In the second half of May and at the turn of June, the third series of our participatory workshops took place in three geographical areas of interest (in Třeboň on 16 May, in Bečov nad Teplou on 30 May and in Křivoklát on 1 June).
The focus of this series was conflicting interests in the areas (or “trade-offs”) – a topic that had not been addressed in the previous series of the workshops and which raises a number of interesting questions. We prepared two activities for the participants to reveal the attitudes of different groups towards the ecosystem services provided by nature in the area of interest.
After a short introductory presentation where we summarised all the essential information about the One Nature project and introduced the concept of ecosystem services and their “trade-offs”, the participants were divided into small homogeneous groups according to their professions (e.g. mayors, officials, nature protection representatives, farmers, foresters, business sector and tourism representatives). In these groups, the participants completed our worksheets with the help of a researcher from the organising team who, if necessary, explained and clarified whatever was needed at any moment.
These worksheets contained a range of open and closed questions designed to make the participants reflect on the following themes through the lens of their professional group:
- Which specific ecosystem services in the area does a particular professional group prefer?
- Where in the area are there multifunctional sites which provide more different ecosystem services at the same time?
- What are the “competing” services in the area as perceived by each group?
- How do different professional groups perceive their influence on the provision of different services in the area and what specific form does this influence take?
- Which other professional groups do the participants work with when influencing the provision of ecosystem services?
The aim of the second activity was to look at three pairs of “competing” services through the lens of participants from different professions and learn about their (possibly) different views. The exercise was conducted in heterogeneous groups using the World Café method; this is a participatory method which allows groups of participants to share experiences and opinions, and discuss predefined topics. The goal was not to reach a consensus, but to share experiences and knowledge, to have a friendly exchange of views, to enrich the perspectives of other participants and to educate each other.
The diverse groups of participants explored the following three pairs of services at three “checkpoints” (these pairs of services had been identified by the participants themselves as “competing” with each other at the previous autumn workshop):
- Production of materials x Regulation of water quantity and runoff
- Habitat creation and maintenance x Physical and psychological experiences
- Production of materials x Habitat creation and maintenance
At each checkpoint, a researcher from the organising team asked the participants guiding questions, moderated the discussion and then recorded the participants’ answers and thoughts on a flipchart. After about 15 minutes, the groups of participants moved on to the next checkpoint (the next pair of services) and the discussion continued – the participants saw the answers of the previous group and added their own answers and thoughts.
All three of our workshops were very positively evaluated. In particular, the participants appreciated the wide range of topics covered and the fact that they learned something new and interesting. A number of them said that the workshop had given them a new perspective on the landscape and nature in the area and had helped them to understand the different views of other participants from different professions.
Co-author: Eliška Tichopádová
Původní příspěvek byl v češtině publikován na stránkách projektu.
SustainableCZ 