Do stakeholders analyze their audience? The communication switch and stakeholder personal versus public communication choices

Policy Sciences

Volumn 49, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 421-444

  McBeth, Mark K ^a   Lybecker, Donna L ^a   Stoutenborough, James W ^a  

^a IDAHO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Policy communication; Policy narratives; Public policy

Indexed keywords

COMMUNICATION; ETHICS; POLICY ANALYSIS; POLICY APPROACH; POLICY MAKING; STAKEHOLDER;

EID: 84969850247     PISSN: 00322687     EISSN: 15730891     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11077-016-9252-2     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Arbuckle, J. G., Jr, Prokopy, L. S., Haigh, T., Hobbs, J., Knoot, T., Knutson, C., & Widhalm, M. (2013). Climate change beliefs, concerns, and attitudes toward adaptation and mitigation among farmers in the Midwestern United States. Climatic Change, 117(4), 943–950.
2. Berenguer, J., Corraliza, J. A., & Rocío, M. (2005). Rural-urban differences in environmental concern, attitudes, and actions. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 21(2), 128–138.
3. Bromley-Trujillo, R., Stoutenborough, J. W., Kirkpatrick, K. J., & Vedlitz, A. (2014). Climate scientists and environmental interest groups: The intersection of expertise and advocacy. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 2(1), 120–134.
4. Bryson, J. M. (2004). What to do when stakeholders matter: Stakeholder identification and analysis techniques. Public Management Review, 6(10), 21–53.
5. Buijs, A. E. (2009). Public support for river restoration. A mixed method study into local residents’ support for framing of river management and ecological restoration in the Dutch floodplains. Journal of Environmental Management, 90, 2680–2689.
6. Chan, K. M., Guerry, A. D., Balvanera, P., Klain, S., Satterfield, T., Basurto, X., et al. (2012). Where are cultural and social in ecosystem services? A framework for constructive engagement. BioScience, 62(8), 744–756.
7. Clayton-Thomas, J. (1995). Public participation in public decisions: New skills and strategies for public managers. New York: Jossey-Bass.
8. Clemons, R. S., McBeth, M. K., & Kusko, E. (2012). Understanding the role of policy narratives and the public policy arena: Obesity as a lesson in public policy development. World Medical & Health Policy, 4(2), Article 1.
9. Crow, D. A., & Baysha, O. (2013). Conservation as a catalyst for conflict: Considering stakeholder understanding in policy making. Review of Policy Research, 30, 302–320. doi:10.1111/ropr.12020.
10. Crow, D. A., & Berggren, J. (2014). Using the Narrative Policy Framework to understand stakeholders’ strategies and effectiveness: A multi-case analysis. In M. D. Jones, E. A. Shanahan, & M. K. McBeth (Eds.), The science of stories: Applications of the Narrative Policy Framework in public policy analysis, Chapter 3 (pp. 131–156). New York: Palgrave-McMillian.
11. Dalton, R. J. (2008). The good citizen: How a younger generation is reshaping American politics. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
12. Dalton, R. J. (2016). The good citizen: How a younger generation is reshaping American politics (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
13. Dempsey, J., & Robertson, M. M. (2012). Ecosystem services: Tensions, impurities, and points of engagement within neoliberalism. Progress in Human Geography, 36(6), 758–779.
14. Golding, D., Krimsky, S., & Plough, A. (1992). Evaluating risk communication: Narrative vs. technical presentations of information about radon. Risk Analysis, 12(1), 27–35.
15. Guess, G. M., & Farnham, P. G. (2011). Cases in public policy analysis. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
16. Gupta, K., Ripberger, J. T., & Collins, S. (2014). The strategic use of policy narratives: Jaitapur and the politics of siting a nuclear power plant in India, Chapter 4. In M. D. Jones, E. A. Shanahan, & M. K. McBeth (Eds.), The science of stories: Applications of the Narrative Policy Framework in public policy (pp. 89–106). New York: Palgrave.
