Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
The importance of stakeholder analysis in ensuring comprehensive identification of stakeholder groups during governmental decision-making processes. It highlights the benefits of using tested social science techniques to identify impacts and stakeholder groups, collect data, and assess impacts. The document also emphasizes the significance of engaging with powerful and seemingly powerless stakeholder groups to mitigate adverse impacts and increase the likelihood of efficient and effective implementation.
Typology: Study Guides, Projects, Research
1 / 104
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Stakeholder A sis Methodologies
Resource Book
I
3abiuch and Barbara C. Farha
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617 Cole Boulevard Golden, Colorado 80401 -
Operated by Midwest Research Tnstitute
NREL/TP-461-5857 UC Category 233 DE
Methodologies
William M. Babiuch and Barbara C. Farhar
A national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy
Preface
stakeholder analysis process. It also examines such methodological issues as sampling and generaLizing findings.
The project benefited from the oversight and guidance of an advisory group of DOE offidals, national laboratory scientists, and academic participants. Members of the advisory group were:
Fred Abel, Office of Planning and Assessment, DOE Jerry Dion, Office of Planning and Assessment, DOE
Joe Galdo, Office of Utility Technologies, DOE Dan Packey, NREL David Rodgers, Office of Transportation Technologies, DOE
Other NREL staff supporting the project included Becky BaIdwin, Mary Anne Dunlap, Rod Franklin, Fran Hodson, Lisa She-, Kay Vernon, and Joe Woodburn.
William M. Babiuch Programmatic Studies Office
BarbaraT. Farhar, Programmatic Studies Office
Approved for the NATIONAL RENEWmLE ENERGY LABORATORY
Thomas D. Bath, Director Analytic Studies Division
Eldon Boes, Office Manager Programmatic Studies Office
iii
Executive Summary
Stakeholder analysis is a process that allows analysts to identify how parties are likely to be affected by
the likely impacts of a proposed action and the affected stakeholder groups. In addition, analysts assess how the stakeholder groups are likely to be affected by a proposed action and suggest measures to mitigate any adverse impacts.
Evidence suggests that the efficiency and effectiveness of government actions can be increased and adverse social impacts mitigated when officials understand how^ stakeholder groups are likely to be affected^ by^ a proposed action. A small investment of time and money in a stakeholder analysis in the early stages of a decision-making process is likely to reduce the probability that program managers will confi-ont unexpected long-term investment demands because the proposed action has been obstructed by negatively affected stakeholder groups.
An ideal decision process on a proposed action combines both analytical and stakeholder involvement processes. The first phase is strictly analytical, relying on an expert-based stakeholder analysis. The
representatives. In the third phase, stakeholder groups themselves hold center stage and analysts assist in synthesizing inputs. Decision makers weigh and evaluate the information and arrive at a decision in the fourth phase. In later phases, the decision is implemented and evaluated. Stakeholder analysis in each
c
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and its Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EE) have endorsed the stakeholder analysis concept in strategic plans, policy statements, mission statements, and recommendation papers. Their calls for greater stakeholder involvement imply a need for increased stakeholder analysis because, ideally, analysis should precede and accompany involvement. The quality
identification of stakeholder groups. Stakeholder analysis methodologies provide the means to ensure that
Recent EE projects illustrate that stakeholder analysis is gaining greater acceptance. Much of the analysis, however, continues to be performed on an ad hoc basis. Although this type of analysis provides useful information for EE officials, efforts should also be made to conduct systematic stakeholder analyses that use tested social science techniques to identify impacts and stakeholder groups, collect data, and assess impacts. A systematic approach increases the reliability of the data accumulated in stakeholder processes, thereby ensuring that program managers have access to credible information about the likely impacts of
Several methodological issues that may affect the validity and reliability of^ findings ftom any stakeholder analyses are discussed. These include sampling, generalizability, validity, "uncooperative" stakeholder
Committee Act (FACA)^ and Office of Management and Budget^ (OMB)^ clearance of forms.^ Finally, resource directories and specialists in stakeholder analysis and involvement are listed.
iV
Contents (Continued)
Page
6. Methodological Issues................................................ 51
General Consideration of the Analysis Design ............................... 51 Effect of Government Clearance Requirements
Effect of Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) on
onthe AnalysisDesign.............................................. 51
Advisory Committees............................................... 54 Importance of Social Indicators in Stakeholder Analysis ........................ 55
Importance of Obtaining Reliable Findings ................................. Accurately Generalizing the Findings ..................................... Dealing with "Uncooperative" Stakeholder Groups ............................
