Barriers and Lessons Learned for Collaboration in ......Barriers and Lessons Learned for...
Transcript of Barriers and Lessons Learned for Collaboration in ......Barriers and Lessons Learned for...
Barriers and Lessons Learned for Collaboration in Strategic Watershed Planning
Analysis of Multi-Stakeholders’ Experiences
Presented by: Sheikh Javed Ahmed MSc., P.EngWR-Development Engineer- City of Calgary, Alberta, Canada
PhD Student at Department of Civil Engineering, Water Resources Specialization, University of Calgary
Philadelphia, PASeptember 26, 2011
Agenda
Introduction
Why this Research?
Goals and Objectives
Research Question
Research Approach
Research Methods
Data Analysis
Results and Discussion
Recommendations and
Implications
Limitations
Future Research
1/1/2012 LID Symposium-Philadelphia, PA 2
Collaborative Strategic Watershed Planning
(Source: Barry Tonning- Tetra Tech)
Collaborative watershed
ManagementPlans
Environmentally Feasible Plans
Economically Feasible Plans
Financially Feasible
Plans
Legally Feasible Plans
Technically Feasible
Plans
Socially Feasible Plans
Politically Feasible
Plans
Institutionally Feasible Plans
1/1/2012 LID Symposium-Philadelphia, PA 4
The Three Case Studies
Multiple Level & Units of Planning
Largest Level of Planning Application
Bow Basin WSMP Largest Unit
Medium Level of Planning Application
Elbow River WMP Medium Unit
Lowest Level of Planning Application
Nose Creek WSMP Small Unit
Bow, Elbow & Nose Creek Basins Map
1/1/2012LID Symposium-Philadelphia, PA
6
Multi-Stakeholders’ Involved
1/1/2012LID Symposium-Philadelphia, PA
7
• Industries(Oil and Gas, Consultants, Hydro etc)
• Industries(Oil and Gas, Consultants, Hydro etc)
• Watershed and other Environmental Partnerships
• Watershed and other Environmental Partnerships
• Governments (Federal, Provincial & All Municipalities in Bow Basin)
• Governments (Federal, Provincial & All Municipalities in Bow Basin)
• Citizens/Tax Payers and Volunteer Groups
• Citizens/Tax Payers and Volunteer Groups
ENGOs& NGOs
Researchers, Academics
and Students
Planners, Engineers & Managers
Others
Breakdown of the Stakeholders Involved
Stakeholders InvolvedVariety and Level of Stake
1/1/2012LID Symposium-Philadelphia, PA
8
Descriptions Case Study 1 Case Study 2 Case Study 3 External Total
Total 15 15 15 25 70
Why this Research?
1/1/2012 LID Symposium-Philadhelphia 9
Multi-Stakeholders’ collaboration is criticized for generating
more frustration then results
To built effective, practical and acceptable strategic
management plans…..
Avoid the technical and social complexities involved
Knowing the rules of the game is essential to ensure
continuity and facilitate implementation….
Understanding the existing practices involving multi-
stakeholders’ in strategic watershed planning
Research Goal and Objectives
The goal of this research study is to minimize frustrations and
produce simple, practical and acceptable outcomes
1. Improve the engagement process to build trust and better
utilization of resources
2. Develop a theoretical and academic understanding of the multi-
stakeholders’ engagement process for CDM in strategic planning
by understanding the:
existing practices
need for engagement
challenges faced and lessons learned
1/1/2012LID Symposium-Philadelphia, PA
10
The Research Questions
What are the real life challenges and lessons learned for collaboration in strategic watershed planning in Bow Basin?
Understanding of the terms used in the research
Need for Engagement & CDM in SWP
Challengesin CDM
Lessons learned
1/1/2012LID Symposium-Philadelphia, PA
11
Research Approach
Formulate Ground Work
Design the Research
Research Sample-Identify
Research Participants
Conduct Delphi Round I
Pre- Test the Research
Questionnaire
Release the Results of
Delphi Round 1
Conduct Delphi Round 2
Organize the data Analyze the Data
from Round 2
Delphi Round-3
Analyze the Data for Round
3
Delphi Round-IV Compare the
Results from II and III
Experts' Panels for Final Feed-
back
Develop Research and Discussions and
Conclusions
1/1/2012LID Symposium-Philadelphia, PA
12
Mixed Method Approach
1/1/2012
LID Symposium-Philadelphia, PA
13
Researcher's experience
Literature Review
Case studies documents
Research QuestionResearch Design &
Sampling
Case study Grounded Theory
Results, discussion & conclusion
Data collection and analysis
Delphi Round 1
Delphi Round 2
Delphi Round 3
D. Round 4Comparison of
results of Round 2 & 3
Review by expert panel
Open Coding
CategoriesCore -
CategoriesSelective
CodesStory Lines
Theory
Data Analysis Model
1/1/2012 LID Symposium-Philadelphia, PA 14
Data Source
Data Management
Data Analysis
InterviewsWith internal stakeholders
•Documents•Observation•Expert Opinion
Data Entry
Manual Coding
ReadCode & memo
Sort and WriteMicro & Macro Analysis
Analyze &Interpret
ReadCollectCode
Input fromExternal
Stakeholders
Ethics, Validity and Reliability
1/1/2012LID Symposium-Philadelphia, PA
15
CFREB Approval and letter of informed Consent
Voluntary participation and option to withdraw
Anonymity and secrecy of data
Reliability means that the results from a survey are consistent ,
obtained through panel of experts and externals
Reliability means that a study will produce the same results when
the established process is repeated.
