Search results

This paper aims to provide empirical evidence on formal stakeholder participation (or “lobbying”) in the early phase of the International Sustainability Standards Board’s (ISSB’s) standard-setting.

Drawing on a rational-choice framework, this paper conducts a content analysis of comment letters (CLs) submitted to the ISSB in response to its first two exposure drafts (published in 2022) to investigate stakeholder participation across different groups and jurisdictional origins. The analyses examine participation in terms of frequency (measured using the number of participating stakeholders) and intensity (measured using the length of CLs).

Preparers and users of sustainability reports emerge as the largest participating stakeholder groups, while the accounting/sustainability profession participates with high average intensity. Surprisingly, preparers do not outweigh users in terms of participation frequency and intensity; and large preparers outweigh smaller ones in terms of participation intensity but not participation frequency. Internationally, stakeholders from countries with a private financial accounting standard-setting system participate more frequently and intensively than others. In addition, country-level economic wealth and sustainability performance are positively associated with more participating stakeholders.

This study is of interest for organizations and stakeholders involved in or affected by standard-setting in the field of sustainability reporting. The finding of limited participation by investors and from developing countries suggests the ISSB take actions to enhance the voice of those stakeholders.

The imbalances in stakeholder participation that were found pose potential threats to an important aspect of the input legitimacy of the ISSB’s standard-setting process.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first to explore stakeholder participation by means of CLs with the ISSB in terms of frequency and intensity.

This paper aims to explore the Kinh and ethnic stakeholders’ participation and collaboration in tourism planning in Sapa, Vietnam.

The primary data collection involved semi-structured interviews with 33 key tourism stakeholders, and data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

The findings reveal that in terms of participation and collaboration in tourism planning, there is little difference between the Kinh and ethnic groups. Tourism planning is viewed as a top-down approach, and both groups at the community level have very limited participation in tourism planning activities. However, at the on-site management level, there are opposing views between high (Kinh) and low (ethnic) management levels about participation in tourism planning. Both groups recognize the need for interdependence regarding collaboration in tourism planning. They also share similar aspects in regard to facilitating and hindering their participation in tourism planning.

The limitations of this study include the use of a qualitative method, which limited the number of respondents. Future research could benefit from the application of quantitative research methods to include a greater number of local tourism stakeholders.

This study contributes to a better understanding of tourism planning in the Vietnamese context and has some practical implications for destination management and policymaking.

This is the first study to investigate the perspectives of Kinh and ethnic groups in term of participation and collaboration in tourism planning in the Vietnamese context.

The concept of “participation” has become a buzzword in contemporary public governance models. However, despite the broad and significant interest, defining participation remains a debated topic. The aim of the current study was to explore how participants perceived and interpreted the meaning and scope of participation.

This study is part of a four-year (2019–2022) longitudinal research project investigating stakeholder participation in the context of developing and establishing a strategic regional plan in Region Skåne in southern Sweden. The research project has a qualitative approach and uses interviews with different stakeholder groups such as municipal politicians and public officials and a survey as empirical material.

The authors developed a participation spectrum including eight types of participation: to be open, to be informed, to be listened to, to discuss, to be consulted, to give and take, to collaborate and to co-create. The authors also identified four different purposes of participation: creating a joint network, creating a joint understanding, creating a joint effort and creating a joint vision. The spectrum and the purposes were related through four characteristics of participation, i.e. involvement, interaction, influence and empowerment.

The study rests on a single case, and so the results have limited transferatibility.

Researching participation in terms of the participants' perceptions contributes a new perspective to the existing literature, which has commonly focussed on the organizers' perceptions of participation. Moreover, in order to clarify what participation meant to the participants, the study puts emphasis on untangling this from the why question of participation.

Accounting standards are issued only after a comprehensive due process, which includes opportunities for external constituents to participate via public hearings and comment letters. The purpose of this paper is to identify stakeholders unique to government and evaluate the extent to which they respond to 13 due process documents issued by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). The results provide insight into the comment letter element of due process – who participates, in what way do they participate, and why do they participate?

Comment letters received by the GASB in response to eleven exposure drafts and three preliminary views (PV) documents from 2010-2013 were examined, and respondents were categorized according to Cheng’s (1994) model as modified by Kidwell and Lowensohn (2011), resulting in the following 16 participant types: academics, budget officers, bureaucratic managers, state auditors/controllers, citizens, financial markets, elected officials, external auditors/CPA firms, finance officers, government accountants, government auditors, interest groups, media, professional associations, standard setters, and other governments. The authors next examined responses in favor of and opposed to for each document by group and responses by stakeholder group over time.