17. Haight, D., & Ginger, C. (2000). Trust and understanding in participatory policy analysis: The case of the Vermont forest resources advisory council. Policy Studies Journal, 28(4), 739–759.
18. Hampton, G. (2009). Narrative policy analysis and the integration of public involvement in decision making. Policy Sciences, 42(3), 227–242.
19. Heikkila, T., Pierce, J. J., Gallaher, S., Kagan, J., Crow, D. A., & Weible, C. M. (2014). Understanding a period of policy change: The case of hydraulic fracturing disclosure policy in Colorado. Review of Policy Research, 31(2), 65–87.
20. Jones, M. D. (2014). Communicating climate change: Are stories better than ‘Just the Facts?’. Policy Studies Journal, 42(4), 644–673.
21. Jones, M. D., McBeth, M. K., & Shanahan, E. A. (2014). Introducing the Narrative Policy Framework, Chapter 1. In M. D. Jones, E. A. Shanahan, & M. K. McBeth (Eds.), The science of stories: Applications of the Narrative Policy Framework in public policy analysis (pp. 1–25). New York: Palgrave.
22. Kahan, D. M., & Braman, D. (2006). Cultural cognition and public policy. Yale Law & Policy Review, 24(1), 149–172.
23. Kahan, D. M., Braman, D., Gastil, J., Slovic, P., & Mertz, C. K. (2007). Culture and identity-protective cognition: Explaining the white-male effect in risk perception. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 4(3), 465–505.
24. Kahan, D. M., Jenkins-Smith, H., & Braman, D. (2010). Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. Journal of Risk Research, 14, 1–28.
25. Lasswell, H. (1951). The policy orientation. In D. Lerner & H. Lasswell (Eds.), The policy sciences: Recent developments in scope and method (pp. 3–15). Stanford, CA: Stanford Press.
26. Lawton, R. N., & Rudd, M. A. (2013). Strange bedfellows: Ecosystem services, conservation science, and central government in the United Kingdom. Resources, 2(2), 114–127.
27. Lodge, M., & Taber, C. S. (2005). The automaticity of affect for political leaders, groups, and issues: An experimental test of the hot cognition hypothesis. Political Psychology, 26(3), 455–482.
28. Lubell, M., Zahran, S., & Vedlitz, A. (2007). Collective action and citizen responses to global warming. Political Behavior, 29(3), 391–413.
29. Luck, G. W., Chan, K. M. A., Eser, U., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Matzdorf, B., Norton, B., & Potschin, M. B. (2012). Ethical considerations in on-ground applications of the ecosystem services concept. BioScience, 62(12), 1020–1029.
30. Lybecker, D. L., & McBeth, M. K. (2015). Interview with non-profit river activist. May 28.
31. Lybecker, D. L., McBeth, M. K., & Kusko, E. (2013). Trash or treasure: Recycling narratives and reducing political polarisation. Environmental Politics, 22(2), 312–332.
32. Lybecker, D. L, McBeth, M. K., & Stoutenborough, J. W. (forthcoming). Do we understand what the public hears? Stakeholders’ preferred communication choices for discussing river issues with the public. Review of Policy Research (in press).
33. McBeth, M. K., Jones, M. D., & Shanahan, E. A. (2014a). The Narrative Policy Framework, Chapter 7. In P. A. Sabatier & C. M. Weible (Eds.), Theories of the policy process. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
34. McBeth, M. K., Lybecker, D. L., & Garner, K. A. (2010). The story of good citizenship: Framing public policy in the context of duty-based versus engaged citizenship. Politics & Policy, 38(1), 1–23.
35. McBeth, M. K., Lybecker, D. L., & Husmann, M. A. (2014b). The Narrative Policy Framework and the practitioner: The case of recycling policy, Chapter 3. In E. A. Shanahan, M. D. Jones, & M. K. McBeth (Eds.), The science of stories: Applications of the Narrative Policy Framework in public policy analysis (pp. 45–68). New York: Palgrave-McMillian.