Validity is truthfulness, accuracy, authenticity and soundness
Validity is a continuous process of disciplined inquiry
Accuracy of the interpretations
Research Results
Stakeholders understanding of the process and terms: Multi-Stakeholders’ Engagement Collaborative Decision Making Strategic Planning
Need for Engagement Challenges Lessons Learned
1/1/2012 MSc Research Thesis U of C 16
Multi-Stakeholders’ Engagement
Similar to partnering
sessions
Practical and politically
correct approach
Right people in the right
time
Free and open (friendly)
environment
It is not positional, but
rather it is interest based
1/1/2012LID Symposium-Philadelphia, PA
17
Partnering
Team Approach
Challenging
Free and
Open
NegotiationOpinion
Comfortable
Informed/Made Aware
Collaborative Decision-Making
Based on common understanding
and shared learning
Seeking first to understand and
then to be understood
Not positional
Balanced inclusive & co-operative
Sharing in the decision-making
process and relinquishes some
autonomy in order to manage
conflict and achieve agreement
Work in progress until a
consensus decision is reached
1/1/2012LID Symposium-Philadelphia, PA
18
Voluntary & Involved
Expectations
Balanced &
Inclusive
Involved
Autonomy
Manage Conflict
Shared Outcomes
Strategic Planning
Considers current and anticipating
emerging issues
Provides specific direction to final
plans
Creates the big picture based on a
mosaic of smaller pictures
Looks at longer time-lines
fundamental relationships and
patterns
Provides framework, with timelines, to
achieve the stated outcomes
Brings a variety of experiences and
perspectives to the table
1/1/2012 MSc Research Thesis U of C 19
Long term Vision
Framework
Perspective
Big Picture
Broader Scale
Direction
Need for Engagement
Perspectives, opinions, mandates,
interests and the understanding of
issues
Helps guide, educate & clear any
roadblocks to the process
Helps in creating a balanced and
acceptable planning direction
Ensures support and conflict
management in the planning process
Increases support and buy-in for the
final plan
Helps to achieve long term goals of
collective action
1/1/2012 MSc Research Thesis U of C 20
Roadblocks
Guide
Educate & Inform
Perspectives
Buy-in
Top 10 Challenges
1/1/2012LID Symposium-Philadelphia, PA
21
Identifying Appropriate
Stakeholders
Educating the Stakeholders'
EnsuringAffective
Communication
Responding toIndividuals
Needs
Avoiding Duplications
Developing a Defined
Framework
Dealing with Dominating
Stakeholders
AffectiveFacilitation
ProducingSimple, Practical and Acceptable
Outcomes
CreatingRecognition
Top 10 Lessons Learned
1/1/2012LID Symposium-Philadelphia, PA
22
Duplication of efforts
It took long to build
relationships and capacity
It was hard to identify appropriate stakeholders’, clarify roles and
obtain consents
Proper framework was
required
Some stakeholders
weren’t engaged early
Communication protocol was
missing
Identifying the conflicts early
Better practices approach was
required
Keep the process simple, practical
and balanced
Sign off and follow up
Top 10 Recommendations
1/1/2012 MSc Research Thesis U of C 23
Start the Engagment
Process Early
Identify Appropriate Stakeholders and Better Management Prcatices
Develop a Process
Framework
BalanceConflicting Needs from
the Start
Reach Influential Stakeholders to gain
their Support
Develop Clear Communication
Protocol
Define Schedule Don't Strech out the Engagement Process
Park Topics that can not be Rectified
Make Precess Outcomes Available
in Simple Way
Make Plans Consitant Celebrate
Sucess
Recommended Framework for Engagement
Step 1 Identify and Educate
Stakeholders' and Asses the Problem
Step 2 Validate the Purpose &
Concerns
Step 3 Confirm Stakeholders’
Roles and Collect Information
Step 4Develop Communication
& Engagement Framework
Step 5 Develop the Plan,
Confirm, and Seek Support and Feedback
Step 6 Verify and Accept the
Plan as Decision Support Tool
Step 7Develop Implementation
Plan
Step 8 Demonstrate, Monitor, Evaluate and Improve
1/1/2012 MSc Research Thesis U of C 24
Implications of the Research
1/1/2012 MSc Research Thesis U of C 25
1. Enhance the theoretical and academic understanding
2. Provide opportunities to educate the relevant stakeholders
3. Help in managing the conflicts through shared knowledge,
seeking timely political, economical, social and technical
support
4. Achieve the long-term goal of collective action
5. Improve ownership, buy-in and acceptance of the planning
decisions
6. Have a direct positive impact on future strategic planning
initiatives and their implementation
7. Findings of this research could be used as guidelines (decision-
support tools)
Limitations
1/1/2012LID Symposium-Philadelphia, PA
26
1. Finding stakeholders willing to participate in strategic
planning
2. Level of understanding of the issue by the stakeholders
3. Participants have a variety of interests
4. The three case studies vary in size, level of application, the
nature and variety of stakeholders involved in the research
5. Identifying the right stakeholders to be involved at the
right time
6. Limited number of case studies and the participants
Recommendations' for Future Research
1. Enhance the process framework by its practical application
2. Developing better practices approach
3. Explore the barriers in implementation of watershed
planning recommendations
4. Assess the organizational structure of the three case
studies in question, their mechanics, cost (volunteer hours,
consulting costs, etc), their strengths and weaknesses
1/1/2012 MSc Research Thesis U of C 27