|
Design |
Broadening
Participation in Biological Monitoring: |
|
Matching roles to expertise—Participants can be usefully involved in any phase of designing a participatory monitoring project as long as their level of knowledge and expertise is matched to the role they will play. An important consideration is the concern that resultant data be viewed as credible by the users of the information. If monitoring data are not trusted, then the collaborative effort has been wasted and all parties involved in, or familiar with, the project will be discouraged. Discussing, during the design phase, how data will be analyzed and how results will be distributed can help ensure the information is both credible and useful to all. Details are discussed in the Quality, Analysis, and Reporting modules. That said, even individuals without formal education in a topic can contribute to the most complex project design if they have unique knowledge, information, or perspectives that might otherwise not have been considered. For instance, local participants often have a familiarity with locations, local habitat, forest conditions, specific organisms, or practical considerations that managers, specialists, or scientists do not. All of these types of information can be exceedingly useful in developing efficient sampling designs, avoiding mistakes, planning logistics, efficiently using time and resources, and maintaining safe work conditions. Determining appropriate roles for participants in planning sampling protocols, fieldwork procedures, data analysis and management, record keeping, equipment care, and other aspects of the project design and management depends not only on factors such as project complexity, sophistication, need for long-term support, but also on the qualifications of the individuals involved. For instance, perhaps a retired statistician or taxonomic specialist volunteers to assist the project, thus obviating the need for outside technical expertise on that topic. Such experts can, however, threaten the job security of hired staff (if they are not already too busy), so sensitivity to this possibility can prevent problems. Other participants might come to projects with previous leadership experience or show aptitude or interest in leadership during the course of a project. The greater the number of participants in a project the more likely there will be a need for some participants to assume extra responsibilities as leaders. Ways to promote leadership are discussed in the Participants module. Matching participants to the roles they play in project design is best done on a case-by-case basis. Issues of efficient sampling designs and statistical validity will be discussed further in the modules on Sampling and Quality. Matching indicators and measures to goals—As discussed more thoroughly in the Indicators module, most participants can certainly participate in determining what indicators will best serve to meet project monitoring goals and often they can help identify and select the particular measures that would best reflect trends in the indicators. Sometimes such indicators are not biological, but rather geophysical, social, economic, cultural or others. Feasibility, practicality, affordability, and continuity—The practical experience of local participants can also serve as a reality-check on the enthusiasm of specialists or novices who have less experience with the logistical implications or expense of planned activities. Individuals or stakeholder groups that are familiar with local resources and conditions often make more accurate estimates of the time, effort, resources, and labor needed to attain a particular goal. This practical knowledge qualifies them to better match available resources to long-term plans, and thus help the project avoid over-commitment or participant fatigue. Involving all participants in appropriate aspects of project design improves the likelihood that expended time, resources, and labor will be efficiently used to achieve project goals. Maintaining long-term commitment to a project can be challenging, so engaging participants in planning or designing incremental results and rewards, while striving for long-term goals, will help sustain project continuity.
One way to involve
participants in project design is to evaluate the utility, propriety,
suitability, efficacy, and feasibility of the proposed project.
Evaluating the utility of the project might include questions such as:
“How widely will the results of this project be used? Is it only
applicable to the monitored area or can the results be extrapolated
over a broader region? Could project activities help managers meet
information and participation requirements associated with the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)? Propriety issues could
include: Is the proposed project legal and ethical? Is it consistent
with other formal agreements and compliant with the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA)? To evaluate suitability, questions might
include: Will it benefit stewardship objectives? Are the selected
indicators appropriate for answering questions posed by project
goals? Regarding efficacy: Is the project designed to be
scientifically defensible? Will the collected data provide reliable
information about the actual state of the indicator or detect
meaningful change? Is the project cost-effective? Does project
design take advantage of opportunities for partnerships with other
organizations or agencies? To evaluate feasibility: Are the project
activities and objectives realistic, prudent, and frugal? Can goals be
accomplished in the allotted time and within the proposed budget?
Involving participants in this pre-project evaluation process can
increase the likelihood of success as well as contribute to trust
between monitoring coordinators and participants.
Checklist—
|
|