[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tse/wpaper/31158.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Context-based Procedure for Assessing Participatory Schemes in Environmental Planning

Author

Listed:
  • Berthomé, Guy-El-Karim
  • Thomas, Alban
Abstract
The efficiency of participatory schemes in environmental planning is an emerging research area, and many issues are not solved yet regarding the assessment of such procedures. It is essential for decision makers to identify improvement opportunities of participatory schemes. We propose an original procedure to address such issue, through a bargaining model from the signaling game literature, which accounts for participation design as well as for agents' preferences, beliefs and bargaining power. The model is calibrated using qualitative data from surveys in French local communities involved in municipal solid waste management. Model simulations are used to test for assumptions on the stakeholder dialogue and explore sensitivity of game outcomes to structural parameters. We propose a set of performance indicators to identify the most effective participatory schemes in achieving convergence in stakeholder positions regarding environmental and land-use planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Berthomé, Guy-El-Karim & Thomas, Alban, 2016. "A Context-based Procedure for Assessing Participatory Schemes in Environmental Planning," TSE Working Papers 16-729, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    • Handle: RePEc:tse:wpaper:31158
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.tse-fr.eu/sites/default/files/TSE/documents/doc/wp/2016/wp_tse_729.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Goltsman, Maria & Pavlov, Gregory, 2011. "How to talk to multiple audiences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 100-122, May.
    2. Lynn A. Maguire & E. Allan Lind, 2003. "Public participation in environmental decisions: stakeholders, authorities and procedural justice," International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(2), pages 133-148.
    3. Skurray, James H., 2015. "The scope for collective action in a large groundwater basin: An institutional analysis of aquifer governance in Western Australia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 128-140.
    4. Vijay Krishna & John Morgan, 2001. "A Model of Expertise," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(2), pages 747-775.
    5. Eli Feinerman & Israel Finkelshtain & Iddo Kan, 2004. "On A Political Solution to the NIMBY Conflict," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(1), pages 369-381, March.
    6. Lejano, Raul P. & Davos, Climis A., 2002. "Fair Share: Siting Noxious Facilities as a Risk Distribution Game under Nontransferable Utility," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 251-266, March.
    7. Kay Mitusch & Roland Strausz, 2005. "Mediation in Situations of Conflict and Limited Commitment," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 467-500, October.
    8. Simin Davoudi & Neil Evans, 2005. "The Challenge of Governance in Regional Waste Planning," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 23(4), pages 493-517, August.
    9. Stephen K. Swallow & James J. Opaluch & Thomas F. Weaver, 1992. "Siting Noxious Facilities: An Approach That Integrates Technical, Economic, and Political Considerations," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(3), pages 283-301.
    10. Prapatpaow Awakul & Stephen Ogunlana, 2002. "The effect of attitudinal differences on interface conflicts in large scale construction projects: a case study," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(4), pages 365-377.
    11. Joseph Farrell & Matthew Rabin, 1996. "Cheap Talk," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(3), pages 103-118, Summer.
    12. Wagner, Jeffrey, 2011. "Incentivizing sustainable waste management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 585-594, February.
    13. Nicklin, Jessica M. & Greenbaum, Rebecca & McNall, Laurel A. & Folger, Robert & Williams, Kevin J., 2011. "The importance of contextual variables when judging fairness: An examination of counterfactual thoughts and fairness theory," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 114(2), pages 127-141, March.
    14. Ricardo Alonso & Wouter Dessein & Niko Matouschek, 2008. "When Does Coordination Require Centralization?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 145-179, March.
    15. Ananda, Jayanath & Herath, Gamini, 2008. "Multi-attribute preference modelling and regional land-use planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 325-335, April.
    16. Simon French & Clare Bayley, 2011. "Public participation: comparing approaches," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 241-257, February.
    17. Strager, Michael P. & Rosenberger, Randall S., 2006. "Incorporating stakeholder preferences for land conservation: Weights and measures in spatial MCA," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 627-639, June.
    18. van Rensburg, Thomas M. & Kelley, Hugh & Jeserich, Nadine, 2015. "What influences the probability of wind farm planning approval: Evidence from Ireland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 12-22.
    19. Michel Callon, 2010. "Performativity, Misfires And Politics," Journal of Cultural Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 163-169, July.
    20. Strager, Michael P. & Rosenberger, Randall S., 2006. "Incorporating stakeholder preferences for land conservation: Weights and measures in spatial MCA," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 79-92, June.
    21. Judith Petts, 2004. "Barriers to participation and deliberation in risk decisions: evidence from waste management," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 115-133, March.
    22. Rudy Santore, 2014. "Noxious Facilities, Environmental Damages, and Efficient Randomized Siting," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 57(1), pages 101-116, January.
    23. Ananda, Jayanath & Proctor, Wendy, 2013. "Collaborative approaches to water management and planning: An institutional perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 97-106.
    24. Suzuki, Yukari & Iwasa, Yoh, 2009. "Conflict between groups of players in coupled socio-economic and ecological dynamics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 1106-1115, February.
    25. Sang-Chul Suh & Quan Wen, 2009. "A multi-agent bilateral bargaining model with endogenous protocol," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 40(2), pages 203-226, August.
    26. Torsten Reimer & Ulrich Hoffrage, 2006. "The Ecological Rationality of Simple Group Heuristics: Effects of Group Member Strategies on Decision Accuracy," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 60(4), pages 403-438, June.
    27. Ricardo Alonso & Wouter Dessein & Niko Matouschek, 2008. "When Does Coordination Require Centralization? Corrigendum," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(3), pages 1195-1196, June.
