Angelika Zimmermann School of Business and Economics Different

Angelika Zimmermann School of Business and Economics Different views, shared frames: How members of multi-stakeholder initiatives use and deliberate shared frames to agree on sustainability actions

Background • MSIs are important vehicles for reaching sustainability solutions • Need to better understand: – how agreements can be reached across different stakeholder perspectives and interests – micro-level mechanisms • Perspectives and interests are part of stakeholder ‘frames’ – Mental schemata for making sense of the world (Goffman, 1974)

• Prior framing research has focused on: – Between-frame conflicts (Kaplan, 2008; Schoen & Rein, 1996) – ‘Cold’ aspects of frames (knowledge, understanding) • Research questions – How do stakeholders use shared frames to tackle ‘within-frame conflicts’, i. e. disagreements on views that stand in the way of joint decisions? – How do stakeholders deliberate their shared frames during micro-level interactions?

Setting • ‘Best practice’ case • Stakeholder collaboration on management of Peatland in the North Pennines

Significance of the setting • Peatlands globally store about 30% of soil carbon stock • The UK holds 13% of the world’s blanket bog (Bain et al. 2011). • Need to decide on Peatland management policies after Brexit

Methods • • • Interpretivist Observation of stakeholder workshop Post-workshop interviews Pre-/post workshop surveys (supplementary) Iterative-inductive data analysis

Findings: Shared frames • Shared ‘Collaboration’ frame ‘I think everybody was on board with what everybody's trying to do and trying to listen to everybody's point of view just to come to some sort of compromise or a plan for doing the best we can. ’ (Farmer 1) • Shared issue frames – Environmental– Economic– Localisation, – Global– Holistic– Framing to the public– External opponent-

Localisation frame: ‘This one’s a national scheme so it applies to the whole of the country. We need it localised so that we can have a different cutting date and times… even each field’s different, that’s why you want to work with local people that come onto the farm. ’ (Farmer 3) Holistic frame: ‘You can’t consider any vegetation habitat, type, or area of farm in isolation. The whole lot interreacts and if you tinker with that, it affects the others. … their production of food … the sheep enterprise and the cattle enterprise on the hill farm, the production of the environmental public goods is equally important and none of them will stand up without the other. You know, they’re all interlinked. ’ (Farmer 1)

• Shared value frames – Protecting the environment– Social justice– Respect for tradition– Place identity– Responsibilitye. g. Social justice frame Conservationist 3: … If you have a farm next door that just has dry heath on the top … that isn’t capable of restoring to that level, under the same benefit system that farm then may not be profitable. ’ … Farmer 2: ‘…Yeah, and you’ll create a two-tier system, that’s unfortunate. ’

Example: Contrasting views on heather burning • Estate keepers, farmers: – Traditional practice to create mixed (‘mosaic’) habitat for grouse and young shoots for grazing sheep – Controlled burning of combustible vegetation is an important measure to prevent wildfires (allows for the growth of the more fire-resistant heather). • Conservationists, scientists: – Traditional burning has ‘a major negative impact on the upland environment’ (threatens carbon stocks, quality of drinking water, priority habitats and species) – Wildfires develop primarily on degraded, dry bogs, hence degraded bogs should be rewetted to make them fire resistant.

HEATHER BURNING discussion: Use and deliberation of frames

Frame deliberation mechanisms and outcomes

Why did shared frames dominate?

Conditions for the dominance of shared frames

Contributions • Characteristics of deliberation mechanisms in cases where shared frames dominate • Reasons for the dominance of shared frames • Utility of shared frames > important to make shared frames more salient and elaborate them to encompass divergent views, in order to resolve within-frame conflicts.

Contributions • Helps members of MSIs and other collaborations elicit, foster, and strengthen shared frames: – reflect on and apply their shared frames more consciously – strengthen them by making them more salient and elaborate, building the ground for improved conflict resolution in the subsequent stages of the collaboration – draw on the best practices of workshop design and facilitation to elicit and deliberate shared frames.

Thank you!