ArticleEnvironmental management2018
Perceptions of Government and Research Expert Groups and Their Implications for Watershed Management in Oklahoma, USA.
Article in Environmental management, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The collaborative approach for sustainable management of watersheds is built on engagement of diverse stakeholders. Climate variability and anthropogenic activities increasingly impose challenges to successful management, as do contrasts in stakeholder perceptions about those processes. To assess differences in perceptions about watershed issues, we conducted a focus group meeting of expert stakeholder groups from research institutions, and state and federal agencies in the management of Cimarron River Watershed, Oklahoma. We employed the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOTs) approach to identify important issues, and the analytic hierarchy process to rank the perceptions of these groups. We found incongruity between these two groups over internal factors (SW) and external factors (OT) risking sustainable watershed management. External threats such as climate change dominated the research group perceptions, whereas internally prevalent weaknesses such as inability to track water use and lack of a common platform to share scientific data, dominated the government group perceptions. Despite these differences, both groups identified the negative aspect (W + T) as dominant over the positive aspect (S + O), which suggests a pessimistic watershed management future, with risks prevailing over the opportunities. We see this particular congruity of these two stakeholders as an opportunity to initiate a collaborative approach to watershed management in Oklahoma. We also note that the most important factor from each group corresponds to a relatively modest importance from the other group, and therefore suggests the possibility of cooperation rather than conflict in management goals should collaborative watershed management become established in the watershed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30242528What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.