Importance of Relating Measurement Indicators to the Concept BeingMeasured................................................... 56 58 59 59
Bibliography........................................................... 61
Acronyms.......................................................... 68
Glossary .......................................................... 69
AppendixA.......................................................... A-
AppendixB.......................................................... B-
AppendixC.......................................................... C-
vi
List of Figures
proposed action................................................... 5
2 Decision maker. stakeholder. md analyst involvement in decision processes.................................................. 6
3 Interrelationships of impacts. (Example: Potential Btu tax) ..................... 25
4 Public participation techniques.......................................... 50
List of Tables
Page
l a Stakeholder Identification Matrix. Version 1................................ 30
lb Stakeholder Identification Matrix. Version 2 ................................ 33
2 Probability and Nonprobability Sampling.................................. 41
3 Social Science Data Collection Techniques................................. 45
4 FACA Chartered DOE Advisory Groups (1993) ............................. 56
5 Social Well-Being Indicators at the Community Level of Analysis................. 57
vii
technologies and their commercialization. It presents information on stakeholder analysis methods to provide a resource for federal government managers and the analysts supporting them.
Analysts should use information presented in the Resource Book as a menu from which to select various approaches-not a recipe for conducting stakeholder analyses. A menu presents a list of options that may
list of ingredients, each of which must be included for a particular outcome to OCCLU, When making selections from the menu, analysts should be sure to focus on specific needs of the project.
What Is an Impact?
that will be caused by a proposed action. They can occur over space and time. Stakeholder groups may either be directly affected by the proposed action (i.e., first-order impacts), or affected by secondary impacts resulting fiom the action (second- or higher-order impacts) (see Chapter 3 for more details). For example, the government may propose that new electric utility plants only use natural gas for fuel.
choice for new plants would be severely constrained. Coal miners, however, are also likely to be affected if the demand for coal decreases in the years ahead because of the proposal leading to the second-order impact of layoffs in the coal mining industry.
Impacts affect stakeholder groups. Stakeholder groups are parties affected by, or perceiving themselves to be affected by, a proposed govemmentd action.2 Proposed governmental actions include (1) policy initiatives, (2) facility siting projects, (3) R&D programs, (4) information programs, (5) incentive programs, ( 6 ) regulation, (7) grants, and (8) joint ventures with industry to develop energy-related technologies.
The term "parties" includes organizations, groups, and aggregates of individuals. The parties may be
affected by the proposed actions, and (2) groups that objective analyses show, or experts claim, are not affected by the proposed actions, but believe they are.
In the first instance, analyses show-and experts agree-that a particular stakeholder group is affected by a proposed action. For example, if the federd government implemented a Btu tax on energy suppliers,
Analysts conducting a stakeholder analysis on such a proposal would classify oil-dependent industries as stakeholders, and representatives of these industries would, no doubt, take the position that their firms would be affected.
2Appendix A^ presents^^16 definitions^ of^ the term "stakeholder"^ as^ found in^ the^ literature.^ These definitions overlap considerably.
In the second instance, experts conclude that a particular stakeholder group is not going to be affected by the impacts of^ the proposed action. Members of the stakeholder group still maintain, however, that they will be affected by the action. Even when there is an absence of objective information to support a stakeholder group’s claim, a group may insist that it is an affected party. For example, if the federal
conceivably object because they believe it will adversely affect their health or property ~ a l u e s. ~Even
health effects, the group of citizens could continue to maintain that it will harm them. (^) These citizens comprise a stakeholder group. Conversely, a group of citizens could object to the nuclear waste depository because they believe it would adversely affect their property values. Scientific evidence ftom a number of studies supports this belief. These citizens would thus also comprise a stakeholder group.
