Evaluation of a Mixed Participatory Method to Improve Mutual Understanding Between Consumers and Chain Actors

Journal of Mixed Methods Research

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 121-140

  Van Wezemael, Lynn ^a   Verbeke, Wim ^a   Alessandrin, Agnès ^b  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^b Association pour le Développement de l'Institut de la Viande   (France)

Author keywords

citizen consumer; evaluation; mixed methods; public participation; SWOT

Indexed keywords

EID: 84876179266     PISSN: 15586898     EISSN: 15586901     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1558689812459253     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Abelson J.,Forest P.-G.,Eyles J.,Smith P.,Martin E.,Gauvin F.-P.Deliberations about deliberation: Issues in the design and evaluation of public consultation processes: A review of public participation and consultation methods. Hamilton, Ontario, Canada: McMaster University Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis; 2001:.
2. Beierle T. C.,Konisky D. M.Public participating in environmental planning in the Great Lakes region. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future; 1999:.
3. Bergeaud-Blackler F.,Paola Ferretti M.More politics, stronger consumers? A new division of responsibility for food in the European Union.Appetite. 2006;47:134-142.
4. Bruges M.,Smith W.Participatory approaches for sustainable agriculture: A contradiction in terms?.Agriculture and Human Values. 2008;25 (1): 13-23.
5. Cameron R.A sequential mixed model research design: Design, analytical and display issues.International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches. 2009;3:140-152.
6. ChapmanA. (2010). SWOT analysis. Retrieved from http://www.businessballs.com/swotanalysisfreetemplate.htm.
7. Chess C.,Purcell K.Public participation and the environment: Do we know what works?.Environmental Science & Technology. 1999;33:2685-2692.
8. Chilvers J.Deliberation competence: Theoretical and practitioner perspectives on effective participatory appraisal practice.Science, Technology & Human Values. 2007;33:155-185.
9. Christ T.Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. 2010). Teaching mixed methods and action research: Pedagogical, practical and evaluative considerations. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 643-676). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Tashakkori A.Teddlie C., ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2010:643-676.
10. Collins K. M. T.,O'Cathain A.Ten points about mixed methods research to be considered by the novice researcher.International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches. 2009;3 (1): 2-7.
11. Cornwall A.,Jewkes R.What is participatory research?.Social Science & Medicine. 1995;41:1667-1676.
12. Creswell J. W.,Garrett A. L.The "movement" of mixed methods research and the role of educators.South African Journal of Education. 2008;28:321-333.
13. Creswell J. W.,Plano Clark V. L.Designing and conduction mixed methods research. 2011). Designing and conduction mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2011:.
14. Daniels S. E.,Walker G. B.Collaborative learning: Improving public deliberation in ecosystem-based management.Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 1996;16 (2): 71-102.
15. de Barcellos M. D.,Kügler J. O.,Grunert K. G.,Van Wezemael L.,Perez-Cueto F. J. A.,Ueland O.,Verbeke W.European consumers' acceptance of beef processing technologies: A focus group study.Innovative Food Science and emerging Technologies. 2010;11:721-732.
16. Deng C.-Y.,Wu C.-L.An innovative participatory method for newly democratic societies: The "civic groups forum" on national health insurance reform in Taiwan.Social Science & Medicine. 2010;70:896-903.
17. EuropeAid. (2005). SWOT (strengths, weakness, opportunities, threats)-Why and when? Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/evaluation/methodology/tools/too_swo_whe_en.htm.
18. Gauvin F.-P.,Abelson J.Primer on public involvement. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Health Council of Canada; 2006:.
19. Januszewska R.,Viaene J.,Gheysen C.,De Steur D.Strategic options for regional products as a tool for regional development.Bulletin UASVM Horticulture. 2009;66:260-267.
20. Langer J.,Alfirevic N.,Pavicic J.Organizational change in transition societies. Hampshire, England: Ashgate; 2005:.
21. Leech N. L.,Dellinger A. B.,Brannagan K. B.,Tanaka H.Evaluating mixed research studies: A mixed methods approach.Journal of Mixed Methods Research. 2010;4 (1): 17-31.
22. Leusie M.,Alessandrin A. Paper presented at the Colloque SFER Au nom de la qualité, ENITA, Clermont-ferrand; 2005France; 2005.
23. MacKenzie N.,Knipe S.Research dilemmas: Paradigms, methods and methodology.Issues in Educational Research. 2006;16:193-205.
24. NichollsL.ThoburnA.CrecyL.SmartH. (2008). SWOT analysis and autonomous study in midwifery education-An integrative review. Retrieved from http://www.placementlearning.org/uploads/Lynne%20Nicholls%20CEPPL%20Final%20report%20-%20Oct%2020081.doc.
25. O'Cathain A.Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. 2010). Assessing the quality of mixed methods research: Towards a comprehensive framework. In TashakkorieA.TeddlieC. B. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 531-555). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Tashakkorie A.Teddlie C. B., ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2010:531-555.
26. Petts J.,Leach B.Evaluating methods for public participation: Literature review. Bristol, England: Environment Agency; 2000:.
27. Pidgeon N. F.,Poortinga W.,Rowe G.,Jones T. H.,Walls J.,O'Riordan T.Using surveys in public participation processes for risk decision making: The case of the 2003 British GM nation? Public debate.Risk Analysis. 2005;25:467-479.
28. Reason P.,Bradbury H.Handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice. Reason P.Bradbury H., ed. London, England: Sage; 2004:1-12.
29. Rowe G.,Frewer L. J.Public participation methods: A framework for evaluation.Science, Technology & Human Values. 2000;25 (1): 3-29.
30. Rowe G.,Frewer L. J.Evaluating public-participation exercises: A research agenda.Science, Technology & Human Values. 2004;29:512-557.
31. Rowe G.,Frewer L. J.A typology of public engagement mechanisms.Science, Technology & Human Values. 2005;30:251-290.
32. Rowe G.,Horlick-Jones T.,Walls J.,Pidgeon N.Difficulties in evaluating public engagement initiatives: Reflections on an evaluation of the UK GM Nation? Public debate about transgenic crops.Public Understanding of Science. 2005;14:331-352.
33. Sabbe S.,Verbeke W.,Van Damme P.Analysing the market environment for acai (Euterpe oleracea Mart.) juices in Europe.Fruits. 2009;64:273-284.
34. Shmueli D. F.,Plaut P. O.International public policy and management. Policy learning beyond regional, cultural and political boundaries. Levi-Faur D.Vigoda-Gadot E., ed. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker; 2004:395-422.
35. Teddlie C.,Tashakkori A.A general typology of research designs featuring mixed methods.Research in the Schools. 2006;13 (1): 12-28.
36. Van Wezemael L.,Verbeke W.,Kugler J. O.,de Barcellos M. D.,Grunert K. G.European consumers and beef safety: Perceptions, expectations and uncertainty reduction strategies.Food Control. 2010;21:835-844.
37. Verbeke W.Beliefs, attitude and behaviour towards fresh meat revisited after the Belgian dioxin crisis.Food Quality and Preference. 2001;12:489-498.
38. Verbeke W.,Frewer L. J.,Scholderer J.,De Brabander H. F.Why consumers behave as they do with respect to food safety and risk information.Analytica Chimica Acta. 2007;586 (1-2): 2-7.
39. Vitale D. C.,Armenakis A. A.,Feild H. S.Integrating qualitative and quantitative methods for organizational diagnosis: Possible priming effects?.Journal of Mixed Methods Research. 2008;2 (1): 87-105.