An Evaluation of Three Democratic, Community-Based Approaches to Citizen Participation: Surveys, Conversations With Community Groups, and Community Dinners

By Deborah S. Carr, Kathleen E. Halvorsen. 2001

153 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0b3498cebb0d5acb4821829fb8485afff249cacd

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

1. Alexey A. Voinov
2. François Bousquet
3. Michael Mascarenhas
4. G. Rowe
5. M. A. Moote
6. A. Conley
7. Rik Scarce

In Global and Planetary Change

1. Alexey A. Voinov
2. F. Gauvin
3. Patricia Smith
4. Élisabeth Martin
5. François Bousquet
6. Michael Mascarenhas
7. John Eyles
8. P. Forest

Citations in the corpus

• Public Opinion and Affordable Housing: A Review of the Literature (2010, unknown): “Despite these theoretical shifts, planners today tend to gather public input through public meetings, charettes, or focus groups—measures that tend to gather opinions from a small, self-selected group of individuals rather than the entire affected community (Carr and Halvorsen 2001).”
• Deliberations about deliberative methods: issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes. (2003, background): “…whether participants were demographically representative of their community; (ii) whether the methods focused on communal vs. individual-specific issues; and (iii) whether the processes elicit information about underlying beliefs and values regarding the issue under study (Carr & Halvorsen, 2001).”
• “The Intention Was Good”: Legitimacy, Consensus-Based Decision Making, and the Case of Forest Planning in British Columbia, Canada (2004, methodology): “... that telephone surveys and interviews (Duffy et al. 1998; Kelly and Alper 1995; Tamblyn 1996; Wilson, Roseland, and Day 1996) or criteria generated from literature reviews (Duffy 1991) were the preferred method for this research (Table 1). While the parallel literature is more substantial in the”
• Evaluating Collaborative Natural ResourceManagement (2003, background): “Taking a deductive rather than inductive approach, some researchers have compared collaborative efforts to criteria derived from a theoretical construct such as communicative rationality (Duane 1997) or participatory democracy ( Carr and Halvorsen 2001; Moote et al. 1997).”
• Modelling with stakeholders (2010, background): “In addition, engaging local decision makers in the scenario modelling stage of the research process can lead to development of more innovative solutions (Carr and Halvorsen, 2001).”
• A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms (2005, background): “SOURCES: (1) New Economics Foundation (1999); (2) Democracy Network (1998); (3) Rosener (1975); (4) Baughman (1995); (5) Lynn and Busenberg (1995); (6) Rowe and Frewer (2000); (7) Plumlee, Starling, and Kramer (1985); (8) Hannah and Lewis (1982); (9) Pierce and Doerksen (1976); (10) Lowndes et al.”