Article Summary of "Collaborative Learning: Improving Public Deliberation in Ecosystem-Based Management" by Steven Daniels and Gregg Walker
Citation: Steven Daniels and Gregg Walker, "Collaborative Learning: Improving Public Deliberation in Ecosystem-Based Management," Environmental Impact Assessment Review 16 (1996), pp. 71-102.
This Article Summary written by: Tanya Glaser, Conflict Research Consortium
Natural resource management agencies are increasingly moving
toward an ecosystem based management (ESBM) philosophy. The
authors note that "constructive approaches to conflict, with
the best science discussed within a fair and just political
process, are essential to good ESBM."[p. 72] Daniels and
Walker propose collaborative learning as a model for effective
public participation in ESBM planning and policy-making.
Public Participation as a Learning Process
Any public policy-making necessarily involves learning. This
learning process involves much more than the mere dissemination
of information from the experts to the public. The authors
observe that, "constructive public deliberation is the means
by which 'opinions can be revised, premises altered, and common
interests discovered.'"[p. 74] Conflict should be
appreciated because they can lead to deeper understanding and
reveal common interests.
Learning is particularly important within ESBM. ESBM tries to
respond to both scientific and political realities, and deals
with inherently complex issues. Since "no single party,
agency, organization or discipline holds the key to understanding
a particular resource management situation," it is crucial
that the various participants learn from one another. The public
participation process in ESBM should then be designed to foster
learning.
The authors describe some basic assumptions about the learning
process. A effective learning- centered public participation
process will need to incorporate these basic elements. First,
people learn better in active situations than in passive
situations. For example, people generally learn more by
participating in a discussion or debate than by hearing a speech
or seeing a video.
Second, the learning process involves four different modes of
thought: concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract
conceptualization, and active experimentation. Different learners
combine these modes in different ways.
Third, given these various modes of thought, it follows that
different people have different learning styles. No one style is
clearly superior to another. Learning-centered processes need to
be flexible enough to accommodate various learning styles.
Fourth, learning is improved by systems thinking. The task of
learning, particularly for the purposes of ESBM, is to think
about "interrelated parts, holism, and emergent
properties," in an effort to reach a coherent structured
view of a complex situation.[p. 77] Systems thinking supplies the
needed conceptual tools for the task.
Learning-Centered Public Participation as Negotiation
While learning is an important feature of public participation
in ESBM, the public must also be seen as negotiating in its own
interests. The authors define negotiation as "joint
decision-making among parties with interdependent yet
incompatible interests."[p. 79] Such negotiation will
require that the parties become competent communicators. The
public participation process in ESBM should then also be designed
to foster the parties' development of and use of competent
communication skills.
Agency personnel may not have particularly good negotiation
skills either. The authors cite research showing that a set of
negotiation errors is typical of the population as a whole.
Unless the other participants in the ESBM policy-making process
have had specific training, they also will need to develop
competent communication skills.
Collaborative Learning
Daniels and Walker argue that public participation modeled on
collaborative learning will meet the needs identified above. The
collaborative learning approach "emphasizes activities that
encourage systems thinking, joint learning, open communication,
and focuses on appropriate change."[p. 81] Collaborative
learning combines features from both soft systems methodology
(SSM) and alternative dispute resolution (ADR)
SSM researchers explore applications and examples of
theoretical findings from systems and learning theory. "The
systematic learning process aims to create a temporarily shared
culture in which conflicts can be accommodated so that action can
be taken."[p. 81] Collaborative learning draws its emphasis
on learning and systems thinking from SSM.
ADR research contributes its expertise on value differences
and bargaining strategies to the collaborative learning approach.
Collaborative learning facilitators draw on mediators'
transformative techniques to foster mutual understanding,and to
promote integrative negotiation.
In addition to the material drawn from SSM and ADR, the
collaborative learning approach stresses communication
competence. It seeks to enhance parties' competence in such
skills as listening, questioning, clarifying, giving feedback,
social cognition, sustaining dialogue, and collaborative arguing.
The collaborative approach also emphasizes the goal of
improving the situation over problem solving. This sets a more
realistic standard for successful participation, given the
complex and ongoing nature of resource management issues. It also
opens up a broader array of possible responses, and makes issues
more approachable.
In practice, the collaborative learning process emphasizes
communication and negotiation over concerns and interests in
order to improve a situation, rather than bargaining over
positions to solve a problem. It emphasizes making progress
toward desirable and feasible change, rather than on achieving a
particular set of future conditions. Finally it stresses the need
for systematic learning in order to make good policy.
Case Study and Conclusions
The authors describe in some detail a set of collaborative
learning workshops held as part of the Oregon Dunes National
Recreation Area planning process in 1993. When surveyed,
participants generally gave positive evaluations of their
experience with the workshops.
Based on their research, the authors argue that three factors
make the collaborative learning approach particularly well-suited
to ESBM policy-making procedures. Collaborative learning entails
systems thinking, which is most appropriate to ESBM subject
matter. Collaborative learning stresses the goal of situation
improvement, which is more appropriate to the ongoing nature of
the ESBM task. Collaborative learning processes are designed to
accommodate a broad array of perspectives and strategies, such as
are found in resource management situations.
|