8/8/2019 Glass Jayne Extended Abstract

1/2

Beyond the usual suspects? The role of expert knowledge in sustainability indicatordevelopment for Scotlands upland estates

Jayne H Glass (Centre for Mountain Studies, Perth College UHI, UK jayne.glass@perth.uhi.ac.uk ) Alister J Scott (Birmingham City University, UK alister.scott@bcu.ac.uk )

Martin F Price (Centre for Mountain Studies, Perth College UHI, UKmartin.price@perth.uhi.ac.uk )

Introduction

In Scotland, upland areas have a unique pattern of landownership with much of the land dividedinto estates owned by private individuals and organisations, public bodies, and non -governmental and community organisations. The extent to which estate management practicesseek a balance between the use of natural resources and the economic and social needs of communities is a key aspect of sustainability. However, little academic or policy attention has

been devoted to translating sustainability principles into practical upland estate management strategies due to the varied range of estate ownership types, estate management objectives andvalues of opinions of numerous external stakeholders.

Sustainability indicators are a useful tool that can be used to monitor progress towardssustainability and define the central tenets of the concept. However, rationales for indicatorselection are often unclear and their top -down nature can antagonise stakeholders and hi ndertheir effective implementation, particularly when they do not take into account the values of relevant stakeholders. The development of sustainability indicators in a participatory mannermay improve communication and increase consensus among stakeholders with contrasting

management objectives, however, problems arise when participants represent different backgrounds or expertise, or do not collectively have a history of good communication. Weargue that there remains scope to develop sustainability indicators in a creative manner,bringing different types of expert knowledge together to seek joint learning opportunities anddevelop indicators in a collective, more accountable manner.

A novel approach

We propose a widely-applicable methodological approach that was used to developsustainability indicators for Scotlands upland estates, centred around an anonymous, iterative

process that involved four developmental stages. Adapting a policy Delphi approach, weworked with a multi-disciplinary group of nineteen stakeholders who comprised expertise insustainability, rural/upland land use and/or estate management, incorporating landmanagement professionals, researchers, policy-makers and members of representative bodies.This secured a range of experts that had not previously discussed sustainability in this context and went beyond traditional definitions of expert knowledge , recognising local managerialknowledge as having expert quality. Panellists did not know the identity of other participantsduring the process so that a safe environment for open dialogue was created.

The first stage was carried out in interview format to establish rapport between the researcher

and the experts, increasing motivation and buy-in. This resulted in an 89% response rate overthe whole process. In the first round, interviews with each panellist explored the participants

mailto:jayne.glass@perth.uhi.ac.ukmailto:jayne.glass@perth.uhi.ac.ukmailto:jayne.glass@perth.uhi.ac.ukmailto:alister.scott@bcu.ac.ukmailto:alister.scott@bcu.ac.ukmailto:alister.scott@bcu.ac.ukmailto:martin.price@perth.uhi.ac.ukmailto:martin.price@perth.uhi.ac.ukmailto:martin.price@perth.uhi.ac.ukmailto:alister.scott@bcu.ac.ukmailto:jayne.glass@perth.uhi.ac.uk

8/8/2019 Glass Jayne Extended Abstract

2/2

perceptions of sustainability. In the second round, interview findings were collated by theresearcher and returned to the panel in an unattributable, combined feedback andquestionnaire document, and each was invited to comment on points made by other panellists.The results of the first two rounds were then analysed by the researcher who actively reframedthe panels ideas into the first draft of a suite of indicators. Using clear explanations anddiagrams, the indicators were presented to the panel for their comments; these wereincorporated into a new version that was presented to the panel in round four for furthercomment and subsequent amendment.

A sustainability toolkit

Spending time at the outset exploring different perceptions of sustainability allowed a workingdefinition of sustainable upland estate management to be developed prior to selectingindicators. This gave a sound, rational basis to the process. Five sustainable estate principlescomprise this definition, around which the assessment tool is organised (AdaptingManagement; Broadening Options; Ecosystem Thinking; Linking into Social Fabric; Thinkingbeyond the Estate).

Sixteen opportunities for sustainable upland estates were identified, developed and endorsedby the panel (these are the indicators). The extent to which an estate takes advantage of eachopportunity can be assessed by the tools user to judge whether an estates management practices are deemed proactive (more sustainable), active or underactive (less sustainable).Creativity, innovation and a proactive attitude were regularly cited by more than half of thepanel as crucial for moving beyond traditional ideas to promote management that demonstratesa shift towards a more sustainable approach.

Reflections

The indicators were developed by the researcher , using only the participants opinions andideas for the content; the format of the tool was not pre-determined. This allowed theparticipants to have ownership over the evolution of the process and recognised the creativerole that the facilitator can play in collating and feeding back the responses for furtherreflection.

This approach proved very effective for bringing together different types of expert knowledge inorder to find common solutions, going beyond what can be achieved using more traditionalmethods. The active role that the facilitator played in developing and feeding back material(based on the experts input) created an excellent platform for continual deliberation, reflectionand development of ideas. There is scope for this method to be applied to other situationswhere bringing together different types of knowledge is problematic.