Www.env.leeds.ac.uk/sustainableuplands A joint Research Councils Research Project co-sponsored by DEFRA & SEERAD Klaus Hubacek, Mark Reed, Tim Burt, Pippa.

www.env.leeds.ac.uk/sustainableuplands

A joint Research Councils Research Project co-sponsored

by DEFRA & SEERAD

Klaus Hubacek, Mark Reed, Tim Burt, Pippa Chapman, Stephen Cornell, Andy Dougill, Evan Fraser, Joe Holden, Brian Irvine, Nanlin

Jin, Mike Kirkby, Bill Kunin, Christina Prell, Sigrid Stagl, Lindsay Stringer, Mette Termansen, Sam Wong, Fred Worrall

Stakeholder Participation in the Strategic Management of Upland

Landscapes

Claire Quinn



by DEFRA & SEERAD

Uplands provide a range of goods and services, but are affected by:

• Historic pollution• Current land use• Future change

– Burning regulation– CAP reform– WFD implementation– Kyoto– Cultural, demographic & climate change

Background




by DEFRA & SEERAD

Project Goals (1 of 3)

1. Combine knowledge from local stakeholders, policy-makers and social and natural scientists to anticipate, monitor and sustainably manage rural change in UK uplands

• Visions for a sustainable future from multiple users• Barriers, uncertainties, driving forces behind change• Adaptive responses to rural change scenarios in

uplands



by DEFRA & SEERAD


2. Develop tools and approaches for stakeholder engagement

• Enhancing stakeholder analysis• Environmental applications of social network

analysis• Stimulating and evaluating social learning• Multi-stakeholder mediated modelling



by DEFRA & SEERAD


3. Stimulate two-way learning and meaningful interaction between:

i) different stakeholder groupsii) social and natural scientistsiii) stakeholders and researchers



by DEFRA & SEERAD

Different approaches and methods

Integrated modelling

Futures Research

Adaptive Management

Disparate Disciplinary Approaches

Mediated Modelling



by DEFRA & SEERAD

ContextContext

Goals, Goals, Scenarios Scenarios

& Indicators& Indicators

Management Management OptionsOptions

Social Social Learning Learning ProcessProcess



by DEFRA & SEERAD

System boundaries & local research

foci

Social Network Maps

Interviews

Current & Future Drivers

Sustainability Goals

Sustainability Indicators

Conceptual model & qualitative scenarios

Quantitative, spatially explicit scenarios

Model outputs for strategies

Stakeholder-Led Site Visits

Draft Concept-ual Model

Stakeholders identified,

described & categorised

Stakeholder revisions & priorities

Innovative management

strategies

ContextContext

Management Management OptionsOptions

Advisory Panel & Co-I

Meetings

Literature Review: key drivers, system components & research foci

ABM rules

Stakeholder evaluations

of model outputs

Refined strategies

Social Learning

Short-List Options

Management & Policy Recommendations

12

Goals, Scenarios & Goals, Scenarios & IndicatorsIndicators

Social Network Data

Grounded Theory

Analysis

FG3: Review, test &

short-list indicators

Social Network Analysis

Stakeholder Selection

Evaluate

learning

FG 5

Run model

Run model

GIS & photo manipulation

Questionnaires

Focus Group (FG) 1: Stakeholder

Analysis

Scoping Interviews

FG 2: Academic

Illustrated story-lines

FG 3

PESERA parameters

Integrated computational

model

Model development

Stakeholder Selection

ii) Scenarios & indicators (2 of 4)

Managedburns overless area

No changein managed

burns

Defra Burning Code Re

view

10% leftunburned

Blanket BogBurning Ban

ShorterBurningSeason

Increasedbiodiversity

More birdsof prey

Less grouse

Lessshooting

days

Futureshooting ban

Increasedanimal rights

activism

Lower economic returns from grouse

Less moorland managed for grouse

Smaller rurallabour pool

Demographic change

Culturalchange

Conservation priorities

More longheather

Less shortheather

Lessground-nesti

ng birds

BLANKET BOGDRY HEATH (or if

hydrology not restored)

More scrub

Morebroadleaf

forest

Moreaccidental

fires

If no firebreaks

If hydrologyrestored

Climate Change to warm

er/drier

dryer conditions - specie

s change

Lowerwater table

Uncertainbiodiversity

Less erosion Less watercolour

Moreerosion

More watercolour

Lessvegetation

cover

Lessattractivelandscape

Moreattractivelandscape

In valleys only

On plateaux

More waterpollution

Atmospheric deposition

Afforestation schemes

WaterFramework

DirectiveProgrammesof Measures

Coniferreplacement

schemesDesire to

keep grouseshooting

Desire tokeep hillsheep

Burningtechnologyadvances

Traditionalrural cultural

values

CAP reform

Single farmpayment

Environmental Stewardship Scheme

Entry-LevelScheme

High-LevelScheme

Hill sheepless

profitable

Less gamekeepering

Rural-urbanmigration

Ageing ruralpopulation

Less interestin rural

livelihoods

Less grazingLess hillsheep

Agriculturalmarkets

No changein hill sheep

Declining market

Improvingmarket

Diversification?