The authors find that participants came from various stakeholder groups. Consistent with findings in different standard-setting environments, the primary financial statement preparers – finance officers – were the most frequent individual respondents; however, there was participation from a wide variety of stakeholders. Responses are generally constructive and relatively consistent in their balance of favorable and unfavorable feedback over time, with a few exceptions. Closer examination of comment letters in response to the financial projections PV document reveals both conceptual and practical considerations underlying respondent participation.

Motivations for participation were discerned from the letter content, but direct data on motivation was not measured, limiting the conclusions to apparent motivation. Future research might examine the extent to which comment letter content is incorporated into the basis of conclusions section of issued standards to assess the direct impact of comment letters on the governmental accounting standard-setting process. It would also be relevant to trace specific projects that advanced from a PV stage to the exposure draft stage to assess whether the proportional participation of these stakeholder groups is different throughout due process.

The GASB has long been receptive to constituent feedback (Lowensohn, 2000) and can glean useful input from comment letters. By closely examining arguments impounded within comment letters, including conceptual and practical considerations, and by utilizing a more delineated understanding of the stakeholders in governmental accounting standard setting, the Board can better forge into the future.

Much of the extant research documents that stakeholder participation is relatively low, given the number of parties affected by accounting standards. Prior research into both public and private sector accounting standard setting in the USA and abroad has not used all unique actors specific to the public sector. Using a comprehensive stakeholder model designed for the governmental environment, the authors examine who participates in the GASB comment letter process, assess the nature of GASB comment letter participant responses, determine whether relative participation by stakeholder group is relatively constant over time, and consider why the participants respond.

The chapter aims to explore the corporate social responsibility (CSR) policy domain at EU decision-making level, aiming to understand the nature of the participation shaping the CSR policy agenda co-design.

Building on a conceptual framework of participation, the chapter highlights the literature and policy views around the importance of EU CSR policy and how EU envisage the framework of the CSR policy co-design. By highlighting conceptual dimensions of the participatory governance, different levels of participation that shape the policy are evidenced. In particular, a case analysis emphasising the predominant role of the consultation approach in the decision-making process of the CSR policy is undertaken.

The findings shed light on the shift from the traditional passive participation in EU CSR policy decision making, based on purely communications towards consultation and multi-stakeholders participation. From the multi-stakeholder perspective, the EU Multi-Stakeholder Forum’s strategic relevance is observed, however, with no clear mechanisms to enforce its aims. Although the CSR policy is a core priority on the policy agenda, its voluntary approach justifies its early stages of implementation and fragmented use.

The research is qualitative, based on literature review and policy view. Further research directions could enrich the chapter.

The research contributes to the theoretical discussion around participation in a supranational context. Our insights shed light on the levels of participation and CSR policy goals and call for a critical debate on the EU policy co-design processes. Furthermore, through the lens of a case analysis, it sheds light on how EU CSR forum fits in with the current EU structure and its ‘principle of subsidiarity’, which states that decisions must be taken close to its citizens.

The US federal government requires auditors to follow governmental auditing standards when performing audits of entities expending significant federal government dollars. This study explores stakeholder participation during the comment letter phase of government auditing standard setting to determine if participation is symbolic or substantive.

Researchers conduct an analysis of the 179 comment letters submitted to the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) and received for their 2010 and 2017 exposure drafts of government auditing standards.

The distribution of stakeholder participation groups in the government auditing standard-setting process differs from the distribution in the private company auditing standard-setting process. On average, participants submit letters that are greater than two pages in length. Participants also contribute feedback on topics that the GAO directly solicits. Taken together, the results demonstrate stakeholder behaviors that are consistent with a substantive rather than symbolic due process involvement for government auditing standards.

Stakeholder beliefs are inferred based on the observed behavior of comment letter submissions. Also, there is a subjective element to the classification of the comment letters for the study.

Given the far-reaching implications of Yellow Book auditing standards on public, private and nonprofit entities, the findings are relevant to a heterogeneous audience. This study reveals opportunities for users of government auditing standards, practitioners and academics for greater involvement in due process standard setting to bring additional legitimacy to the GAO and its standard-setting activities.

Beyond the current study, little empirical research examines Yellow Book auditing standards or the due process through which these standards are established. This is the first study to examine the complete set of comment letters for the 2010 and 2017 exposure drafts of government auditing standards.

This study aims to evaluate the meaningful public participation in activities relating to the master plan development and, at the same time, propose some recommendations for improvement.

The study was carried out with in-depth interviews of 35 key-informants selected from various stakeholder groups involving in public participation activities. The evaluation frameworks for meaningful participation were developed from various scholars.

