Developing an understanding of a major environmental issue with multiple
stakeholders is complex. Each stakeholder has a different perspective, level
of knowledge and institutional focus. Acid sulfate soils on New South Wales
coastal catchments are an emotive and polarising issue for the many
stakeholders involved. Conflict over acid sulfate soils is therefore
newsworthy, and the broader community is introduced to different stakeholders
from these polarising viewpoints. Consequently, cane and cattle producers, who
benefit from the draining of acid sulfate soils, are portrayed as
perpetrators. Oyster farmers and fishers, who incur the cost of acidified
water, are portrayed as victims, while local and state government agencies,
who have responsibility for regulation, are variously portrayed as either
heavy-handed bureaucrats or toothless tigers.
Multi-stakeholder benchmarking has been developed to clarify complexity and
ambiguities. By establishing indicators for documenting and understanding
change in stakeholder attitude and behaviour it aims to decrease the
divisiveness and degree of the polarised opinions. Benchmarking is a
continuous process of measurement that identifies the best and compares
against the best. Multi-stakeholder benchmarking uses multiple methods to
establish quantitative data which, along with qualitative data are used to
develop a deeper understanding of the complex social issues. It aims to
empower individuals and groups while supporting extension and processes of
change. First, information about social and economic issues is established by
identifying and surveying stakeholders, using both quantitative
‘closed’ or explicit questions and qualitative ‘open’
questions for non-structured responses. Second, qualitative research,
conducted in focus groups of subsampled survey respondents, validates and
explores the survey results. During this stage, unique characteristics of the
groups are defined, compared and best practices are identified. Results from
these 2 stages are communicated back to the stakeholders, taking care to use
non-judgemental language. Finally, best practice goals are defined,
investigated and transferred within the same or other stakeholder groups.
This paper proposes multi-stakeholder benchmarking as a new benchmarking
process, and discusses the application of it to a complex environmental
problem, acid sulfate soils. Multi-stakeholder benchmarking provides an
important opportunity for stakeholders to voice their view on how
environmental issues can be best managed and for determining which practices
they wish to change. Further it provides information for education program
development and evaluation, and facilitates the process of change. Acid
sulfate soils stakeholders’ positive responses to non-judgemental
information, that clarifies their position, and helps identify the way
forward, suggest that multi-stakeholder benchmarking is applicable to other
multi-stakeholder environmental problems.