Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Although collaborative watershed management is increasingly accepted as the dominant paradigm in resource management and environmental policy, research on collaborative watershed organizations has largely ignored the attitudes and behaviors of grassroots stakeholders and the formation and organization of grassroots watershed groups. Instead, the research on collaborative watershed management has remained focused on the study of policy elites or “grasstops” (Graetz and Shapiro 2005) stakeholders, including “interest group leaders, elected officials, bureaucrats, and partnership staff” (Lubell 2004, 341) and on watershed partnerships, defined as a “collection of parties, usually featuring both private and governmental representatives…” (Kenny et al. 2000, quoted in Lubell, et al 2002), i.e. as collaborations among such policy elites (see Leach and Pelky 2001). In this study, we shift this focus to examine the beliefs and behavior of grassroots stakeholders, defined as the “appropriators” (Ostrom 1990) or the “consumers” (Lubell 2004) of natural resources and the formation of grassroots watershed organizations. We utilize the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF), which has been fruitfully applied to research on watershed partnerships, and we attempt to adopt the appropriate elements of ACF in conjunction with conceptions of social identity to provide a framework for examining grassroots stakeholders and groups. This study focuses on one grassroots watershed group, which is made up of farmers, in a subwatershed in the Sugar Creek watershed in northeast Ohio, and uses data collected through three different methods to address some of the difficulties in understanding grassroots as opposed to grasstops stakeholders and organizations.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Once thought of as limitless in resources, the world’s oceans are now resembling empty tanks. At the same time, the present structure of a central authority, with a monopoly on information that regulates a passive and limited set of stakeholders, is being challenged. There has been an emerging set of marine stakeholders in Hawaii, who are enabled by technology and whose actions are fueled by an increasing amount and availability of information, fostering the formation of new alliances and partnerships. These stakeholder groups have started to demand a more active role in the management of marine resources. In this paper, we characterize this shift from “ocean users” to technology-enabled, information-rich, and “active stakeholders.” We link preliminary findings from ongoing research to theoretical approaches to information and communication technology use in order to describe and understand this new shift among Hawaii’s marine stakeholders.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The practice of international stakeholder participation has increased exponentially in the last decade. Following especially the UN Conference on Environment and Development in 1992, stakeholder participation has become praxis for UN conferences and decision-making, and become increasingly accepted for the formulation of EU policy as well as in the implementation of large-scale industrial developments. The integration of stakeholders in these processes is often undertaken short-term through invitation of stakeholders for conferences, and more long-term through inclusion of stakeholder groups in decision-making structures. However, given the relative recency and breadth of international stakeholder processes, and the diverse actors practicing it, there has been very little systematic study of the contribution and efficiency of international stakeholder participation. This paper attempts to outline the diverse types of participation in policy and business, describe the main ways in which it is practiced, and evaluate key examples of international stakeholder participation according to set criteria of efficiency. The examples evaluated include the UN Commission on Sustainable Development and UN Forum on Forests, the EU Water Initiative and EU Action on Climate Change, and Shell International?s outreach activities. The paper concludes that while the practices and processes in the examples differ largely, they display common biases towards the own field, level of activity and organisational style that may possibly limit the participatory outreach. At the same time, they provide some assessment of relevant and well-functioning practices for outreach and international participatory democracy.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: At present, the extent of the ICC?s ability to assist in halting, punishing, and preventing violent conflict remains unknown. The is a need to assess the impact of the rule of the International law in situations of violent conflict as well justice initiative within the larger context of building sustainable peace. The special survey (purposive sample of 50 respondents) and interviews with more than 30 Ambassadors were conducted during Spring 2006. The research examined opinions of ICC stakeholders, international experts and NGOs about the role and responsibility of ICC, its indictments and prosecutions, including timing and effectiveness, approaches to victims, sources of the influence and limitations of ICC activities, its role in peacebuilding process, and future of the Court. In addition, the survey and interviews helped to examine the evaluation of the role of ICC in Uganda and overall performance of the Prosecutor.

Publication Type: Abstract
Abstract: Introduction: The first draft of the National EMS Scope of Practice Model, released in June 2004, proposed a new “level” of EMS practitioner, called the Advanced Practice Paramedic (APP). It was proposed that this practitioner could provide eleven “advanced” interventions (such as wound closure), and could implement treat-and-release/refer protocols. The objective of this study was to judge the level of support for this new provider level among three key stakeholder groups through a written survey.
Methods: One hundred EMS medical directors (EMD: two per state, randomly selected from the NAEMSP membership list), all state EMS directors (SED), and 100 EMS employers (EE: the transport agencies for the largest city and another randomly selected city in each state) were surveyed by mail. Survey questions varied slightly for each group, but focused primarily on perceived need for the proposed APP level and skills. Descriptive statistics were used, and chi-square and Fisher’s exact test were used to compare groups. IRB approval was obtained.
Results: Responses were received from 64% of EMDs, 39% of SEDs, and 59% of EEs. Fewer than half of the EMDs (38%) and SEDs (47%) felt there was a need for the APP, while slightly more than half of EEs felt there was a need for the APP (53%, comparisons between groups: p=NS). Private EMS agencies were more likely to indicate a need for the APP than fire department services (p= 0.006). Rapid sequence intubation, surgical cricothyrotomy, blood product administration, and central venous access enjoyed the most support, but were also the most likely to be currently provided by paramedics. Among the skills not currently provided by paramedics, treat-and-release/refer received the most support from each group. SEDs were more likely than EMDs to support treat-and-release/refer (p=0.015). Among all respondents, perceived need for each proposed skill was consistently associated with support for the APP level.
Conclusions: Fewer than half of EMDs and SEDs surveyed, and just over half of EEs surveyed, feel a need for the proposed APP level. While the APP concept has been tabled in the latest draft, this data may help guide future discussions of the concept.