Search

Participatory approaches to science and decision making, including stakeholder engagement, are increasingly common for managing complex socio-ecological challenges in working landscapes. However, critical questions about stakeholder engagement in this space remain. These include normative, political, and ethical questions concerning who participates, who benefits and loses, what good can be accomplished, and for what, whom, and by who. First, opportunities for addressing justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion interests through engagement, while implied in key conceptual frameworks, remain underexplored in scholarly work and collaborative practice alike. A second line of inquiry relates to research-practice gaps. While both the practice of doing engagement work and scholarly research on the efficacy of engagement is on the rise, there is little concerted interplay among 'on-the-ground' practitioners and scholarly researchers. This means scientific research often misses or ignores insight grounded in practical and experiential knowledge, while practitioners are disconnected from potentially useful scientific research on stakeholder engagement. A third set of questions concerns gaps in empirical understanding of the efficacy of engagement processes and includes inquiry into how different engagement contexts and process features affect a range of behavioral, cognitive, and decision-making outcomes. Because of these gaps, a cohesive and actionable research agenda for stakeholder engagement research and practice in working landscapes remains elusive. In this review article, we present a co-produced research agenda for stakeholder engagement in working landscapes. The co-production process involved professionally facilitated and iterative dialogue among a diverse and international group of over 160 scholars and practitioners through a yearlong virtual workshop series. The resulting research agenda is organized under six cross-cutting themes: (1) Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion; (2) Ethics; (3) Research and Practice; (4) Context; (5) Process; and (6) Outcomes and Measurement. This research agenda identifies critical research needs and opportunities relevant for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers alike. We argue that addressing these research opportunities is necessary to advance knowledge and practice of stakeholder engagement and to support more just and effective engagement processes in working landscapes.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42532-022-00132-8.

Alexi P. Kireyev (ed.). 2016. Building Integrated Economies in West Africa: Lessons in Managing Growth, Inclusiveness, and Volatility. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund. 385 pp. The West African Economic and [...]

Fairtrade is a transnational voluntary labelling initiative that aims to upgrade the social, economic, and environmental conditions of producers in developing countries. In this paper, we systematically translated, coded, and analysed open-ended responses from a global survey of Fairtrade producers to explore how Fairtrade operates as a credential. The credentialism literature sheds light on Fairtrade's ability to create social and economic mobility, the operation of positive and negative selection processes and the hidden curriculum. We conclude with research and policy recommendations, including the need for the research community and Fairtrade International to track and monitor initial conditions of Fairtrade producers and measure progress over time to improve understanding of how Fairtrade operates as a credential and structures the social and economic mobility of developing country producers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: In this paper, we identify three literature‐based hypotheses about how and whether Fairtrade labeling delivers its advertised benefits: a market mechanism that provides producers in developing countries advantaged access to consumer markets; a sustainable agriculture mechanism that improves the sustainability of Fairtrade products and a social justice mechanism that protects the rights and livelihoods of farmers and workers. We surveyed a broad cross‐section of Fairtrade‐certified producer organizations and compared their expectations with their satisfactions using an importance–performance analysis (IPA), principal component analysis (PCA) and ordered logit regression analyses. According to our results, Fairtrade producers report both high importance and high performance in terms of metrics such as empowering women, democratic decision‐making and reduction of child labor, suggesting that farmers are most satisfied with Fairtrade as a social justice mechanism. Fairtrade producers report high importance but lower performance of Fairtrade as a market mechanism and least satisfaction as a sustainable agriculture mechanism. We explore the drivers and implications of these findings for Fairtrade and provide recommendations to increase producer satisfaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]