    28. William D. Leach & Neil W. Pelkey & Paul A. Sabatier, 2002. "Stakeholder partnerships as collaborative policymaking: Evaluation criteria applied to watershed management in California and Washington," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(4), pages 645-670.
    29. Kent Messer & Jordan Suter & Jubo Yan, 2013. "Context Effects in a Negatively Framed Social Dilemma Experiment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 55(3), pages 387-405, July.
    30. Garmendia, Eneko & Stagl, Sigrid, 2010. "Public participation for sustainability and social learning: Concepts and lessons from three case studies in Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1712-1722, June.
    31. AvcI, Duygu & Adaman, Fikret & Özkaynak, Begüm, 2010. "Valuation languages in environmental conflicts: How stakeholders oppose or support gold mining at Mount Ida, Turkey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 228-238, December.
    32. Calcott, Paul & Hutton, Stephen, 2006. "The choice of a liability regime when there is a regulatory gatekeeper," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 153-164, March.
    33. Heli Saarikoski, 2006. "When Frames Conflict: Policy Dialogue on Waste," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 24(4), pages 615-630, August.
    34. Thomas C. Beierle, 1999. "Using Social Goals To Evaluate Public Participation In Environmental Decisions," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 16(3‐4), pages 75-103, September.
    35. Ching-Pin Chiu & Shih-Kung Lai, 2009. "An Experimental Comparison of Negotiation Strategies for Siting NIMBY Facilities," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 36(6), pages 956-967, December.
    36. Laura Wolf-Powers, 2010. "Community Benefits Agreements and Local Government," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 76(2), pages 141-159, April.
    37. Crawford, Vincent P & Sobel, Joel, 1982. "Strategic Information Transmission," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(6), pages 1431-1451, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ali Nasiri Khiavi & Mehdi Vafakhah & Seyed Hamidreza Sadeghi, 2022. "Comparative prioritization of sub-watersheds based on Flood Generation potential using physical, hydrological and co-managerial approaches," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 36(6), pages 1897-1917, April.
    2. Adhami, Maryam & Sadeghi, Seyed Hamidreza & Sheikhmohammady, Majid, 2018. "Making competent land use policy using a co-management framework," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 171-180.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. McGee, Andrew & Yang, Huanxing, 2013. "Cheap talk with two senders and complementary information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 181-191.
    2. Dmitry Sedov, 2023. "Almost-truthful interim-biased mediation enables information exchange between agents with misaligned interests," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 27(3), pages 505-546, September.
    3. Rantakari, Heikki, 2014. "A simple model of project selection with strategic communication and uncertain motives," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 14-42.
    4. Koessler, Frédéric & Martimort, David, 2012. "Optimal delegation with multi-dimensional decisions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(5), pages 1850-1881.
    5. Persson, Petra, 2018. "Attention manipulation and information overload," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 78-106, May.
    6. Kawamura, Kohei, 2008. "Communication for Public Goods," SIRE Discussion Papers 2008-25, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    7. Hagenbach, Jeanne & Koessler, Frédéric, 2016. "Full disclosure in decentralized organizations," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 5-7.
    8. Li, Zhuozheng & Rantakari, Heikki & Yang, Huanxing, 2016. "Competitive cheap talk," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 65-89.
    9. Kovác, Eugen & Mylovanov, Tymofiy, 2009. "Stochastic mechanisms in settings without monetary transfers: The regular case," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(4), pages 1373-1395, July.
    10. Migrow, Dimitri, 2021. "Designing communication hierarchies," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    11. Wang, Yun, 2013. "The result of world powers in WTO: A cheap-talk game under different communication protocols," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 192-207.
    12. Venkatesh, Raghul S, 2017. "Cheap Talk with Strategic Substitutability," CRETA Online Discussion Paper Series 31, Centre for Research in Economic Theory and its Applications CRETA.
    13. Daniel Habermacher, 2022. "Authority and Specialization under Informational Interdependence," Working Papers 142, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    14. Zhuozheng Li & Huanxing Yang & Lan Zhang, 2019. "Pre-communication in a coordination game with incomplete information," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 48(1), pages 109-141, March.
    15. Kohei Kawamura, 2007. "Constrained Communication with Multiple Agents: Anonymity, Equal Treatment, and Public Good Provision," Edinburgh School of Economics Discussion Paper Series 166, Edinburgh School of Economics, University of Edinburgh.
    16. de Castro, Mónica & Urios, Vicente, 2017. "A critical review of multi-criteria decision making in protected areas," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 16(02), January.
    17. Irene Valsecchi, 2013. "The expert problem: a survey," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 303-331, November.
    18. Luca Anderlini & Dino Gerardi & Roger Lagunoff, 2012. "Communication and Learning," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 79(2), pages 419-450.
    19. Golosov, Mikhail & Skreta, Vasiliki & Tsyvinski, Aleh & Wilson, Andrea, 2014. "Dynamic strategic information transmission," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 304-341.
    20. Andreas Blume & April Mitchell Franco & Paul Heidhues, 2021. "Dynamic coordination via organizational routines," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 72(4), pages 1001-1047, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Cheap talk; Facility sitting; Public participation; Collaborative negotiation; Waste management; Nimby; Simulation model;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • C51 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Construction and Estimation
    • R53 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Public Facility Location Analysis; Public Investment and Capital Stock
    • D74 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Conflict; Conflict Resolution; Alliances; Revolutions
    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling
    • H44 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Publicly Provided Goods: Mixed Markets

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tse:wpaper:31158. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tsetofr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.