Abstract

As interest grows in supporting multi-stakeholder forums (MSFs) to address land-use and climate change, it is important to understand how these processes operate from the perspectives of their participants. The academic literature on their equity largely presents a dichotomy: participatory processes either allow for horizontal decision-making with more equitable and effective outcomes for local populations, or they mask technologies of governance that do not address – and may reinforce – structures of inequality. These two perspectives downplay the different, complex and sometimes nuanced perceptions and experiences of participation. In order to better understand these nuances, the authors applied Q-methodology to analyse and compare the perceptions of MSF participants and organisers in four forums in the Peruvian Amazon. The research finds that participants are often optimistic about the forums, but at the same time they are aware of risks; and that groups falling into both camps may be just as likely to fail to address inequality among participants but for different reasons. The results help identify points of convergence and divergence, and potential ways forward to help construct more equitable and effective MSFs.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.