The Stakeholder Analysis Process
affected by proposed government actions. It relies upon valid scientific techniques to identify likely impacts of the action, identify relevant stakeholder groups, and gather data about how these groups are likely to be affected. Analysts supply this information to decision makers and stakeholder groups to assist
increasing the likelihood that the actions will be implemented efficiently and effectively.
forward with the action, they enter a period of analysis combined with stakeholder and public involvement to obtain feedback and share information among affected groups on expected impacts and stakeholder attitudes. Analysts continue to assist decision makers by categorizing, classifying and interpreting information. Finally, officials make a decision on the proposal, which is then either implemented or canceled.
Stakeholder groups often contribute to the formulation of the initial idea for a proposed action.
shows that the earlier stakeholders are involved in decision processes, the greater their satisfaction with the decision outcome (e.g., Peelle and Reed 1992).
overseeing the stakeholder analysis process and are knowledgeable about relevant methodologies. Experts are individuals knowledgeable about the proposed action. They may range fi-om government officials to college professors to officials in private or nonprofit organizations. Program managers, also knowledge- able about the proposed action, are the government officials responsible for making programmatic
The Decision Process on Proposed Actions
assistance of stakeholders, they should ideally go through a process that takes into account the advantages
3This is a hypothetical example and any similarity to an actual siting is purely coincidental.
3
3. Public Participation in Environmental Restoration Activities
In November 1991, DOE published a guidance document to assist ofXcials in conducting effective public participation activities for environmental restoration activities under various legislative mandates? Throughout much of its history, DOE was reluctant to encourage stakeholder involvement in its activities
materials for weapons. The end of the Cold War, however, marked the beginning of a new culture at DOE. The guide states that the
principles that embody this new culture include seeking out constructive criticism, being
identified and resolved cooperatively.... This commitment includes listening to DOE’s
decision-making process. (DOE 1992, p. 2.1)
In the context of DOk’s evolving organizational culture, stakeholder involvement is becoming a key
process by which the views of the parties interested in DOE decisions (Le., interested and affected individuals, organizations, state and local governments, Indian tribes, and other federal agencies) are integrated into DOE’s decision-making process” (DOE 1991, p. 2.2). The guide’s support for stakeholder involvement implies support for stakeholder analysis because the involvement process cannot begin until decision makers and analysts have identified the range of stakeholders affected by proposed actions. A systematic effort to identify stakeholdershelps ensure that the analysts identify all affected parties, thereby decreasing the likelihood that relevant stakeholders are accidently excluded fiom the involvement process.
4. Evaluating the Effecijveness of Public Meeiings/Workshops
In August 1992, DOE published an evaluation of the effectiveness of the DOE Office of Environmentiil Restoration and Waste Management Stakeholder involvement activities. The evaluation lists three goals
should
Obtain public input on the issue
Create an atmosphere to build public trust and confidence by providing a visible, equitable, and legitimate process for decision-making (Young et al. 1992, p. 4).
Contained within DOE’s criteria for an effective stakeholder involvement program is a key element of stakeholder analysis--obtaining input so stakeholder interests can be identified and understood by DOE
a key element of the canvassing-stakeholders phase of analysis (i.e., obtaining input from the affected stakeholder groups).
’The legislative mandates are the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
of 1986 (SAIRA); the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), as amended by the Hazardous Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA); and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA).
8
5. Draft Final Report of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (SEAB) Task Force on
Management released a draft report on public trust and confidence. The task force6 organized an extensive research effort using workshops, focus groups, site visits, and surveys to collect the data for their analysis. They concluded: "DOE stands little chance of strengthening public trust and confidence unless it recognizes that its decision-making behavior will have to fundamentally change" (DOE 1992b, p. 25). Among the specific measures and policies recommended to increase public trust and confidence are the following:
Ensure that the programs speak consistently to stakeholders Improve the quality of interaction with all public stakeholders (italics added)
concerns is a position supporting the basic element of stakeholder analysis-that all relevant stakeholder groups be identified.
