Difference between revisions of "The tracing of the current actor network interactions made the group realize that they need a different kind of stakeholders from what they previously thought"
From COST Action FP0804: FORSYS
SeanGordon (Talk | contribs) (Seans automated transfer) |
SeanGordon (Talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
|Has decision making dimension=More than one decision maker/stakeholder | |Has decision making dimension=More than one decision maker/stakeholder | ||
|Has country=Germany | |Has country=Germany | ||
| − | |||
|Has reference=see case | |Has reference=see case | ||
| − | |Has related case=Germany | + | |Has related case=Germany-Actor Network Theory to Understand Collaborative Decision Support Systems Development in Forest Management Practice |
|Has related lesson=The tracing of the actor network supported the identification of the key actors influencing the collaborative DSS implementation and institutionalization | |Has related lesson=The tracing of the actor network supported the identification of the key actors influencing the collaborative DSS implementation and institutionalization | ||
| − | |Has | + | |Has other relevant information=see case |
|Has working group theme=Dss development process, Participation | |Has working group theme=Dss development process, Participation | ||
| + | |Has actor perspective=Developer/Architect, Researcher | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 19:06, 5 May 2013
Lesson
| ID | |
|---|---|
| Has statement | The tracing of the current actor network interactions made the group realize that they need a different kind of stakeholders from what they previously thought |
| Has evidence | In the session where the Prezi diagram of the draft actor network was presented, a list of stakeholders who were involved in a climate change project (klimland) were reviewed and it appeared that these are not the stakeholders that fit the new desired planning process |
| Has consequences | Although this realization made it more difficult to develop the DSS and held it back a bit, eventually also the realization of who are not the most relevant stakeholders was a necessary step in the development process |
| Has recommendation for action | Consider the institutionalization of a DSS as a complicated chain of people and various methods and tools, the mapping of which will lead to the mediator (unpredictable actors) and the less relevant intermediary (predictable) actors. |
| Has domain | Ongoing development |
| Has DSS development stage | |
| Has decision stage | |
| Has temporal scale | Long term (strategic) |
| Has spatial context | Spatial with neighbourhood interrelations |
| Has spatial scale | Forest level, Regional/national level |
| Has objectives dimension | Multiple objectives |
| Has goods and services dimension | Market services, Non-market services |
| Has decision making dimension | More than one decision maker/stakeholder |
| Has country | Germany |
| Has reference | see case |
| Has related DSS | |
| Has related case | Germany-Actor Network Theory to Understand Collaborative Decision Support Systems Development in Forest Management Practice |
| Has related lesson | The tracing of the actor network supported the identification of the key actors influencing the collaborative DSS implementation and institutionalization |
| Has other relevant information | see case |
| Has working group theme | Dss development process, Participation |
| Has DSS development | |
| Has decision support techniques | |
| Has knowledge management processes | |
| Has support for social participation | |
| Has actor perspective | Developer/Architect, Researcher |
| Has researcher role | |
| Has user role | |
| Has developer role |
