Moving beyond the numbers: A participatory evaluation of sustainability in Dutch agriculture

Agriculture and Human Values

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 307-319

  van de Kerkhof, Marleen ^a   Groot, Annemarie ^b   Borgstein, Marien ^b   Bos Gorter, Leontien ^c  

^a VU UNIVERSITY AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c RIJKSWATERSTAAT   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Agriculture; Fourth Generation Evaluation; Netherlands; Participation; Stakeholder dialogue

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA;

EID: 77955774540     PISSN: 0889048X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10460-009-9214-9     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Abma, T. 2004. Responsive evaluation: The meaning and special contribution to public administration. Public Administration 82 (4): 993-1012.
2. Amo, C., and J. B. Cousins. 2007. Going through the process: An examination of the operationalization of process use in empirical research on evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation 116: 5-26.
3. Boone, K., C. de Bont, K. J. van Calker, A. van der Knijff, and H. Leneman. 2007. Duurzame Landbouw in Beeld. Resultaten van de Nederlandse land- en tuinbouw op het gebied van people, planet en profit. The Hague, The Netherlands: LEI report no. 2. 07. 09. http://www. lei. dlo. nl/publicaties/PDF/2007/2_xxx/2_07_09. pdf. Accessed 9 Feb 2009.
4. Borgstein, M. H., H. Leneman, L. Bos-Gorter, E. A. Brasser, A. M. E. Groot, and M. van de Kerkhof. 2007. Dialogen over verduurzaming van de Nederlandse landbouw. Wageningen, The Netherlands: WOT report no. 44. http://www. wotnatuurenmilieu. wur. nl/NL/publicaties/Rapporten/Rapporten_2007/. Accessed 9 Feb 2009.
5. Brouwer, F. M., C. J. A. M. de Bont, H. Leneman, and H. A. B. van der Meulen. 2004. Duurzame Landbouw in Beeld. Wageningen, The Netherlands: LEI report PR. 05. 01. http://www. lei. dlo. nl/publicaties/PDF/2005/PR_xxx/PR_05_01. pdf. Accessed 9 Feb 2009.
6. Bruges, M., and W. Smith. 2008. Participatory approaches for sustainable agriculture: A contradiction in terms? Agriculture and Human Values 1: 13-23.
7. Cousins, J. B., and E. Whitmore. 1998. Framing participatory evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation 80: 87-105.
8. Edelenbos, J., and A. van Buuren. 2005. The learning evaluation. A theoretical and empirical exploration. Evaluation Review 29 (6): 591-612.
9. Fischer, F. 1995. Evaluating public policy. Chicago, USA: Nelson-Hall Publishers.
10. Garaway, G. B. 1995. Participatory evaluation. Studies in Educational Evaluation 21: 85-102.
11. Greene, J. C. 1987. Stakeholder participation in evaluation design: Is it worth the effort? Evaluation and Program Planning 10: 379-394.
12. Groot, A. M. E. 2002. Demystifying facilitation of multi-actor learning processes. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen UR.
13. Groot, A. M. E., M. H. Borgstein, H. Leneman, M. van de Kerkhof, L. Bos-Gorter, and E. A. Brasser. 2007. Dialogen over verduurzaming van de Nederlandse landbouw. Gestructureerde Sectordialogen als onderdeel van een monitoringsmethodiek. Wageningen, The Netherlands: WOT report no. 45. http://www. wotnatuurenmilieu. wur. nl/NL/publicaties/Rapporten/Rapporten_2007/. Accessed 9 Feb 2009.
14. Guba, E. G., and Y. S. Lincoln. 1989. Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
15. Guijt, I., and J. Proost. 2002. Monitoring for social learning. Insights from Brazilian NGOs and Dutch farmer study clubs. In Wheelbarrows full of frogs. Social learning in rural resource management, ed. C. Leeuwis and R. Pyburn, 215-232. Assen, The Netherlands: Koninklijke van Gorcum.
16. Hanberger, A. 2001. Policy and program evaluation, civil society, and democracy. American Journal of Evaluation 22 (2): 211-228.
17. Mathie, A., and J. C. Greene. 1997. Stakeholder participation in evaluation: How important is diversity? Evaluation and Program Planning 20 (3): 279-285.
18. Patton, M. Q. 1990. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
19. Pretty, J. N. 1994. Alternative systems of inquiry for a sustainable agriculture. IDS Bulletin 25 (2): 37-48.
20. Pretty, J. N., and S. D. Vodouhê. 1997. Using rapid or participatory rural appraisal. In Improving agricultural extension. A reference manual, ed. B. E. Swanson, R. P. Bentz, and A. J. Sofranko. Rome, Italy: FAO report no. M-67. http://www. fao. org/docrep/w5830E/w5830e08. htm. Accessed 9 Feb 2009.
21. Ryan, K., and L. DeStefano. 2001. Dialogue as a democratizing evaluation method. Evaluation 7 (2): 188-203.
22. van de Kerkhof, M. 2006. Making a difference: On the constraints of consensus building and the relevance of deliberation in stakeholder dialogues. Policy Sciences 39: 279-299.
23. van Zeijts, H., M. M. van Eerdt, and J. W. H. van der Kolk. 2007. Duurzame ontwikkeling van de landbouw in cijfers en ambities. Bilthoven, The Netherlands: MNP report no. 500139002. http://www. rivm. nl/bibliotheek/rapporten/500139002. pdf. Accessed 9 Feb 2009.
24. e Kamerstuk van 16 januari 2008 Ministerie van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit. The Hague, The Netherlands (letter to the parliament by the Minister of Agriculture). http://www. minlnv. nl/portal/page?eid=116, 1640321&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL& p_file_id=24405. Accessed 9 Feb 2009.
25. Webler, T. 1995. Right discourse in citizen participation: An evaluative yardstick. In Fairness and competence in citizen participation. Evaluating models for environmental discourse, ed. O. Renn, T. Webler, and P. Wiedemann, 35-86. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.