Using Q method for the formative evaluation of public participation processes

Society and Natural Resources

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 92-96

  Danielson, Stentor ^a   Webler, Thomas ^a   Tuler, Seth P ^a  

^a Social and Environmental Research Institute   (United States)

Author keywords

Evaluation; Public participation; Q method; Social learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 71149098751     PISSN: 08941920     EISSN: 15210723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08941920802438626     Document Type: Note

References (12)

1. Brown, S. R. 1980. Political subjectivity: Applications of Q methodology in political science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
2. Brown, S. R. 1993. A primer on Q methodology. Operant Subjectivity 16(3/4):91-138.
3. Chess, C., and K. Purcell. 1999. Public participation and the environment: Do we know what works? Environ. Sci. Technol. 33(16):2685-2692.
4. Dryzek, D. 1996. Democracy in capitalist times. New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Halvorsen, K. E. 2006. Critical next steps in research on public meetings and environmental decision making. Hum. Ecol. Rev. 12(2):150-160.
6. McKeown, B., and B. Thomas. 1988. Q methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
7. National Research Council. 1996. Understanding risk: Informing decisions in a democratic society. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
8. National Research Council. 2001. A risk management strategy for PCB-contaminated sediments. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
9. Posavac, E. J. 1994. Misusing program evaluation by asking the wrong question. In Preventing the misuse of evaluation, eds. C. J. Stevens and M. Deal, 69-78. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
10. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2001. Stakeholder involvement & public participation at the U.S. EPA: Lessons learned, barriers, & innovative approaches. http://www.epa.gov/stakeholders/pdf/sipp.pdf (accessed 4 May 2008).
11. Webler, T., and S. P. Tuler. 2006. Four perspectives on public participation process in environmental assessment and decision making: Combined results from 10 case studies. Policy Stud. J. 34(4):699-722.
12. Woolley, J., M. McGinnis, and W. Herms. 1998. Survey methodologies for the study of ecosystem restoration and management: The importance of Q-Methodology. In Critical methodologies for the study of ecosystem health, eds. K. Scow, G. E. Fogg, D. E. Hinton, and M. L. Johnson, 321-332. Ann Arbor, MI: Sleeping Bear Press.