Stakeholders Research Project Introduction

Preliminary stakeholder identification around any natural resource proves vital to carrying out meaningful trans- disciplinary researches with regard to managing that particular resource. Stakeholders may be defined as all players capable of impacting, or being impacted by, any action or decision (after Freeman 1984). Natural resource management research scholars (e.g. Grimble and Wellard 1997; Dougill et al. 2006; Ravnborg and Westermann 2002) constantly report that the inclusion of stakeholders in finding solutions facilitates mutual learning and negotiation, improves stakeholder buy- in and support of actions and decisions, and decreases conflict. Trans- disciplinary study strategies build on this rationale through assimilating stakeholders and integrating the diverse kinds of ideas and knowledge they bring with them to the table in socially- sound, solution- focused studies (Lang et al. 2012; Bracken et al. 2014; Hurni and Wiesmann 2014).

Quite frequently, project reports and scholarly papers’ descriptions pertaining to stakeholder identification are vague. Thus, research scholars who are not very familiar with trans- disciplinary research or with a given topic or location have no well- defined tools or explicit examples for serving as the starting point of their study. Numerous brilliant review articles offer typologies for understanding and analyzing natural resource management stakeholders (e.g. Reed 2008; Prell, Hubacek & Reed, 2009; Reed et al. 2009). But not much information may be found on how a stakeholder population may be identified. Practitioner- focused guidelines prove more useful (e.g., Caribbean Natural Resources Institute- issued guidelines, which cover simple questions and steps one may follow when it comes to stakeholder identification) (Renard 2004) (p.7). But these continue to significantly underscore author knowledge whilst being rather vague on the subject of how and using whom one can resolve identification- related questions. As trans- disciplinary studies encourage scholars to engage stakeholders and generate solutions and knowledge, the filling of this gap ought to be prioritized and a structured, workable instrument provided for identifying stakeholders (Leventon, Fleskens, Claringbould, Schwilch & Hessel, 2016).

Possible Research Stakeholders

Stakeholders imply every entity with a vested interest in a given study. For instance, a study on emotional...

Study subjects need to understand the fact that their participation is voluntary, their non- engagement or engagement has no harmful consequences, and they are free to stop participating in the research at any stage of the project if they desire with no unfavorable consequence (Bhattacherjee, 2012).
When instructors require their pupils to answer any questionnaire and state that participation in the survey research is purely voluntary, pupils need to have no fear and understand the fact that declining participation will hurt their grades in no way. One example of unethical conduct when carrying out a survey research which is supposed to be voluntary is: providing bonus points to participants and depriving non- participants of that benefit, as such a decision serves to place anybody who refuses to participate at a clear disadvantage. For avoiding such scenarios, instructors can have non- participants perform another task to recoup those bonus points without having to take part in the study, or simply provide all with bonus points regardless of whether or not they participate. In addition, all participants have to be provided with a form of informed consent explicitly outlining their right of refusing participation and withdrawal rights (at any stage), which they must sign and return prior to recording their responses for research purpose. An additional requirement in medical researches is specifying all potential participation-related risks. In case of minor participants, consent of a parent or legal guardian is required. Researchers have to retain the forms of informed consent for a specified time period (normally 3 years) following data acquisition process completion…