a useful structure for the exploration of stakeholder concerns, their view of ideal states and their solutions for reaching them. Low participation levels demonstrated the need to understand the motivations that drive stakeholders to engage in such projects, and highlighted the value of developing long-term relationships between stakeholders and researchers that allow scientific research to become an accepted part of practical problem-solving. The second part of the report describes stakeholder engagement activities carried out in the context of one of the MACSUR regional pilot studies (Oristanese case study in Sardinia, Italy). The Oristanese case study demonstrates the potentialities and constraints of participatory methodologies in relation to the different categories of stakeholder involved. It highlights the importance of creating new spaces for dialogue between farmers, researchers and policy makers in order to promote the generation of “hybrid knowledge” (Nguyen et al. 2013) for the emergence of more sustainable and longer-lasting strategies to adapt to CC. This would require the promotion of open knowledge generation platforms where multiple stakeholders are encouraged to participate and make their views heard. These approaches are designed in order to overcome the misalignment between scientists’ suggestions and policy implementation. In the third part of the report, the outcomes of a “learning event” held in Sassari (MACSUR mid-term meeting) with decision makers from different EU countries, are discussed. Finally, some reflections are presented on the importance of involving local stakeholders and decision makers in research projects, of sharing views and knowledge between scientists and stakeholders, and on the pros and cons of different methodologies at the different scales of stakeholder engagement, drawing on all three examples of practice. The research approach analysed includes two important components, which are represented by “transdisciplinarity” (to be included in the macro area of “scientific knowledge”) and “local knowledge”, as fundamental elements to fill the Science and Policy Gap. No Label
|
|
Lai, R., Seddaiu, G., Gennaro, L., & Roggero, P. P. (2012). Effects of nitrogen fertilizer sources and temperature on soil CO2 efflux in Italian ryegrass crop under Mediterranean conditions. Ital. J. Agron., 7(2), 27.
|
|
Nguyen, T. P. L., Seddaiu, G., Tidore, C., & Roggero, P. P. (2014). Adaptation to climate change of Italian agricultural systems: the analysis of explorative scenarios. FACCE MACSUR Mid-term Scientific Conference, 3(S) Sassari, Italy.
Abstract: Adaptation of agricultural systems to climate uncertainties requires the construction of scenarios that should take into account the complexities of socio-ecological systems of a specific local context. Adaptation scenarios of agricultural systems are not making forecasts or predictions, but prospective futures or future paths. They can facilitate our understanding of how systems work and evolve. Adaptation processes of agricultural systems involve a variety of changes in local practices and social organization. The development of adaptation scenarios at farm level entails a clear understanding of farmers’ frames that are mediated by their interests, experiences and internal and external forces. Farmers’ frames is the way in which farmers frame climate issues emphasizing vulnerabilities, uncertainties and opportunities (i.e: impacts on their farming systems) and open the window for searching adaptation strategies. This study reports on the methodologies for the development of explorative scenarios (i.e., scenarios that explore the future from a variety of perspectives) for the climate change adaptation of four agricultural systems (intensive dairy cattle, extensive dairy sheep, rice farming and horticulture) in the Oristano regional pilot study in Italy. Explorative scenarios were used to explore trends into the future from the past and present. Three research steps were followed: (i) in the first step farmers’ perceptions and prospective through semi-structured interviews and questionnaires were analysed; (ii) in the second step the evolution of the agricultural systems (i.e. temporal and spatial) was evaluated; (iii) the third step examined multiple stakeholders’ outlooks about farm-level possible adaptive strategies through interactive workshops.
|
|
Roggero, P. P., Seddaiu, G., Ledda, L., Doro, L., Deligios, P., Nguyen, T. P. L., et al. (2014). Combining modeling and stakeholder involvement to build community adaptive responses to climate change in a Mediterranean agricultural district. FACCE MACSUR Mid-term Scientific Conference, 3(S) Sassari, Italy.
Abstract: The case study area (54,000 ha) is located at Oristano, Italy. The main cropping systems are based on forages (silage maize, Italian ryegrass and alfalfa under irrigation, winter cereals and grasslands under rainfed conditions), rainfed cereals (durum wheat, barley), vegetables (e.g. artichokes), rice, citrus, olives and vineyards. Some 36,000 ha are served by irrigation. The area includes the dairy cows cooperative system of Arborea (30,000 cows, 5500 ha, nitrate vulnerable zone). The rainfed dairy sheep includes 372,000 sheep and a number of small milk processing plants. The research aims to support adaptive responses to climate change through the combination of modeling approaches and stakeholder engagement. Present (2000-2010) and future (2020-2030) climatic scenarios were developed by combining global climate models with Regional Atmospheric Modelling Systems to produce calibrated time series of daily temperature and precipitation for the case study. The EPIC model was calibrated to simulate the impact of climate scenarios on the main cropping systems. The impact of THIndex on milk yield, milk quality and mortality was also simulated for dairy cows. A territorial farm-type Discrete Stochastic Programming model was implemented to simulate choices for thirteen farming typologies as influenced by crop yields and water consumptions. Participatory activities, including field experiments, interviews, focus groups and interactive workshops, involved farmers and other stakeholders in the most critical phases of the research. The assessment of uncertainties and opportunities were proposed as a basis for discussion with policy makers to identify priorities for agro-climatic measures in 2014-2020.
|