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

Abstract: Adaption to climate change in the context of agriculture involves collaborative planning and development of practices which is deemed more sustainable than preceeding practices. It is however not given that sustainable development will be the outcome of such efforts. In some cases, even motivated participants experience that despite good intentions, high levels of knowledge, feasible models, appropriate technologies and many other factors present, they still might not succeed bringing about the desired change. The reasons for this can not easily be reduced to just one factor, but is very likely to be the outcome of highly complex interactions between social, technological, institutional, or even personal factors. The report documents attempts to understand the complexities of climate change adaption in a Danish water catchment, Lundgaards Bæk, which is dominated by dairy farming. As part of the EU projects AQUARIUS and MACSUR, a local action group was formed which was composed of local farmers, local agricultural advisors, advisors from the national agricultural advisory service, environmental planners from the local municipality, and environmental planners from the national environmental agency in Denmark. The action group was supposed to develop specific measures, which were supposed to lead to an overall reduction in nitrogen loading of the neighboring fjord, Mariager Fjord. The report addresses three related research themes: (1) how do the stakeholders in question interact during the process of climate change adaption, (2) when do the stakeholders encounter opportunities and barriers during the process, and finally (3) does the adaption process in question lead to the desired outcomes? The empirical background of the report is a detailed process study of dynamics within a group of stakeholders, including farmers and extension officers, who were supposed to develop sustainable management practices in order to reduce nitrogen leaching to the Mariager Fjord. The study is based on the assumption that in order for research and policy to contribute to sustainable practices, deeper understanding of complex dynamics within stakeholder partnerships is needed. Based on a theoretical framework derived from social learning, adaptive co-management and Andrew Pickering’s notion of ‘the mangle’, different in-depth explanations to why sustainable development did not occur, are offered. One explanation concerns social-psychological dynamics of knowledge. Another explanation concerns the mechanisms by which social and material forces affect outcomes of the adaption process. The report concludes by exploring the study’s relevance in relation to policy, research and practice, followed by suggestions for further in-depth case studies and experimentation in practice. No Label