Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36939890›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental management2024

The Role of Multistakeholder Platforms in Environmental Governance: Analyzing Stakeholder Perceptions in Kalomo District, Zambia, Using Q-Method.

Freddie S Siangulube

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental management, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Freddie S SiangulubeAmsterdam Institute for Social Science Research (AISSR), University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 166, 1018 VW, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. f.s.siangulube@uva.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multistakeholder platforms (MSPs) are increasingly applied in environmental governance as institutions to collectively negotiate challenges, opportunities, and policy options in contested landscapes. However, their contributions and effectiveness depend on how stakeholders perceive and frame the role of MSPs in addressing social and environmental challenges. Despite this dependence, stakeholder perceptions of MSPs are currently under-researched. Hence this empirical study carried out in Zambia's Kalomo District asks: how do stakeholder groups perceive the role of MSPs in addressing landscape challenges, given the context of the dual land tenure system, and what does this imply for the implementation of integrated landscape approaches? This study uses Q-methodology to analyze the perceptions of purposefully selected stakeholders from state institutions, civil society organizations, land users, and others familiar with existing MSPs at the district and village levels. The findings reveal three narratives. The first one presents MSPs as institutions that foster dialogue. The second narrative foregrounds the role of the government and private sector, despite acknowledging the diversity of stakeholders in MSPs. In this narrative, MSPs should focus on supporting market-driven solutions to resolve landscape challenges. The third narrative recognizes power imbalances and considers MSPs as institutions to identify policy gaps and needs. The first two narratives are positioned in Dryzek's discourse classification as environmental problem-solving, while the third inclines toward green radicalism. Despite this divergence, there was consensus that MSPs have the potential to harmonize policies in a dual governance system and encourage dialogue between stakeholders to reconcile landscape challenges.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesEnvironmental PolicyGovernmentHumansStakeholder ParticipationZambiaDiscoursesKalomo DistrictLandscape challengesMultistakeholder platformsNarrativesQ-methodStakeholder perspectivesZambia

Identifiers

PMID36939890
PMCPMC11208185

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.