Integrative Theory of Reflexive Dialogues

  • Martin Welp
  • Susanne Stoll-Kleemann
Part of the Environmental Science and Engineering book series (ESE)


Bayesian Network Mental Model Integrative Theory Natural Resource Management Public Participation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ames, D.P., Neilson, B.T. (2001). A Bayesian Decision Network Engine for Internet-Based Stakeholder Decision-Making. World Water and Environmental Resources Congress. Orlando, FloridaGoogle Scholar
  2. Argyris, C., Schön, D.A. (1996). Organisational Learning II: Theory, method, and practice, Reading. Addison-WesleyGoogle Scholar
  3. Asch, S. (1956). Status of Independence and Conformity: A Minority of One Against a Unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs 70(9)Google Scholar
  4. Ashmore, R.D., Del Boca, F.K. (1981). Conceptual approaches to stereotypes and stereotyping. In: Hamilton, D.L. (ed). Cognitive processes in stereotyping and intergroup behavior. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 1–35Google Scholar
  5. Beierle, T.C. (2002). Democracy On-line: An Evaluation of the National Dialogue on Public Involvement in EPA Decisions. RFF Report, Resources for the Future, Washington D.CGoogle Scholar
  6. Berghöfer, A., Berghöfer, U. (2006). ‘Participation’ in Development Thinking — Coming to Grips with a Truism and its Critiques. In: Stoll-Kleemann, S., Welp, M. (eds). Stakeholder Dialogues in Natural Resources Management. Springer-Verlag, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  7. Bohm, D. (1996). On Dialogue. RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  8. Bostrom, A., Fischhoff, B., Morgan, M.G. (1992). Characterizing mental models of hazardous process: A methodology and an application to radon. J. Social Issues 48, 85–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Breen, R. (1999). Beliefs, rational choice and Bayesian learning. Rationality and Society 11, 463–479Google Scholar
  10. Brehm, J.W. (1966). A Theory of Psychological Reactance. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Cain, J. (2001). Planning improvements in natural resources management. Guidelines for using Bayesian networks to support the planning and management of development programmes in the water sectors and beyond. Centre for Ecology and Hydrology CEH, Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
  12. Clark, W.C., Jäger, J., van Eijndhoven, J., Dickson, N.N. (2001a). Learning to Manage Global Environmental Risks: A Comparative History of Social Responses to Climate Change, Ozone Depletion and Acid Rain. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  13. Clark, W.C., Jäger, J., van Eijndhoven, J., Dickson N.N. (2001b). Learning to Manage Global Environmental Risks: A Functional Analysis of Social Responses to Climate Change, Ozone Depletion, and Acid Rain. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  14. Dawes, R.M., Messick, D.M. (2000). Social Dilemmas. International Journal of Psychology 35(2), 111–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dogson, J., Spackman, M., Pearman, A., Phillips, L. (1999). DTLR Multi-Criteria Analysis Manual, NERA (National Economic Research Associates)Google Scholar
  16. Doise, W. (1978). Groups and individuals: Explanations in social psychology. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Dürrenberger, G., Behringer, J., Dahinden, U., Gerger, Å., Kasemir, B., Querol, C., Schüle, R., Tabara, D., Toth, F., van Asselt, M., Vassilarou, D., Willi, N., Jaeger, C.C. (1997). Focus Groups in Integrated Assessment. A Manual for a participatory tool. ULYSSES WP-97-2. Darmstadt University of Technology, Center for Interdisciplinary Studies in Technology, DarmstadtGoogle Scholar
  18. Enayati, J. (2002). The research: Effective Communication and Decision-Making in Diverse Groups Beyond Deadlock and Conflict. In: Hemmati, M. (ed). Multi-stakeholder Processes for Governance and Sustainability. Earthscan, London, 73–95Google Scholar
  19. Ernst, A.M., Bayen, U.J., Spada, H. (1992). Informationssuche und-verarbeitung zur Entscheidungsfindung bei einem ökologischen Problem. In: Pawlik, K., Stapf, K.H. (eds). Huber, Bern, 107–127Google Scholar
  20. Forester, J. (1985). Critical Theory and Planning Practice. In: Forester, J. (ed). Critical Theory and Public Life. The MIT Press, Massachusetts, 202–227Google Scholar
  21. Forester, J. (1993). Critical Theory, Public Policy and Planning Practice. Toward a Critical Pragmatism. State University of New York Press, AlbanyGoogle Scholar
  22. Gardner, G.T., Stern, P.C. (1996). Environmental Problems and Human Behavior. Allyn and Bacon, BostonGoogle Scholar
  23. Gunderson, A. (1995). The Environmental Promise of Democratic Deliberation. University of Wisconsin Press, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  24. Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons, Science 168, 1243–1248Google Scholar
  25. Hemmati, M. (2002). Multi-stakeholder Processes for Governance and Sustainability. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  26. Hogg, M.A., Vaughan, G. (1998). Social Psychology. Prentice Hall Europe, HarlowGoogle Scholar
  27. IIASA (2004). International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA). Austria, Vienna. Available from World Wide Web. URL: Scholar
  28. Jackson, S.E. (1996). The Consequences of Diversity in Multidisciplinary Work Teams. In: West, M. (ed). Handbook of Work Group Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Jaeger, C.C. (2003). A Note on Domains of Discourse — Logical Know-How for Integrated Modelling. Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK). Working paper No. 86Google Scholar
