Your CIOS file request: Q-METHOD/06309111.623 hotline item

-
Received:  by CIOS Mailer; Tuesday 30 Jun 2009 11:16:23
Date:         Tue, 30 Jun 2009 11:15:31 -0400
From:         "BROWN, STEVEN" 
Subject: Q Bibliography:  Doody et al. on sustainable development indicators (forthcoming article)
To:           Q-METHOD@LISTSERV.KENT.EDU
List-Help: ,              
List-Unsubscribe: 
List-Subscribe: 
List-Owner: 
List-Archive: 

--_000_C66FA45375CBsbrownkentedu_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Doody, D.G., P. Kearney, J. Barry, R. Moles, & B. O'Regan (2009, November).=
 Evaluation of the Q-method as a method of public participation in the sele=
ction of sustainable development indicators.  Ecological Indicators, 9(6), =
1129-1137.

Abstract: The complexity of sustainable development means that it is often =
difficult to evaluate and communicate the concept effectively. One standard=
 method to reduce complexity and improve communication, while maintaining s=
cientific objectivity, is to use selected indicators. The aim of this paper=
 is to describe and evaluate a process of public participation in the selec=
tion of sustainable development indicators that utilised the Q-method for d=
iscourse analysis. The Q-method was utilised to combine public opinion with=
 technical expertise to create a list of technically robust indicators that=
 would be relevant to the public. The method comprises statement collection=
, statement analysis, Q-sorts and Q-sort analysis. The results of the Q-met=
hod generated a list of statements for which a preliminary list of indicato=
rs was then developed by a team of experts from the fields of environmental=
 science, sustainable development and psychology. Subsequently members of t=
he public evaluated the preliminary list of indicators, to select a final l=
ist of indicators that were both technically sound and incorporated the vie=
ws of the public. The utilisation of the Q-method in this process was evalu=
ated using previously published criteria. The application of the Q-method i=
n this context needs to be considered not only by the quality of the indica=
tors developed, but also from the perspective of the benefit of the process=
 to the participants. It was concluded that the Q-method provided an effect=
ive framework for public participation in the selection of indicators as it=
 allowed the public to discuss sustainable development in familiar language=
 and in the context of their daily lives. By combining this information wit=
h expert input, a list of technically robust indicators that resonate with =
the public was developed. The results demonstrated that many citizens are n=
ot aware of sustainable development, and if it is to be successfully commun=
icated to them, then indicators and policy need to be couched in terms fami=
liar and relevant to citizen and communities.

D.G. Doody , Kearney, Moles, and O'Regan are =
in the Department of Chemical and Environmental Science, University of Lime=
rick, Limerick, Ireland.  J. Barry is in the School of Politics, Internatio=
nal Studies and Philosophy, Queens University, Belfast, Northern Ireland.

--_000_C66FA45375CBsbrownkentedu_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








Doody, D.G., P. Kearney, J. Barry, R.=
 Moles, & B. O’Regan (2009, November). Evaluation of the Q-method=
 as a method of public participation in the selection of sustainable develo=
pment indicators.  Ecological Indicators, 9(6), 1129-1137.



Abstract: T=
he complexity of sustainable development means that it is often difficult t=
o evaluate and communicate the concept effectively. One standard method to =
reduce complexity and improve communication, while maintaining scientific o=
bjectivity, is to use selected indicators. The aim of this paper is to desc=
ribe and evaluate a process of public participation in the selection of sus=
tainable development indicators that utilised the Q-method for discourse an=
alysis. The Q-method was utilised to combine public opinion with technical =
expertise to create a list of technically robust indicators that would be r=
elevant to the public. The method comprises statement collection, statement=
 analysis, Q-sorts and Q-sort analysis. The results of the Q-method generat=
ed a list of statements for which a preliminary list of indicators was then=
 developed by a team of experts from the fields of environmental science, s=
ustainable development and psychology. Subsequently members of the public e=
valuated the preliminary list of indicators, to select a final list of indi=
cators that were both technically sound and incorporated the views of the p=
ublic. The utilisation of the Q-method in this process was evaluated using =
previously published criteria. The application of the Q-method in this cont=
ext needs to be considered not only by the quality of the indicators develo=
ped, but also from the perspective of the benefit of the process to the par=
ticipants. It was concluded that the Q-method provided an effective framewo=
rk for public participation in the selection of indicators as it allowed th=
e public to discuss sustainable development in familiar language and in the=
 context of their daily lives. By combining this information with expert in=
put, a list of technically robust indicators that resonate with the public =
was developed. The results demonstrated that many citizens are not aware of=
 sustainable development, and if it is to be successfully communicated to t=
hem, then indicators and policy need to be couched in terms familiar and re=
levant to citizen and communities.



D.G. Doody <donnacha.doody@afbini.gov.uk>,=
 Kearney, Moles, and O’Regan are in the Department of Chemical and En=
vironmental Science, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.  J. Ba=
rry is in the School of Politics, International Studies and Philosophy, Que=
ens University, Belfast, Northern Ireland.






--_000_C66FA45375CBsbrownkentedu_--