Working Group 4 - main objectives

WG4 should assess models, tools and conventions for different phases of participatory planning process and for different tasks within these phases; for evaluating the effectiveness of DSSs in supporting participatory processes; and for deriving improved protocols to be included in guidelines on good practices for DSS development and use, the last point in concert with WG1.

Work Program 2009

Activities and Outputs

• WG4 established - 27 participants from 13 countries.
• Definition of public participation has been defined as well as a classification scheme of methods models and tools.
• Case template defining documentation of cases of participatory planning in forestry
• A description of cases following the template is emerging.
• A preliminary list of success criteria for participatory processes has been developed.
• WG4 sessions at Riga meeting.
• A WG4 designated page on the wiki opened.

Work Program 2010

Activities and Outputs

• WG4 enlargened - 31 participants from 14 countries.
• The success criteria for participatory planning have been reviewed, and the criteria most relevant to DSS development have been selected, and their importance discussed. (manusript Menzel, S. et al. 2010, Between ethics and technology - evaluation criteria for the development of appropriate DSS in the context of participatory planning under preparation)
• Cases for participatory planning have been included to the list

Finalize descriptions / classifications /criteria

• A (peer-reviewed) review on the possible approaches to evaluate a case of participatory planning.
• To assemble existing knowledge on methods involving participation with respect to the problem structuring phase of the decision making process. To be presented at the Lisbon workshop.

Work on cases

• The contribution of DSS on participation based on the information collected from important cases with case template questions

The overall work plan

The first task for this is to establish general success measures for public participation by reviewing the existing literature. New measures may be included during the work. Below are examples of possible success measures to be used based on the plan.

Table 1. Examples of success measures to be derived

Select the cases

Criteria for selecting interesting cases should be developed and communicated with WG1. In the process one should not avoid the possibility that maybe WG4 should have partly different cases than the rest of groups.

A framework for classifying different models and tools

The work of the WG includes the review of different tools and working conventions and recommendations related to participation process. As the process covers all the phases (intelligence, design, choice, monitor), also the models and tools of participatory process relate to all these. In addition, the organization of the whole process is an issue. The phases are further divided to tasks. The work in the first year focuses on for listing tasks related to each phase of participatory process, and on finding appropriate classifications for the existing models, tools and conventions under different tasks (for a draft, see Appendix 1).

Reviewing existing models and tools

In the second year the models, tools and conventions related to tasks (how - questions 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11 or a selection of them in Appendix1) in different fields are reviewed. The aim is to find good practices that could be brought to forestry practice.

Part of the questions may also serve in defining the success criteria.

Evaluating the cases

The cases are selected based on the criteria outlined in Riga meeting from different countries. The selected cases are then evaluated based on the selected success criteria. Then, it is defined what properties of the process and/or the forest DSS support the success in each of the cases.

Preparing the guidelines

Based on all the work carried out, guidelines for forestry practise are presented in the form of final report.