Multi-stakeholder benchmarking: clarifying attitudes and behaviour from complexity and ambiguity

Abstract

Developing an understanding of a major environmental issue with multiple stakeholders is complex. Each stakeholder has a different perspective, level of knowledge and institutional focus. Acid sulfate soils on New South Wales coastal catchments are an emotive and polarising issue for the many stakeholders involved. Conflict over acid sulfate soils is therefore newsworthy, and the broader community is introduced to different stakeholders from these polarising viewpoints. Consequently, cane and cattle producers, who benefit from the draining of acid sulfate soils, are portrayed as perpetrators. Oyster farmers and fishers, who incur the cost of acidified water, are portrayed as victims, while local and state government agencies, who have responsibility for regulation, are variously portrayed as either heavy-handed bureaucrats or toothless tigers.

Multi-stakeholder benchmarking has been developed to clarify complexity and ambiguities. By establishing indicators for documenting and understanding change in stakeholder attitude and behaviour it aims to decrease the divisiveness and degree of the polarised opinions. Benchmarking is a continuous process of measurement that identifies the best and compares against the best. Multi-stakeholder benchmarking uses multiple methods to establish quantitative data which, along with qualitative data are used to develop a deeper understanding of the complex social issues. It aims to empower individuals and groups while supporting extension and processes of change. First, information about social and economic issues is established by identifying and surveying stakeholders, using both quantitative ‘closed’ or explicit questions and qualitative ‘open’ questions for non-structured responses. Second, qualitative research, conducted in focus groups of subsampled survey respondents, validates and explores the survey results. During this stage, unique characteristics of the groups are defined, compared and best practices are identified. Results from these 2 stages are communicated back to the stakeholders, taking care to use non-judgemental language. Finally, best practice goals are defined, investigated and transferred within the same or other stakeholder groups.

This paper proposes multi-stakeholder benchmarking as a new benchmarking process, and discusses the application of it to a complex environmental problem, acid sulfate soils. Multi-stakeholder benchmarking provides an important opportunity for stakeholders to voice their view on how environmental issues can be best managed and for determining which practices they wish to change. Further it provides information for education program development and evaluation, and facilitates the process of change. Acid sulfate soils stakeholders’ positive responses to non-judgemental information, that clarifies their position, and helps identify the way forward, suggest that multi-stakeholder benchmarking is applicable to other multi-stakeholder environmental problems.