Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39294721›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental evidence2023

Existing evidence on the use of participatory scenarios in ecological restoration: a systematic map.

Eleanor Durrant, Pete Howson, Bekah Puttick, Samantha Potts, Yara Shennan-Farpón, Novieta Sari, Nicholas Allen, Jo Yeongeun, Matthew Grainger, Yit Arn Teh and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental evidence, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Eleanor DurrantSchool of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK. e.s.durrant@newcastle.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3396-6912
Pete HowsonDepartment of Geography and Environmental Sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.
Bekah PuttickSchool of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.
Samantha PottsSchool of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.
Yara Shennan-FarpónDepartment of Anthropology, University College London, 14 Taviton St, London, WC1H 0BW, UK.
Novieta SariSchool of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.
Nicholas AllenSchool of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.
Jo YeongeunSchool of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.
Matthew GraingerNorwegian Institute for Nature Research, Torgarden, Postbox 5685, 7485, Trondheim, Norway.
Yit Arn TehSchool of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.
Marion PfeiferSchool of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.

Funding

HORIZON EUROPE Innovative Europe 101017857Natural Environment Research Council NE/S007512/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and contextThe scale of land degradation worldwide has led to nearly one billion hectares committed to restoration globally. However, achieving such restoration targets will necessitate complex trade-offs against limited time, competing knowledge, costs, resources and varying stakeholder and societal preferences. Participatory scenarios allow a way to identify collaborative solutions for restoration planning and implementation best suited for the local cultures and societies they are tied to. They can be used to navigate uncertainties surrounding future trajectories of restored areas by evaluating trade-offs in outcomes. This research aims to systematically map the evidence on the use of participatory scenarios in restoration planning. We use the following research question: What evidence exists on the use of participatory scenarios in ecological restoration? This is answered by examining the characteristics of the evidence base, types of study design, types of outcomes, trade-offs in outcomes, and the role of participants.

methodsA comprehensive and reproducible search strategy was followed using bibliographic databases, web-based searches, and targeted searching. Search results underwent a two-step screening process according to eligibility criteria. Metadata on key areas of interest were extracted from included texts and were narratively synthesised alongside data visualisations to answer the research questions. REVIEW

findings18,612 records were initially identified, and 106 articles were included in the final map. Most studies were conducted in Europe and North America, focusing on restoring agricultural land or forests. Most texts used mixed methods and explored multiple outcome types, but environmental outcomes were the most assessed. Within environmental outcomes, indicators for ecological function were assessed more frequently than structural or compositional indicators. The most common reason for choosing outcomes and indicators was stakeholder interest. Trade-offs in social, ecological, and economic outcomes were mainly examined across space using mapping techniques, while far fewer studies looked at trade-offs across stakeholders and time. Participants were mostly included in the scenario creation step and were usually chosen purposefully by the research team.

conclusionsIt is difficult to understand how useful scenarios are for restoration planning because few texts reported how scenarios fed into the process. Despite this, the range of outcomes used and different method types adopted suggests participatory scenarios allow for integrating different knowledge and approaches, alongside facilitating the use of qualitative or semi-quantitative data when this is more appropriate or quantitative data is not widely available. To better use participatory scenarios as a tool for ecological restoration planning, decision-makers can push for greater levels and definitions of participation from the offset of restoration projects with specified, regular, and structured communication and participation channels. We also recommend more systematic methods of participant selection, such as stakeholder analysis. Further research is needed to understand the effectiveness of participatory scenarios in restoration planning and whether the participation of stakeholders was successful in meeting objectives. To improve the evidence base, future studies should clearly evaluate their effectiveness in the restoration planning process and their success in meeting their participatory objectives.

Indexed as

Alternative futuresCollaborationCo-productionEvidence synthesisSocioecological systemsStakeholder engagement

Identifiers

PMID39294721
PMCPMC11378857

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.