A five-step approach for stakeholder engagement in prioritisation and planning of environmental evidence syntheses
Abstract Systematic reviews and systematic maps, regarded as a gold standard for syntheses of documented research evidence, are increasingly used to inform decisions in environmental management. To increase their relevance and uptake, systematic reviews and maps can be planned with the help and enga...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2017-10-01
|
| Series: | Environmental Evidence |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13750-017-0104-0 |
| _version_ | 1818908914446499840 |
|---|---|
| author | Magnus Land Biljana Macura Claes Bernes Sif Johansson |
| author_facet | Magnus Land Biljana Macura Claes Bernes Sif Johansson |
| author_sort | Magnus Land |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Systematic reviews and systematic maps, regarded as a gold standard for syntheses of documented research evidence, are increasingly used to inform decisions in environmental management. To increase their relevance and uptake, systematic reviews and maps can be planned with the help and engagement of stakeholders, i.e. organisations and individuals involved in and affected by environmental policy-making and practice. We report on the emprically tested five-step approach that the Mistra Council for Evidence-based Environmental Management (EviEM) is using to engage stakeholders and incorporate their views and opinions in the prioritisation and planning of reviews, including (1) stakeholder identification; (2) identification of policy- and practice-relevant topics; (3) framing and prioritisation of review questions; (4) establishment of the specific scope of a review; and (5) a public review of a draft review protocol. We provide examples from EviEM’s reviews and describe various challenges and valuable lessons learnt from the engagement process, hoping that this will be useful reading not only for reviewers, but also for stakeholders who plan to participate in the engagement process. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-19T22:18:35Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-28ae5e2960d74e56abb165d18c528a41 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2047-2382 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-19T22:18:35Z |
| publishDate | 2017-10-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Environmental Evidence |
| spelling | doaj.art-28ae5e2960d74e56abb165d18c528a412022-12-21T20:03:42ZengBMCEnvironmental Evidence2047-23822017-10-01611710.1186/s13750-017-0104-0A five-step approach for stakeholder engagement in prioritisation and planning of environmental evidence synthesesMagnus Land0Biljana Macura1Claes Bernes2Sif Johansson3Mistra EviEM, Stockholm Environment InstituteMistra EviEM, Stockholm Environment InstituteMistra EviEM, Stockholm Environment InstituteMistra EviEM, Stockholm Environment InstituteAbstract Systematic reviews and systematic maps, regarded as a gold standard for syntheses of documented research evidence, are increasingly used to inform decisions in environmental management. To increase their relevance and uptake, systematic reviews and maps can be planned with the help and engagement of stakeholders, i.e. organisations and individuals involved in and affected by environmental policy-making and practice. We report on the emprically tested five-step approach that the Mistra Council for Evidence-based Environmental Management (EviEM) is using to engage stakeholders and incorporate their views and opinions in the prioritisation and planning of reviews, including (1) stakeholder identification; (2) identification of policy- and practice-relevant topics; (3) framing and prioritisation of review questions; (4) establishment of the specific scope of a review; and (5) a public review of a draft review protocol. We provide examples from EviEM’s reviews and describe various challenges and valuable lessons learnt from the engagement process, hoping that this will be useful reading not only for reviewers, but also for stakeholders who plan to participate in the engagement process.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13750-017-0104-0Knowledge needsParticipationPriority settingPublic review processQuestion formulationScoping |
| spellingShingle | Magnus Land Biljana Macura Claes Bernes Sif Johansson A five-step approach for stakeholder engagement in prioritisation and planning of environmental evidence syntheses Environmental Evidence Knowledge needs Participation Priority setting Public review process Question formulation Scoping |
| title | A five-step approach for stakeholder engagement in prioritisation and planning of environmental evidence syntheses |
| title_full | A five-step approach for stakeholder engagement in prioritisation and planning of environmental evidence syntheses |
| title_fullStr | A five-step approach for stakeholder engagement in prioritisation and planning of environmental evidence syntheses |
| title_full_unstemmed | A five-step approach for stakeholder engagement in prioritisation and planning of environmental evidence syntheses |
| title_short | A five-step approach for stakeholder engagement in prioritisation and planning of environmental evidence syntheses |
| title_sort | five step approach for stakeholder engagement in prioritisation and planning of environmental evidence syntheses |
| topic | Knowledge needs Participation Priority setting Public review process Question formulation Scoping |
| url | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13750-017-0104-0 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT magnusland afivestepapproachforstakeholderengagementinprioritisationandplanningofenvironmentalevidencesyntheses AT biljanamacura afivestepapproachforstakeholderengagementinprioritisationandplanningofenvironmentalevidencesyntheses AT claesbernes afivestepapproachforstakeholderengagementinprioritisationandplanningofenvironmentalevidencesyntheses AT sifjohansson afivestepapproachforstakeholderengagementinprioritisationandplanningofenvironmentalevidencesyntheses AT magnusland fivestepapproachforstakeholderengagementinprioritisationandplanningofenvironmentalevidencesyntheses AT biljanamacura fivestepapproachforstakeholderengagementinprioritisationandplanningofenvironmentalevidencesyntheses AT claesbernes fivestepapproachforstakeholderengagementinprioritisationandplanningofenvironmentalevidencesyntheses AT sifjohansson fivestepapproachforstakeholderengagementinprioritisationandplanningofenvironmentalevidencesyntheses |