What is Policy Analytics? An Exploration of 5 Years of Environmental Management Applications.

Our digital age is characterized by both a generalized access to data and an increased call for participation of the public and other stakeholders and communities in policy design and decision-making. This context raises new challenges for political decision-makers and analysts in providing these actors with new means and moral duties for decision support, including in the area of environmental policy. The concept of "policy analytics" was introduced in 2013 as an attempt to develop a framework, tools, and methods to address these challenges. This conceptual initiative prompted numerous research teams to develop empirical applications of this framework and to reflect on their own decision-support practice at the science-policy interface in various environmental domains around the world. During a workshop in Paris in 2018, participants shared and discussed their experiences of these applications and practices. In this paper, we present and analyze a set of applications to identify a series of key properties that underpin a policy analytics approach, in order to provide the conceptual foundation for policy analytics to address current policy design and decision-making challenges. The induced properties are demand-orientedness, performativity, normative transparency, and data meaningfulness. We show how these properties materialized through these six case studies, and we explain why we consider them key to effective policy analytics applications, particularly in environmental policy design and decision-making on environmental issues. This clarification of the policy analytics concept eventually enables us to highlight research frontiers to further improve the concept.

The Effects of Public Participation on Multi-Level Water Governance, Lessons from Uganda.

Water governance occurs at multiple levels, from the local to the supra-national, which are often highly fragmented. The interconnected nature of water requires interactions among these multiple governance levels. Public participation may foster such interactions. Thus, many water management reforms involved decentralization and public participation worldwide over the last decades. Yet, it is not demonstrated how these reforms may improve water resources sustainability. Their analysis in the literature does not show concretely how interactions among multiple levels materialize and are influenced by participation. As such, the question addressed is how interactions among multiple levels of water governance manifest over time in a participatory intervention. Using a case study in the Rwenzori region in Uganda, this article compares the multi-level interactions before and during a participatory process. The latter has been purposely implemented to bridge gaps between local and provincial levels through a participatory planning process centred on the provincial level. Four types of flows were analyzed: information and knowledge, hydrosocial, financial and human. Our analysis shows that using artefacts like the role-playing game and planning matrix fostered bi-directional information and knowledge flows. Hydrosocial flows did not change in depth but the legitimacy of the two organizations implementing the participatory process was reinforced. Project financial flows were injected through a provincial academic institution, who is not a regular budget recipient. They were therefore superimposed on existing budgeting process. We conclude by providing suggestions for the engineering of participatory processes in order to foster more collaborative and effective multi-level water governance.

Four challenges in selecting and implementing methods to monitor and evaluate participatory processes: Example from the Rwenzori region, Uganda.

Participatory approaches are now increasingly recognized and used as an essential element of policies and programs, especially in regards to natural resource management (NRM). Most practitioners, decision-makers and researchers having adopted participatory approaches also acknowledge the need to monitor and evaluate such approaches in order to audit their effectiveness, support decision-making or improve learning. Many manuals and frameworks exist on how to carry out monitoring and evaluation (M&E) for participatory processes. However, few provide guidelines on the selection and implementation of M&E methods, an aspect which is also often obscure in published studies, at the expense of the transparency, reliability and validity of the study. In this paper, we argue that the selection and implementation of M&E methods are particularly strategic when monitoring and evaluating a participatory process. We demonstrate that evaluators of participatory processes have to tackle a quadruple challenge when selecting and implementing methods: using mixed-methods, both qualitative and quantitative; assessing the participatory process, its outcomes, and its context; taking into account both the theory and participants' views; and being both rigorous and adaptive. The M&E of a participatory planning process in the Rwenzori Region, Uganda, is used as an example to show how these challenges unfold on the ground and how they can be tackled. Based on this example, we conclude by providing tools and strategies that can be used by evaluators to ensure that they make utile, feasible, coherent, transparent and adaptive methodological choices when monitoring and evaluating participatory processes for NRM.

Managing frame diversity in environmental participatory processes - Example from the Fogera woreda in Ethiopia.