  30. Jaeger, C.C., Renn, O., Rosa, A., Webler, T. (1998). Decision analysis and rational action. In: Rayner, S., Malone, E.L. (eds). Human Choice and Climate Change. Battelle Press, Columbus, OhioGoogle Scholar
  31. Jaeger, C.C., Kasemir, B., Stoll-Kleemann, S., Schibli, D., Dahinden, U. (2000). Climate change and the voice of the public. Integrated Assessment 1, 339–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jentsch, A., Wittmer, H., Jax, K., Ring, I., Henle, K. (2003). Biodiversity-Emerging Issues for Linking Natural and Social Sciences. GAIA 12(2), 121–128Google Scholar
  33. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., Tversky, A. (1982). Judgement under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  34. Kasemir, B., Dahinden, U., Swartling, Å.G., Schüle, R., Tabara, D., Jaeger, C.C. (2000). Citizens’ perspectives on climate change and energy use. Global Environmental Change 10(3), 169–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kasemir, B., Jaeger, C.C., Jäger, J. (2003). Public participation in sustainability assessments. In: Kasemir, B., Jäger, J., Jaeger, C. C., Gardner., M. T. (eds). Public Participation in Sustainability Science. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  36. Keen, M., Brown, V.A., Dyball, R. (2005). Social Learning: A New Approach to Environmental Management. In: Social Learning in Environmental Management: building a sustainable future. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  37. Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experiences as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  38. Krüger, R.A. (1993). Quality Control in Focus Group Research. In: Morgan, D.L. (ed). Successful Focus Groups: Advancing the state of the art. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, 65–85Google Scholar
  39. Lantermann, E.D., Döring-Seipel, E. (1990). Umwelt und Werte. In: Kruse, L., Graumann, C.F., Lantermann, E.D. (eds). Ökologische Psychologie. Ein Handbuch in Schlüsselbegriffen. Psychologie Verlags-Union, München, 632–639Google Scholar
  40. Lantermann, E.D., Döring-Seipel, E., Schima, P. (1992). Werte, Gefühle und Unbestimmtheit: Kognitiv-emotionale Wechselwirkungen im Umgang mit einem ökologischen System. In: Pawlik, K., Stapf, K.H. (eds). Umwelt und Verhalten: Perspektiven und Ergebnisse ökopsychologischer Forschung. Huber, Bern, 129–144Google Scholar
  41. Leskinen, A. (1994). Environmental Planning as Learning: The Principles of Negotiation, the Disaggregative Decision-making Method and Parallel Organisation in Developing the Road Administration. Publications No. 5. University of Helsinki. Department of Economics and Management, Land Use Economics, HelsinkiGoogle Scholar
  42. Lindblom, C.E. (1959). The science of muddling through. Public Administration Review 19(2), 79–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Maarleveld, M., van de Velde, R., van Uum, J., Pleisier, I. (2006). To See or not to See, that is the Question: Geo-information Visualization Tools as a Means to Facilitate Stakeholder Dialogues in Land and Water Management Planning. In: Stoll-Kleemann, S., Welp, M. (eds). Stakeholder Dialogues in Natural Resources Management. Springer-Verlag, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  44. Mackie, D.M., Hamilton, D.L. (1993). Affect, cognition and stereotyping: interactive processes in group perception. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  45. Merton, R.K. (1987). The focussed interview and focus groups: continuities and discontinuities. Public Opinion Quarterly 51(4), 550–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Messner, D. (1998). Die Netzwerkgesellschaft: Wirtschaftliche Entwicklung und internationale Wettbewerbsfähigkeit als Probleme gesellschaftlicher Steuerung. Weltforum Verlag, KölnGoogle Scholar
  47. Morgan, D.L. (1988). Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. Sage, Newbury ParkGoogle Scholar
  48. O’Connor, M. (2000). The VALSE project-an introduction. Ecological Economics 34 (Special Issue: Social Processes of Environmental Valuation), 165–174Google Scholar
  49. Oels, A. (2003). Evaluating stakeholder participation in the transition to sustainable development: Methodology, case studies and implications for policymaking. LIT-Verlag, MünsterGoogle Scholar
  50. Oels, A. (2006). Evaluating Stakeholder Dialogues. In: Stoll-Kleemann, S., Welp, M. (eds). Stakeholder Dialogues in Natural Resources Management. Springer-Verlag, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  51. O’Riordan, T., Stoll-Kleemann, S. (2002). Deliberative democracy and participatory biodiversity. In: O’Riordan, T., Stoll-Kleemann, S. (eds). Biodiversity, Sustainability and Human Communities. Protecting Beyond the Protected. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 87–112Google Scholar
  52. Pavitt, C. (1993). What (little) we know about formal group discussion procedures. A review of relevant research. Small Group Research 24(2), 217–235Google Scholar
  53. Pennington, D.C., Gillen, K., Hill, P. (1999). Social psychology. Arnold, LondonGoogle Scholar
  54. Pettigrew, T. (1989). Intergroup Contact Theory. Annual Reviews of Psychology 49, 65–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Phillips, G.M., Wood, J.T. (1984). Emergent Issues in Human Decision-making. Southern Illinois University Press, CarbondaleGoogle Scholar
  56. