Stakeholder Voice in Water Resource Planning

Chikezie Isiguzo, Stone Washington, L. Dickes, Thomas Walker, Mani Rouhi Rad, D. Sahoo, Jeffrey S. Allen
{"title":"Stakeholder Voice in Water Resource Planning","authors":"Chikezie Isiguzo, Stone Washington, L. Dickes, Thomas Walker, Mani Rouhi Rad, D. Sahoo, Jeffrey S. Allen","doi":"10.34068/jscwr/08.02.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Stakeholder engagement for natural resource management at the state and local levels has become an important governance practice. This study examines the association of individual traits (aggressive communication, comfort with technology, and argumentativeness) with stakeholder participant voice in a water basin planning virtual meeting setting. Individual participants of the Edisto River Basin Council (RBC) meetings are the subject of the study. South Carolina decentralized water planning to the river basin level, creating RBCs and appointing interested and relevant stakeholders as members. While the river basin planning process did not envisage virtual (Zoom) meetings for the regular meetings of the RBC, the COVID pandemic required this to begin the planning process. Moreover, meeting participants possess diverse interests, powers, and individual traits that may affect the use of voice and engagement. There is well-established literature on stakeholder participation in resource planning. However, there are gaps in the literature regarding use of voice in virtual meeting settings in water resources planning, especially in settings like water-abundant areas in the Southeastern United States. Using the Edisto RBC as a pilot basin and quantitative surveys, preliminary results found that while RBC participants were on average comfortable with technology, they generally avoided conflict, they exhibited average communication apprehension in a meeting environment, and virtual meetings appear to limit participant’s use of voice. Consequently, meeting planners must recognize that not all participants express themselves optimally in virtual meeting settings. In this vein, planners must work to develop opportunities for as much active engagement and sharing as possible.","PeriodicalId":412787,"journal":{"name":"Journal of South Carolina Water Resources","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of South Carolina Water Resources","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34068/jscwr/08.02.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Stakeholder engagement for natural resource management at the state and local levels has become an important governance practice. This study examines the association of individual traits (aggressive communication, comfort with technology, and argumentativeness) with stakeholder participant voice in a water basin planning virtual meeting setting. Individual participants of the Edisto River Basin Council (RBC) meetings are the subject of the study. South Carolina decentralized water planning to the river basin level, creating RBCs and appointing interested and relevant stakeholders as members. While the river basin planning process did not envisage virtual (Zoom) meetings for the regular meetings of the RBC, the COVID pandemic required this to begin the planning process. Moreover, meeting participants possess diverse interests, powers, and individual traits that may affect the use of voice and engagement. There is well-established literature on stakeholder participation in resource planning. However, there are gaps in the literature regarding use of voice in virtual meeting settings in water resources planning, especially in settings like water-abundant areas in the Southeastern United States. Using the Edisto RBC as a pilot basin and quantitative surveys, preliminary results found that while RBC participants were on average comfortable with technology, they generally avoided conflict, they exhibited average communication apprehension in a meeting environment, and virtual meetings appear to limit participant’s use of voice. Consequently, meeting planners must recognize that not all participants express themselves optimally in virtual meeting settings. In this vein, planners must work to develop opportunities for as much active engagement and sharing as possible.
水资源规划中的利益相关者之声
利益相关者参与州和地方一级的自然资源管理已成为一项重要的治理实践。本研究考察了在流域规划虚拟会议设置中,个人特征(积极沟通、技术舒适度和争论性)与利益相关者参与者声音的关系。埃迪斯托河流域委员会(RBC)会议的个别参与者是这项研究的主题。南卡罗来纳州将水资源规划分散到流域层面,创建红细胞,并任命感兴趣和相关的利益相关者为成员。虽然流域规划过程没有设想RBC定期会议的虚拟(Zoom)会议,但COVID大流行要求以此开始规划过程。此外,会议参与者拥有不同的兴趣、权力和个人特征,这可能会影响声音和参与的使用。有关于利益相关者参与资源规划的完善文献。然而,关于在水资源规划的虚拟会议环境中使用语音的文献存在空白,特别是在美国东南部水资源丰富的地区等环境中。使用Edisto RBC作为试点盆地和定量调查,初步结果发现,虽然RBC参与者平均对技术感到满意,但他们通常避免冲突,他们在会议环境中表现出一般的沟通恐惧,虚拟会议似乎限制了参与者对语音的使用。因此,会议策划者必须认识到,并非所有参与者都能在虚拟会议环境中最佳地表达自己。在这方面,规划者必须努力创造尽可能多的积极参与和分享的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信