Stakeholder roles and their level of participation throughout the planning process

Stakeholder participation in ecotourism development planning is not just at one level. Different gradations of participation can be beneficial at different stages because each stage of the planning process requires different commitments and obligations. These different levels of engagement build on each other and they are not mutually exclusive of each other (Drafting Group 2002). Knowing these gradations helps the conveners to understand how stakeholder participation can evolve during the process

76

in order to maximise the benefits from each stakeholder because all stakeholder groups cannot be involved in the whole process at the same time in the same way (Gray 1989; Maguire, Potts & Fletcher 2012). The appropriate level of participation depends upon stakeholder identity including their interest, power and capacity, etc. (Arnstein 1969; Imran, Alam & Beaumont 2011), and the timing of participation activities, the stage of the planning process, available resources, and the benefits of participation (Drafting Group 2002).

Discussion of the levels of participation will be based mainly on Arnstein’s Ladder10 of Citizen Participation which is the seminal and main source in this aspect. Her ladder comprises eight categories (Table 3-1). Each rung reflects the level of stakeholder influences in determining planning outcomes. The lower rungs of the ladder are manipulation and therapy, which does not reflect any genuine attempt at participation but rather the decision-makers’ sole aim is to educate the participants (Friedman & Miles 2006). The participants do not have any influence on the final outcomes.

With regard to the middle section of the ladder, tokenism, three rungs are identified. First, informing the stakeholders about the planning activities, their responsibilities, and the options. This is a one-way flow from the decision-makers or working group to the stakeholders without any channel for feedback or negotiation (Arnstein 1969). However, it can easily be transferred to a two-way process, from the stakeholder to the decision-makers, perhaps to rectify or complete the missing data, and include stakeholder comments in the final agreements. The most frequent techniques used in informing the stakeholders and receiving their feedback are factsheets, newsletters, leaflets, exhibitions and media, etc. (Taschner & Fiedler 2009; Wilcox 2004). Secondly, consultation was defined by Arnstein (1969) as the stakeholders being invited by the competent authorities to discuss and present their opinions without any commitment from the official side to incorporate these views in the outcomes. However, it can be a good opportunity to learn from stakeholder

10 _{All the literature that discusses the participation levels has been based on Arnstein’s Ladder. So the research}

in this section will depend upon her Ladder, focusing on both the top and middle sections. The middle reflects the participation situation in the majority of developing countries, and the higher rungs represent the target levels of participation which may increase the likelihood of the plan being implemented.

77

perceptions, experience and ideas and then to develop the solutions or plans that are presented during the consultation events (Drafting Group 2002). The consultation benefits can be maximised and the stakeholder participation widened through: i) exploring specific optional scenarios, plans or visions and asking the stakeholders for feedback. However, the consultation may not be suitable to develop the ideas or put plans in actions (Wilcox 2004); ii) conducting the consultation during the preparation of plans as well as once they are completed; iii) combining consultation with other participation levels to ensure all the stakeholder views are presented; iv) by providing feedback to the consultation participants about their views and comments to try to build trust with the final agreements. The consultation with stakeholders can also be conducted through written methods such as online or off-line questionnaires to solicit their inputs. Active oral consultation where the stakeholders have the opportunity to discuss with the competent authority during focus groups, workshops or conferences can also be conducted (Drafting Group 2002; Wilcox 2004). Thirdly, placation11 is where the stakeholder begins to have some degree of influence although power still resides with the competent authorities. Here a few stakeholders may be able to provide advice or suggestions but the decision-makers still make the final decision (Arnstein 1969).

At the higher rungs of the ladder stakeholders are not only active participants in the planning process but also become partly responsible for the outcomes (Drafting Group 2002). The higher section consists of three rungs. First, with Partnership the power between the decision-maker and the stakeholders will be redistributed through structures such as joint planning committees or boards for co-producing adequate solutions and committing themselves to implementing them (Taschner & Fiedler 2009). The ground rules will be established after negotiations between the stakeholders and the key decision-makers about shared responsibilities for planning and decision-making processes. This partnership can work most effectively when the stakeholders have an organised power-base which has financial resources to pay

11 _{Edelenbos and Monnikhof (2001) proposed a ladder based on Arnstein’s which consisted of only five rungs}

after omitting the first two rungs and changing the title of some of the others, as follows: 1) Informing; 2) Consultation; 3) Advice (Placation in Arnstein’s ladder); 4 Co-produce (Partnership); 5 Co-decide (Delegated Power and Stakeholder Control) (Taschner & Fiedler 2009).

78

compensation to its leaders for their efforts and time during the process and ensure that these leaders are accountable to the organisation they represent.

Table (3-1) Different levels of participation

Level of

participation Arnstein Participation Ladder

The level of influence Degree of stakeholder power Stakeholder control Forming or agreeing decisions Delegation power Partnership Degree of tokenism Placation Being heard before decision Consultation Informing Knowledge about decision Non-participation Therapy Manipulation

Source: Adapted from Arnstein (1969), Taschner and Fieldler (2009) and Tseng and Penning- Rowsell (2012)

Finally, with both Delegated Power and Stakeholder Control stakeholders have a high influence in decision-making through being the dominant authorities in the planning process and decision-making, and being accountable for the performance of plan implementation. At these levels the bargaining processes are used to resolve the conflict between stakeholders and decision-makers rather than one side, or the other ‘winning’ due to the power or pressure they have exerted (Arnstein 1969).

In conclusion, Arnstein’s ladder provides a valuable framework for understanding the characteristics and the main purposes of different participation levels. It can be used to evaluate the participation levels of the different stakeholder groups during the planning process and hopefully enhance their involvement and commitment at each stage (Friedman & Miles 2006). Nevertheless, the backbone to all the different levels of participation is communication, and the transfer of information must be a two-way process – between the stakeholders and the competent authority (Drafting Group 2002).

79

Furthermore, the second important point related to the different levels of the participation is ensuring that the respective roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder are clearly defined to avoid confusion and inefficiency within the planning process (Malena 2004). Defining the roles of each stakeholder group should take place in advance, designed in such a way to fulfil specific positions during the project and give stakeholders a sense of duty. The convener needs to set preconditions (Terms Of Reference) for each stakeholder group to organise their involvement and increase their motivation (Choi 2005). Furthermore, practitioners recommend that the stakeholder roles and responsibilities need to be commonly agreed and commensurate with their characteristics and experiences. This should ensure that the right stakeholders are in the right position to engage with the process. They also recommend the development of guidelines to assist participants to commit to their roles during the planning and implementation process (GIZ 2011; Malena 2004)

Synthesis

Defining the participation level of each stakeholder as well as their respective role and responsibilities is critical to ensure their effective commitment during the planning and implementation process. These roles should be tailored to stakeholder characteristics, available resources and the planning stage to avoid confusion and inefficiencies with stakeholder participation.

Consequently, the research will investigate the participation levels of the stakeholder at each stage of the Egyptian ecotourism initiatives based around the following questions:

-Which form of participation was used throughout the planning process? -What were stakeholder roles during these stages?

80