Understanding stakeholder preferences for future biogas development in Germany

2021 ◽  
Vol 109 ◽  
pp. 105704
Author(s):  
Terese E. Venus ◽  
Felix Strauss ◽  
Thomas J. Venus ◽  
Johannes Sauer
2021 ◽  
Vol 686 (1) ◽  
pp. 012056
Author(s):  
V E Aristya ◽  
Taryono ◽  
Y A Trisyono ◽  
J H Mulyo

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 863-887 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renfred Wong ◽  
Andrew Millington

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate corporate social disclosure (CSD) assurance from a stakeholder perspective within a study which encompasses both stakeholder preferences and demand drivers of CSD assurance. Design/methodology/approach – Stakeholder perceptions of and their demand for CSD assurance are examined through a questionnaire survey. The analysis is based on responses in an empirical study from 147 organisations which are investing, procuring and third-sector stakeholders. Findings – Overall, stakeholder comments suggest an emphasis on the importance of specialist environmental assurors and the role of trust. The demand for assurance is positively related to stakeholders’ assessment of the value of CSD and the use of information from information intermediaries such as responsible investment indices, and negatively related to stakeholder perceptions of CSD representational faithfulness. Research limitations/implications – This paper only draws on data from the UK. Similar research can be explored in a context outside the UK. Practical implications – Better understanding of stakeholder defined determinants of the demand for CSD assurance as well as their perceptions of CSD assurance will inform regulators and enable companies to better discharge accountability towards stakeholders. Originality/value – This is one of the few empirical studies that investigate CSD assurance and one of the first to focus on stakeholder perceptions of, and demand for, CSD assurance within a multiple stakeholder perspective, rather than practitioner or corporate perceptions of CSD assurance.


2014 ◽  
Vol 113 (1) ◽  
pp. 118-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
V.J. Brookes ◽  
M. Hernández-Jover ◽  
R. Neslo ◽  
B. Cowled ◽  
P. Holyoake ◽  
...  

New Medit ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriella VINDIGNI ◽  
Giuseppina CARRÀ ◽  
Iuri PERI ◽  
Giulia MAESANO

,,, Giulia MAESANO


2021 ◽  
pp. 109179
Author(s):  
David Thomas Kryszajtys ◽  
Jessica Xavier ◽  
Katherine Rudzinski ◽  
Adrian Guta ◽  
Soo Chan Carusone ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (15) ◽  
pp. 6168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadejda Komendantova ◽  
Leena Marashdeh ◽  
Love Ekenberg ◽  
Mats Danielson ◽  
Franziska Dettner ◽  
...  

The water and energy sectors are fundamentally linked. In Jordan, especially in the face of a changing climate, the water–energy nexus holds a number of challenges but also opportunities. A key point in exploring synergies is the identification of such, as well as the communication between the water and energy sectors. This paper promotes the importance of using a co-creative approach to help resolve opposing views and assessing stakeholder preferences in the context of the water–energy nexus in Jordan. A computer-supported, co-creative approach was used to evaluate stakeholder preferences and opinions on criteria and future scenarios for the energy and water sector in Jordan, identifying common difficulties and possibilities. The criteria describe socio-ecological aspects as well as techno-economic aspects for both systems. Discussing a set of preliminary scenarios describing possible energy and water futures ranked under a set of sector relevant criteria, a consensus between both stakeholder groups is reached. The robustness of results is determined, using a second-order probabilistic approach. The results indicate that there are no fundamental conflicts between the energy and water stakeholder groups. Applying a participatory multi-stakeholder, multi-criteria framework to the energy-water nexus case in Jordan promotes a clear understanding of where different stakeholder groups stand. This understanding and agreement can form the basis of a joint water–energy nexus policy used in the continued negotiation process between and within national and international cooperation, as well as promoting and developing acceptable suggestions to solve complex problems for both sectors.


Author(s):  
Marianna J. Coulentianos ◽  
Shanna R. Daly ◽  
Kathleen H. Sienko

Abstract Using prototypes during design requirements elicitation (RE) interviews with stakeholders can encourage stakeholder participation. Stakeholder engagement and the quality of the feedback provided can be influenced by the format of the RE interview, especially in a cross-cultural design setting. Although the selection of design practices is typically motivated by designer preferences and design outcomes, deliberate consideration of stakeholder preferences and perceptions may lead to a more nuanced understanding of when and how to best leverage particular design practices. This study investigated the influence of the number of prototypes (here, assistive devices for removing subdermal contraceptive implants) presented during RE interviews on Ghanaian stakeholder preferences. The findings revealed that most participants (n = 34, 94%) preferred the presence of one or more prototypes compared to no prototypes during the interviews because prototypes enabled participants to better understand the design space, provide accurate feedback, and evaluate ideas. Prototypes provided participants with a basis for answering designers’ questions. When they were not provided with a prototype, participants explained that they imagined a novel device concept or recalled a device from prior experiences. Further, participants preferred the use of three prototypes versus a single prototype because multiple prototypes enabled them to compare across designs and make choices. These findings suggest that designers seeking requirements-related input from stakeholders at the problem definition stage should consider using one or more prototypes, unless they are interested in collecting design ideas from stakeholders.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document