A stakeholder analysis based on project managers’ perceptions: Unlocking transformative potential in Natura 2000 projects

IF 5.2 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Environmental Science & Policy Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104011
Ruxandra Malina Petrescu-Mag , Kinga-Olga Reti , Tibor Hartel , Alexandru Sabin Bădărău , Vlad Măcicăşan , Dacinia Crina Petrescu
{"title":"A stakeholder analysis based on project managers’ perceptions: Unlocking transformative potential in Natura 2000 projects","authors":"Ruxandra Malina Petrescu-Mag ,&nbsp;Kinga-Olga Reti ,&nbsp;Tibor Hartel ,&nbsp;Alexandru Sabin Bădărău ,&nbsp;Vlad Măcicăşan ,&nbsp;Dacinia Crina Petrescu","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Divergent values and interests among stakeholders lead to conflicts during the implementation of biodiversity projects. The present study reveals the perception of project managers about stakeholders’ needs, interests, positions, attitudes, and power that ultimately shape the relationships between these actors within Natura 2000 projects in Romania. Analyzing three selected projects, the research explores the existence of transformative change premises in terms of integrative, capability-responsiveness, and power equilibrium features. The thematic analysis of the interviews revealed a conflict network between stakeholders that poses a threat to the integrative attribute. “Academia” was found to be capable of fulfilling a mediator role, emphasizing the need for neutral entities in conflict resolution. Stakeholders segregate based on interests – those prioritizing economic functions show less concern for biodiversity. The need to use inclusive language in Natura 2000 projects was pointed out to prevent power imbalances and enhance overall inclusiveness. The study advocates for a project-specific approach to stakeholder analysis, thus avoiding the one-size-fits-all model.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"164 ","pages":"Article 104011"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Science & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901125000279","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Divergent values and interests among stakeholders lead to conflicts during the implementation of biodiversity projects. The present study reveals the perception of project managers about stakeholders’ needs, interests, positions, attitudes, and power that ultimately shape the relationships between these actors within Natura 2000 projects in Romania. Analyzing three selected projects, the research explores the existence of transformative change premises in terms of integrative, capability-responsiveness, and power equilibrium features. The thematic analysis of the interviews revealed a conflict network between stakeholders that poses a threat to the integrative attribute. “Academia” was found to be capable of fulfilling a mediator role, emphasizing the need for neutral entities in conflict resolution. Stakeholders segregate based on interests – those prioritizing economic functions show less concern for biodiversity. The need to use inclusive language in Natura 2000 projects was pointed out to prevent power imbalances and enhance overall inclusiveness. The study advocates for a project-specific approach to stakeholder analysis, thus avoiding the one-size-fits-all model.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于项目经理感知的利益相关者分析:释放Natura 2000项目的变革潜力
在生物多样性项目实施过程中,利益相关者之间价值观和利益的分歧导致了冲突。本研究揭示了项目经理对利益相关者的需求、利益、立场、态度和权力的看法,这些看法最终塑造了罗马尼亚Natura 2000项目中这些行动者之间的关系。本研究以三个选定的专案为分析对象,从整合性、能力-回应性和权力均衡的特征,探讨转型变革前提的存在性。访谈的专题分析揭示了利益相关者之间的冲突网络对整合属性构成威胁。“学术界”被认为能够发挥调解人的作用,强调在解决冲突方面需要中立实体。利益相关者基于利益隔离——那些优先考虑经济功能的人对生物多样性的关注较少。有人指出,有必要在《自然2000》项目中使用包容性语言,以防止权力不平衡和增强整体包容性。该研究提倡项目特定的干系人分析方法,从而避免了一刀切的模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Science & Policy
Environmental Science & Policy 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
332
审稿时长
68 days
期刊介绍: Environmental Science & Policy promotes communication among government, business and industry, academia, and non-governmental organisations who are instrumental in the solution of environmental problems. It also seeks to advance interdisciplinary research of policy relevance on environmental issues such as climate change, biodiversity, environmental pollution and wastes, renewable and non-renewable natural resources, sustainability, and the interactions among these issues. The journal emphasises the linkages between these environmental issues and social and economic issues such as production, transport, consumption, growth, demographic changes, well-being, and health. However, the subject coverage will not be restricted to these issues and the introduction of new dimensions will be encouraged.
期刊最新文献
Emerging circular economy practices, environmental health risks, and the “tailings paradox” in Africa’s artisanal and small-scale mining: Evidence from Ghana Whose doctrine, whose priority?: On the troublesome legal interpretation of the Aboriginal right to fish by Canadian courts From generation to treatment: A comprehensive and critical review of landfill leachate The genealogy of mining sustainability Enabling system-level trust: Polycentric governance for complex, many-scaled environmental problems
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1