36. McBeth, M. K., Lybecker, D. L., Stoutenborough, J. W., & Running, K. (2016). River stories or science? (research in progress).
37. O’Donnell, M. (2015). US Army Corp officials tours Portneuf River system in Pocatello. Idaho State Journal, June 4. http://idahostatejournal.com/members/army-corps-of-engineers-official-tours-portneuf-river-system-in/article_9a97b3da-0a8a-11e5-90b0-6b31ca56cd4c.html. Accessed May 7, 2016.
38. O’Keefe, B. J., & McCormack, S. A. (1987). Message design logic and message goal structure: Effects on perceptions of message quality in regulative communication situations. Human Communication Research, 14, 68–92.
39. Orr, P., Colvin, J., & King, D. (2007). Involving stakeholders in integrated river basin planning in England and Wells. Water Resource Management, 21(1), 331–349.
40. Oxley, D. R., Vedlitz, A., & Wood, B. D. (2014). The effect of persuasive messages on policy problem recognition. Policy Studies Journal, 42(2), 252–268.
41. Roe, E. (1994). Narrative policy analysis: Theory and practice. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
42. Rogers, K. H. (2006). The real river management challenge: Integrating scientists, stakeholders and service agencies. River Research and Applications, 22(2), 269–280.
43. Rook, K. S. (1987). Effects of case history versus abstract information on health and behaviors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 17, 533–553.
44. Shanahan, E. A., Jones, M. D., & McBeth, M. K. (2011). Policy narratives and policy processes. Policy Studies Journal, 39(3), 535–561.
45. Shanahan, E. A., Jones, M. D., McBeth, M. K., & Lane, R. R. (2013). An angel on the wind: How heroic policy narratives shape policy realities. Policy Studies Journal, 41(3), 453–483.
46. Stone, D. (2002). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making. New York: W.W. Norton.
47. Stoutenborough, J. W. (2015). Stakeholders’ preferred policy solution: Comparing strategies to address degraded levees. Water Policy, 17(6), 1093–1107.
48. Stoutenborough, J. W., & Vedlitz, A. (2014). The effect of perceived and assessed knowledge of climate change on public policy concerns: An empirical comparison. Environmental Science & Policy, 37(March), 23–33.
49. Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 755–769.
50. Torpen, D. R., & Hearne, R. R. (2008). Stakeholder preferences for water management alternatives in the Red River Basin. Department of Agriculture and Applied Economics, North Dakota State University. http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/36774/2/AAE629.pdf. Accessed August 1, 2014.
51. Trost, C. (2009). Don’t let the Army Corp ruin the Portneuf River again! Letter submitted to Ralph Maughan’s Wildlife News. https://wolves.wordpress.com/2009/08/31/pocatello-dont-let-the-army-corps-ruin-the-portneuf-river-again/. Accessed May 7, 2016.
52. Vail, T (2015). Quoted in O’Donnell, M. (2015). US Army Corp officials tours Portneuf River system in Pocatello. Idaho State Journal, June 4. http://idahostatejournal.com/members/army-corps-of-engineers-official-tours-portneuf-river-system-in/article_9a97b3da-0a8a-11e5-90b0-6b31ca56cd4c.html. Accessed May 7, 2016.
53. Van Eeten, M. J. G. (2001). Recasting intractable policy issues: The wider implications of the Netherlands civil aviation controversy. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 20(3), 391–414.
54. Weible, C. M. (2007). An advocacy coalition framework approach to stakeholder analysis: Understanding the political context of California Marine Protected Area. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17, 95–117.
55. Wester, P., Merrey, D., & De Lange, M. (2003). Boundaries of consent: Stakeholder representation in river basin management in Mexico and South Africa. World Development, 31(5), 797–812.
56. Wolters, E. A., & Hubbard, M. L. (2014). Oregon water: Assessing differences between the Old and New Wests. The Social Science Journal, 51(2), 260–267.