Getting to YES. Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In

(2002). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving in. Quality Management Journal: Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 73-74.

Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving in

Planning with complexity: an introduction for collaborative rationality for public policy

This paper updates and builds on 'Modelling with Stakeholders' Voinov and Bousquet, 2010 which demonstrated the importance of, and demand for, stakeholder participation in resource and environmental modelling. This position paper returns to the concepts of that publication and reviews the progress made since 2010. A new development is the wide introduction and acceptance of social media and web applications, which dramatically changes the context and scale of stakeholder interactions and participation. Technology advances make it easier to incorporate information in interactive formats via visualization and games to augment participatory experiences. Citizens as stakeholders are increasingly demanding to be engaged in planning decisions that affect them and their communities, at scales from local to global. How people interact with and access models and data is rapidly evolving. In turn, this requires changes in how models are built, packaged, and disseminated: citizens are less in awe of experts and external authorities, and they are increasingly aware of their own capabilities to provide inputs to planning processes, including models. The continued acceleration of environmental degradation and natural resource depletion accompanies these societal changes, even as there is a growing acceptance of the need to transition to alternative, possibly very different, life styles. Substantive transitions cannot occur without significant changes in human behaviour and perceptions. The important and diverse roles that models can play in guiding human behaviour, and in disseminating and increasing societal knowledge, are a feature of stakeholder processes today. Display Omitted Participatory modelling has become mainstream in resource and environmental management.We review recent contributions to participatory environmental modelling to identify the tools, methods and processes applied.Global internet connectivity, social media and crowdsourcing create opportunities for participatory modelling.We suggest structured mechanisms to examine and account for human biases and beliefs in participatory modelling.Advanced visualization tools, gaming, and virtual environments improve communication with stakeholders.

Modelling with stakeholders - Next generation

Indigenous and sustainability sciences have much to offer one another regarding the identification of techniques and methods for sustaining resilient landscapes. Based upon the literature, and our findings, it is evident that some Indigenous peoples have maintained distinct systematic, localized, and place-based environmental knowledge over extended time periods. These long-resident knowledge systems contain extensive information regarding not only how to maintain but also to steward biodiverse ecosystems. For example, the Nisqually Tribe of western Washington State, USA blends various aspects of ecological science with their Indigenous knowledge to support the restoration and management of the Nisqually river system watershed along with its associated natural resources of biological and cultural significance. We believe these kinds of Indigenous observations and perspectives are critical for establishing or expanding collaborations with sustainability scientists. Fikret Berkes observed in his foundational text, Sacred Ecology, a “growing interest in traditional ecological knowledge since the 1980s is perhaps indicative of two things: the need for ecological insights from indigenous practices of resource use, and the need to develop a new ecological ethic in part by learning from the wisdom of traditional knowledge holders” (2012: 19). The primary focus of the papers in this special edition of Sustainability Science, including this editorial introduction, is an exploration of the intersection of Indigenous and sustainability sciences. We challenged key thinkers in these research areas to cultivate mutually conducive and appropriate principles, protocols, and practices that address humanity’s collective need to sustain landscapes that demonstrate the ability not only to maintain human life but more crucially the interrelated more-than-human biosphere. The authors were asked to address the strengths and limitations posed by both Indigenous and sustainability sciences in this endeavor. We also encouraged discussion concerning how these two scientific paradigms might collaborate, acknowledging that protocols will need to be identified, or created, to enable successful collaborations. It is our hope that this special edition might add to what Scholz and Steiner (2015) have identified as a scant literature documenting the benefits of transdisciplinary research. This special edition was inspired by an internationally diverse set of Indigenous academics, community scholars and non-Indigenous academics who participated in a National Science Foundation funded workshop entitled Weaving Indigenous and Sustainability Sciences: Diversifying our Methods (WISDOM). The next three sections & Jay T. Johnson jaytjohnson@ku.edu

/pdf/weaving-indigenous-and-sustainability-sciences-to-diversify-49ifi2f8tr.pdf

Weaving Indigenous and sustainability sciences to diversify our methods

https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/jrm/article/download/20144/19769

Using Participatory Workshops to Integrate State-and-Transition Models Created With Local Knowledge and Ecological Data

To better understand the relationship between collaborative process and results, we interviewed participants of an inactive collaborative group and analyzed their perceptions of success and the role of consensus in the group's process and outcomes. The main objective of the Intermountain Public Land Cooperative (IMPLC, a pseudonym) was to craft a consensus community alternative for the local Bureau of Land Management (BLM) resource area's Resource Management Plan. Participants perceived many benefits from collaboration, including improved communication and relationships, and high-quality input to the BLM planning process. However, the group was unable to reach consensus and one-quarter of those interviewed indicated that they were less likely to collaborate in the future due to their IMPLC experience. The IMPLC case highlights both benefits and costs of using consensus in collaboration.

Aleta K. Rudeen

Papers

Using Participatory Workshops to Integrate State-and-Transition Models Created With Local Knowledge and Ecological Data

Perceptions of Success and the Question of Consensus in Natural Resource Collaboration: Lessons from an Inactive Collaborative Group