Improved cookstoves aimed at reducing exposure to indoor air pollution have had a lasting presence in development and health discussions. Through this article we contribute to current debates in the field by reflecting on our experiences during a cookstove participatory project in two ‘non-notified’ communities, or ‘slums,’ in Bangalore, India. We interrogate the alignment between some of the central tenets and methods of participation and the lived experiences of participating communities. The current predominant recommendations focus on developing and implementing cookstoves tailored for user needs. Yet, the project implementation entered a space of uncertainty where the priorities and needs of participants were diverse and changing. While urban infrastructures related to housing and work security, drainage systems, access to health care, and aspects of governance, citizenship and rights, may seem to fall outside the scope of ICS projects, our experiences show how inescapably they shape participatory processes and technologies. We highlight the need to take a closer look at how we can include these broader and changing priorities and needs in our methodologies and reflect on how we can better respond and align them with the ways in which people live.
MULTIFILE
The European Union Water Framework Directive (WFD) encourages water managers to implement active stakeholder involvement to achieve sustainable water management. However, the WFD does not describe in detail how member states should operationalize participation. The need for local experience and local understanding of collaborative governance (co-governance) processes remains. The WaterCoG project evaluated 11 local pilot schemes. Building on the participatory, qualitative evaluation of pilot schemes from Sweden, United Kingdom, Denmark, The Netherlands, and Germany, the authors take a closer look at how co-governance can improve water governance, how water managers can make best use of tools and knowledge, and how they can improve process designs. The results reflect how social learning and successful co-governance are linked. Social learning as a shared understanding of complex ecosystem and water-management issues can be supported with active stakeholder involvement and citizen science. As such, in co-governance processes, stakeholders need technical access to data and knowledge and a shared process memory. This enables them to develop a shared understanding and facilitates bringing together competing interests and finding new solutions. Participatory tools became part of successful processes by building trust and knowledge based on commitment. However, proficient process design and facilitation make these tools more effective.
DOCUMENT
For environmental governance to be more effective and transformative, it needs to enhance the presence of experimental and innovative approaches for participation. This enhancement requires a transformation of environmental governance, as too often the (public) participation process is set up as a formal obligation in the development of a proposed intervention. This article, in search of alternatives, and in support of this transformation elaborates on spaces where participatory and deliberative governance processes have been deployed. Experiences with two mediated participation methodologies – community art and visual problem appraisal – allow a demonstration of their potential, relevance and attractiveness. Additionally, the article analyzes the challenges that result from the nature of these arts-based methodologies, from the confrontational aspects of voices overlooked in conventional approaches, and from the need to rethink professionals’ competences. Considering current environmental urgencies, mediated participation and social imaginaries still demonstrate capacities to open new avenues for action and reflection.
MULTIFILE
In order to achieve much-needed transitions in energy and health, systemic changes are required that are firmly based on the principles of regard for others and community values, while at the same time operating in market conditions. Social entrepreneurship and community entrepreneurship (SCE) hold the promise to catalyze such transitions, as they combine bottom-up social initiatives with a focus on financially viable business models. SCE requires a facilitating ecosystem in order to be able to fully realize its potential. As yet it is unclear in which way the entrepreneurial ecosystem for social and community entrepreneurship facilitates or hinders the flourishing and scaling of such entrepreneurship. It is also unclear how exactly entrepreneurs and stakeholders influence their ecosystem to become more facilitative. This research programme addresses these questions. Conceptually it integrates entrepreneurial ecosystem frameworks with upcoming theories on civic wealth creation, collaborative governance, participative learning and collective action frameworks.This multidisciplinary research project capitalizes on a unique consortium: the Dutch City Deal ‘Impact Ondernemen’. In this collaborative research, we enhance and expand current data collection efforts and adopt a living-lab setting centered on nine local and regional cases for collaborative learning through experimenting with innovative financial and business models. We develop meaningful, participatory design and evaluation methods and state-of-the-art digital tools to increase the effectiveness of impact measurement and management. Educational modules for professionals are developed to boost the abovementioned transition. The project’s learnings on mechanisms and processes can easily be adapted and translated to a broad range of impact areas.
The HAS professorship Future Food Systems is performing applied research with students and external partners to transform our food system towards a more sustainable state. In this research it is not only a question of what is needed to achieve this, but also how and with whom. The governance of our food system needs rethinking to get the transformative momentum going in a democratic and constructive manner. Building on the professorship’s research agenda and involvement in the transdisciplinary NWA research project, the postdoc will explore collective ownership and inclusive participation as two key governance concepts for food system transformation. This will be done in a participatory manner, by learning from and with innovative bottom-up initiatives and practitioners from the field. By doing so, the postdoc will gain valuable practical insights that can aid to new approaches and (policy) interventions which foster a sustainable and just food system in the Netherlands and beyond. A strong connection between research and education is created via the active research involvement of students from different study programs, supervised by the postdoc (Dr. B. van Helvoirt). The acquired knowledge is embedded in education by the postdoc by incorporating it into HAS study program curricula and courses. In addition, it will contribute to the further professional development of qualitative research skills among HAS students and staff. Through scientific, policy and popular publications, participation in (inter)national conferences and meetings with experts and practitioners, the exposure and network of the postdoc and HAS in the field of food systems and governance will be expanded. This will allow for the setting up of a continuous research effort on this topic within the professorship via follow-up research with knowledge institutes, civic society groups and partners from the professional field.
Climate change adaptation has influenced river management through an anticipatory governance paradigm. As such, futures and the power of knowing the future has become increasingly influential in water management. Yet, multiple future imaginaries co-exist, where some are more dominant that others. In this PhD research, I focus on deconstructing the future making process in climate change adaptation by asking ‘What river imaginaries exist and what future imaginaries dominate climate change adaptation in riverine infrastructure projects of the Meuse and Magdalena river?’. I firstly explore existing river imaginaries in a case study of the river Meuse. Secondly, I explore imaginaries as materialised in numerical models for the Meuse and Magdalena river. Thirdly, I explore the integration and negotiation of imaginaries in participatory modelling practices in the Magdalena river. Fourthly, I explore contesting and alternative imaginaries and look at how these are mobilised in climate change adaptation for the Magdalena and Meuse river. Multiple concepts stemming from Science and Technology Studies and Political Ecology will guide me to theorise the case study findings. Finally, I reflect on my own positionality in action-research which will be an iterative process of learning and unlearning while navigating between the natural and social sciences.