Many participatory processes fail to generate social change and collaborative outcomes. This failure can partly be explained by how divergent stakeholders' frames are handled. This paper builds on the framing and participation literature to explain how facilitators can manage frame diversity and foster collaborative outcomes. It suggests two pragmatic steps: identifying frames and managing frames. The two steps are applied to a participatory process for natural resource management in Fogera, Ethiopia. Effectiveness of facilitators' strategies to manage frame diversity in the Fogera case is discussed. Two main elements challenging effectiveness are identified: counter-strategies used by facilitators and most-powerful stakeholders, and the constraining factors knowledge, champions and frame sponsorship. We argue that these elements need to be taken into account by participatory process facilitators when managing frame diversity.

The MEPPP Framework: A Framework for Monitoring and Evaluating Participatory Planning Processes.

Evaluating participatory processes, participatory planning processes especially, can be challenging. Due to their complexity, these processes require a specific approach to evaluation. This paper proposes a framework for evaluating projects that have adopted a participatory planning approach: the monitoring and evaluation of participatory planning processes (MEPPP) framework. The MEPPP framework is applied to one case study, a participatory planning process in the Rwenzori region in Uganda. We suggest that this example can serve as a guideline for researchers and practitioners to set up the monitoring and evaluation of their participatory planning process of interest by following six main phases: (1) description of the case, (2) clarification of the M&E viewpoint(s) and definition of the M&E objective(s), (3) identification of the context, process and outputs/outcomes analytical variables, (4) development of the M&E methods and data collection, (5) data analysis, and (6) sharing of the M&E results. Results of the application of the MEPPP framework in Uganda demonstrate the ability of the framework to tackle the complexity of participatory planning processes. Strengths and limitations of the MEPPP framework are also discussed.

Drivers of Environmental Institutional Dynamics in Decentralized African Countries.

This paper builds on the assumption that an effective approach to support the sustainability of natural resource management initiatives is institutional "bricolage." We argue that participatory planning processes can foster institutional bricolage by encouraging stakeholders to make their own arrangements based on the hybridization of old and new institutions. This papers aims at identifying how participatory process facilitators can encourage institutional bricolage. Specifically the paper investigates the specific contextual and procedural drivers of institutional dynamics in two case studies: the Rwenzori region in Uganda and the Fogera woreda in Ethiopia. In both cases, participatory planning processes were implemented. This research has three innovative aspects. First, it establishes a clear distinction between six terms which are useful for identifying, describing, and analyzing institutional dynamics: formal and informal; institutions and organizations; and emergence and change. Secondly, it compares the contrasting institutional dynamics in the two case studies. Thirdly, process-tracing is used to identify contextual and procedural drivers to institutional dynamics. We assume that procedural drivers can be used as "levers" by facilitators to trigger institutional bricolage. We found that facilitators need to pay particular attention to the institutional context in which the participatory planning process takes place, and especially at existing institutional gaps or failures. We identified three clusters of procedural levers: the selection and engagement of participants; the legitimacy, knowledge, and ideas of facilitators; and the design of the process, including the scale at which it is developed, the participatory tools used and the management of the diversity of frames.

Evaluating participatory modeling: developing a framework for cross-case analysis.

Participatory modeling is increasingly recognized as an effective way to assist collective decision-making processes in the domain of natural resource management. This article introduces a framework for evaluating projects that have adopted a participatory modeling approach. This evaluation framework--known as the "Protocol of Canberra"--was developed through a collaboration between French and Australian researchers engaged in participatory modeling and evaluation research. The framework seeks to assess the extent to which different participatory modeling initiatives not only modify perceptions among and interactions between participants, but also contribute to collective decision-making. The article discusses the development of the framework and its application to three case-studies, two from Australia and one from the Pacific Island of the Republic of Kiribati. The article concludes with some comments for future use of the framework in a range of participatory modeling contexts.

Mind the sustainability gap.

Despite increasing efforts to reach sustainability, key global biophysical indicators such as climate change and biodiversity loss continue to deteriorate rather than improve. Ongoing failure to move towards sustainability calls into question the focus of current research and policy. We recommend two strategies for progress. First, sustainability must be conceptualized as a hierarchy of considerations, with the biophysical limits of the Earth setting the ultimate boundaries within which social and economic goals must be achieved. Second, transdisciplinary research programs must confront key normative questions facing modern consumer societies. The humanities should have a key role in such programs. Assisted by these strategies, ambitious targets that realistically reflect the biophysical limits of the life-support system of the Earth must be set and relentlessly worked towards.