No changein fringe

biodiversity

Concentrateon moorland

fringe

With less managedburns and noshepharding

Ecologicalrestoration

Raisedwater table

Hydrological restoration

Desire tokeep openlandscape

Recreationalpriorities

Moreburning days

Morecontrol ofburning

Lessaccidental

fires

No changeaccidental

fires

Less bareground

Irreversiblevegetation

loss

Decrease inbiodiversity

Of acidifyingsubstances (S

& N)

Atmosphericdepos ition ofnutrients (N)

change inspecies

composition

incr. heather

decr. grasses incr. fireintolerantspecies

moreblanket bog

species

more herbs

more heather

i

less 'flashy'hydrology

loss ofombrotrophi

c species

FG 4

Activities

OutputsKey:



by DEFRA & SEERADwww.env.leeds.ac.uk/sustainableuplands

• Focus group with MFF to identify key stakeholders

• Scoping interviews• Snowball sample

Who are the stakeholders? .




Talking with stakeholders…

What are the issues? .

– Focus on burning

– Water quality

– Climate change



by DEFRA & SEERAD


DEFRA’s Heather & Grass Burning Review

• Unique opportunity to provide a multi-stakeholder response that provided a voice to groups that may otherwise not have been involved

• Positive response from stakeholders





What does the future hold?• Interviewing stakeholders:

– Where do we want to go?– What is likely to cause change?– What will the future hold?– What signs could tell us if we are heading in the right direction?




We combined information from:• Interviews with stakeholders• Literature review • Brainstorming session with researchers• Result = conceptual model from which we can extract

storylines showing different potential futures

Putting the pieces together



by DEFRA & SEERAD


Managedburns overless area

No change inmanaged

burns

Defra BurningCode Review

No burnareas?

ShorterBurning

Season?More birds of

prey

Less grouse

Lessshooting

days

Futureshooting ban

Increasedanimal rights

activism

Lowereconomic

returns fromgrouse

Lessmoorland

managed forgrouse

Smaller rurallabour pool

Demographicchange

Culturalchange

PSI targetsfor SSSIs More long

heather

Less shortheather

Lessground-nesting

birds

ON INTACTBLANKET BOG

More scrub

Morebroadleaf

forest

Moreaccidental

firesIf no firebreaks

Unknowneffect on

biodiversity

Less erosion

Less watercolour &pollution

More erosion

More watercolour &pollution

Lessvegetation

cover

Lessattractivelandscape

Moreattractivelandscape

In valleys only

On plateaux

Increasedadoption of

burningtechnology

Less gamekeeperingRural-urban

migration

Ageing ruralpopulation

Less interestin rural

livelihoods

Grazingconcentrated infewer recently

burned areas &moorland fringeMore burning

days

Bettercontrolled

burning

Lessaccidental

fires

No change inbiodiversity,accidental

fires orerosion

Morevegetation

cover

Irreversiblevegetation

loss

Morefire-sensitive

species

More blanketbog species

Less 'flashy'hydrology

Less openpatches

Lessbryophytes

Lesspredatorcontrol

ON DEGRADEDBLANKET BOG AND

DRY HEATH

ON DRY HEATH ANDINTACT OR DEGRADED

BLANKET BOG

Reducedwater

quality

Improvedwater

quality

Lessdownstream

flooding

Biodiversityand habitat

loss




• What do you think of these storylines?– Focus groups with stakeholders

• Scientists translate storylines into mathematical models• How could we respond to modelled storylines?

– Further focus groups to identify responses to future change, which are themselves modelled and fed back to stakeholders for refinement

Responding to future change




Looking ahead: future learning• Stakeholders, researchers and policy people

exchange views in site visits and focus groups• Who should take part in these upcoming events?

– Stakeholder selection through Social Network Analysis




Social network analysis

• Whom should we include in our site visits and focus groups?– Relationships among stakeholders:

• Who interacts with whom?• How frequently do they communicate with one

another?




Social network analysis • We needed to find a means of selecting

stakeholders who had little contact with each other so that we could stimulate new learning opportunities

• Yet who were as central as possible in the network to optimise the diffusion of ideas and new approaches to a wide social network

• Finally, we also wished to maintain our concern over diversity of voices



by DEFRA & SEERAD

Weak links (bridging ties)




Social network analysis • This network is ‘dominated’ by weak ties.

– Weak ties link diverse segments of the network together

– Also an indicator of where more communication and relationship building can take place

• Certain actors play important ‘broker’ roles (strong ties)

– Linking disconnected others and stakeholder groups



by DEFRA & SEERAD

Strong links (bonding ties)



by DEFRA & SEERAD

•Whom to involve? (representativeness versus manageable size)

•Continuity (institutions vs. individuals)•Trust•Fatigue (research interests vs. people need to work)•Time aspect •Output orientation versus ‘talkshops’•Decision power versus participation•Different ways of thinking and talking


Problems and what have we learned?



by DEFRA & SEERAD

Thank you


Www.env.leeds.ac.uk/sustainableuplands A joint Research Councils Research Project co-sponsored by DEFRA & SEERAD Klaus Hubacek, Mark Reed, Tim Burt, Pippa.

Documents

defra seerad project

defra seerad uplands

defra seerad context

strategies stakeholder

defra seerad klaus hubacek

stakeholder engagement

rural change scenarios

twoway learning