6. A New Voice: Strengthening StatdFederal Energy Actions, Communications, and
In December 1992, the State Energy Advisory Board (STEAB) released an inaugural report summarizing the recommendations it made in fiscal 1992: To assist CE in ClarEying and actualizing its goals and
efficiency and renewable opportunities for the American people. It encouraged CE to seek public input, give proper attention to that input, and provide for its appropriate evaluation, Each of these recommenda- tions are compatible with the stakeholder analysis process.
This brief review of EE and DOE documents shows that officials have begun to recognize the significance
groups are likely to be affected by the proposed action before the action is implemented.
Uses of Stakeholder Analysis
Stakeholder involvement processes are necessary in many circumstances. They can be time-consuming
government offieids are well advised to assess stakeholder interests and impacts before embarking on extensive public participation processes. This permits a stepwise process that can help shape policy
%he SEAB Task Force members included political scientists, a sociologist, government health department officials, environmental and energy organization members, and engineers.
7Congress established the board to provide advice to DOE on the Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP), Institutional Conservation Program (ICP), and State Energy Conservation Program (SECP). In
and the efforts of the department relating to market deployment of energy efficiency and renewable energy research.
9
The advisory group reviewed the document and provided input. The authors used the advisory group’s
of the Resource Book. The project advisory group reviewed the annotated outline and the authors changed
reviewed before the final report was published.
action. It then elaborates on the rationale for conducting systematic stakeholder analyses. The chapter concludes by summarizing recent efforts in EE and DOE to use stakeholder analysis methodologies in energy-related projects.
Chapter 3 examines the basic features of Phase One, the preliminary analysis. It begins by reviewing the
preliminary phase.
Chapter 4 examines the basic steps in Phase Two, the canvassing stakeholders. Sampling and data collection techniques are described.
the decision-making process. Stakeholder analysis has an active part in this phase of stakeholder and public participation.
Chapter 6 discusses several key methodological issues germane to stakeholder analysis.
Chapter 7 presents concluding comments on stakeholder analysis. Throughout the text, references are made to the appendixes. They provide detailed information about several points alluded to in the text as well as a number of resources available to EE officials interested in conducting stakeholder analyses.
Chapter 2
The Critical Nature of Stakeholder Analysis
An effective government requires that officials be informed about public concerns and seek to understand the effects policies and projects are likely to have on various parties prior to implementation. The stakeholder analysis process generates information about affected parties to assist government officials in developing policies that can be implemented efficiently and effectively. This chapter elaborates on the implications of conducting or failing to conduct stakeholder analyses. The first two sections present examples to illustrate the benefits of stakeholder analysis. The third section presents a rationale for systematic stakeholder analyses. The chapter concludes with a discussion of how stakeholder analysis
Instances in Which Stakeholder Analysis Led to Efficient and Effective Policy Im plementation
1. Stakeholder input Benefitted Water Quality Improvement Programs
the development of remedial action plans that embody a systematic and comprehensive ecosystem approach to restoring water quality in the Great Lakes region. The remedial action plan provision mandates that stakeholder interests be recognized in the policy planning process and that the public be involved in the development of water quality plans and consulted on their implementation. Interviews are carried out with water quality officials, scientists, business people, coastal managers, elected officials, and citizens to identify innovative funding and administrative strategies. Information obtained from the inter- views has assisted in the development of effective programs that have improved the water quality of streams, rivers, ponds, and lakes throughout the Great Lakes region (Glassner 1991).
In 1961, the White House announced that Resident Kennedy was interested in building his presidential library in Cambridge, Massachusetts. After the president was assassinated, the library project expanded from a home for Kennedy’s presidential papers to a facility composed of a research library, a public
the library project raised concerns among the citizens of Cambridge over how their community would be affected by the project. The Kennedy Library Corporation, the organization overseeing the library project,
could express their concerns about a major federal project. Because of continued public opposition to the project, the Kennedy Library Corporation decided to move the museum portion to another location rather than risk long and costly construction delays due to public opposition. In the long run, the Kennedy Library Corporation saved both time and money because it became aware of the communities’ opposition to the library before investing large sums of time and money in the construction process (Francis 1975).