The evaluation showed that the public hearings partially met the criteria of information provision and representativeness. However, there are rooms for improvement on participation in decision-making process, social learning and influence over policy decision-making. Therefore, this study proposes two recommendations. First, more flexible form of public participation is needed to enable discussions among various groups of stakeholders. Second, the organizer should communicate with stakeholders about how their opinions influence the final master plan in order to create sense of belonging among community members.

This research developed the evaluation framework for public participation in old town conservation master plan in developing country.

Public involvement, climate change reactions, stakeholder management, and stakeholder management have all been identified as weaknesses in sustainable road infrastructure development (SRID) inquiry. Most scholarly studies on sustainable infrastructure development (SID) are undertaken in advanced countries, while limited academic studies on the SID in third-world countries cite challenges impeding utilization. This chapter examines the conceptual holes in the SID model and aims to solve three identified gaps: public participation, climate change response, and stakeholder management. The inclusion of highlighted challenges is based on the belief that successful SRIP implementation would be impossible without public participation and climate change adaptation. Public participation is essential for the efficient implementation of SID. It allows stakeholders and everyone affected by infrastructure projects to participate in discussions, recognizing possible problems and creating solutions. International organizations, such as the World Bank, have embraced the concept of public participation as a need for effective project implementation. In underdeveloped countries, most infrastructure projects exclude the general populace, so public participation should be seen as a vital variable in the effective implementation of SRIP in poor countries. Arnstein (1969) proposed an eight-stage stepping ladder for citizen involvement from exploitation through consultation to citizens in control. Information is the cornerstone of all types of engagement, and the mildest kind of real involvement is a meeting when project participants voice their concerns and opinions. Co-creation and co-choice are rare in industrialized countries, and the issue of involvement has become a concern. Notification and attendance are prerequisites for meaningful participation, which can begin when the public is given the opportunity to express their opinions. Players are seen as social establishments or gatherings having the power to influence the fate of the organization, and an evaluation of the players is needed to determine whom to include. Participation in projects boosts decision-making efficacy and sufficiency by widening the information base, encouraging innovation, and fostering public acceptance of methodologies. Stakeholder engagement can increase the speed and quality of strategic decision-making. The key takeaways of the chapter are that public participation in road infrastructure projects should have a say in decisions concerning activities that affect their lives or occupations, should take into account the people’s history, cultural, natural, political, and sociological foundations and should be involved in the following ways: initiated early in the life cycle, organized and well-arranged, phased and improved, non-partisan professionals, learning about members’ traits and interests, and focussing on contentious subjects. Public engagement in SRIP implementation must be efficient and well-managed to be successful. Public participation is essential for SRID.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate how to improve the effectiveness of public participation in public infrastructure megaprojects (PIMs). Conflicts among stakeholders and uncertainty disrupt the success of PIMs when public participation is ineffective.

Secondhand data are collected to study the effectiveness of public participation in the Beijing–Shenyang High-Speed Rail (China) and the California High-Speed Rail (USA). The employed research method is an inductive case study.

Ineffective public participation can cause schedule and cost overruns and increase uncertainty in PIMs. The ambiguity of meaningful public participation, ineffective participatory approaches and overburden of public participation in environmental impact assessment are the causes of ineffective public participation in PIMs.

Public participation has become an essential part in PIMs management. This study looks at the understanding of the relationship between public participation and the success of PIMs.

Legislative bodies should perfect the laws to guarantee meaningful public participation. Lead agencies should adopt additional effective participatory approaches to solicit public comments and identify critical voices. A dispute solution mechanism is necessary to solve public participation disputes in PIMs in practice.

Stakeholder and uncertainty management are important to the success of PIMs. This study reveals methods to improve the effectiveness of public participation to alleviate the conflicts among stakeholders and reduce uncertainty in PIMs.

Sustainability has become an important topic and concept in relation to tourism planning and development. For sustainable tourism development to be successful stakeholders must be involved in the process. The questions that should be considered though are: (1) who should be considered stakeholders in tourism development, and (2) how should planners and developers involve stakeholders in the development of tourism? In order to provide answers to these questions this paper investigated sustainable tourism development and how stakeholder inclusion and involvement are incorporated in the basic concept of sustainable tourism development. This investigation was accomplished by reviewing and drawing conclusions from the literature. The discussion includes thoughts from both management and public participation perspectives. So who should be involved in the sustainable tourism development process? Based on the definitions that are used for sustainability and sustainable tourism four distinct groups are identified; the present visitors, future visitors, present host community, and future host community.