CIFOR-ICRAF s’attaque aux défis et aux opportunités locales tout en apportant des solutions aux problèmes mondiaux concernant les forêts, les paysages, les populations et la planète.

Nous fournissons des preuves et des solutions concrètes pour transformer l’utilisation des terres et la production alimentaire : conserver et restaurer les écosystèmes, répondre aux crises mondiales du climat, de la malnutrition, de la biodiversité et de la désertification. En bref, nous améliorons la vie des populations.

CIFOR-ICRAF publie chaque année plus de 750 publications sur l’agroforesterie, les forêts et le changement climatique, la restauration des paysages, les droits, la politique forestière et bien d’autres sujets encore, et ce dans plusieurs langues. .

CIFOR-ICRAF s’attaque aux défis et aux opportunités locales tout en apportant des solutions aux problèmes mondiaux concernant les forêts, les paysages, les populations et la planète.

Nous fournissons des preuves et des solutions concrètes pour transformer l’utilisation des terres et la production alimentaire : conserver et restaurer les écosystèmes, répondre aux crises mondiales du climat, de la malnutrition, de la biodiversité et de la désertification. En bref, nous améliorons la vie des populations.

CIFOR–ICRAF publishes over 750 publications every year on agroforestry, forests and climate change, landscape restoration, rights, forest policy and much more – in multiple languages.

CIFOR–ICRAF addresses local challenges and opportunities while providing solutions to global problems for forests, landscapes, people and the planet.

We deliver actionable evidence and solutions to transform how land is used and how food is produced: conserving and restoring ecosystems, responding to the global climate, malnutrition, biodiversity and desertification crises. In short, improving people’s lives.

Understanding Difference to Build Bridges among Stakeholders: Perceptions of Participation in Four Multi-stakeholder Forums in the Peruvian Amazon

Exporter la citation

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.
Download:

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2021.1945041
Score Altmetric:
Dimensions Nombre de citations:

Publications connexes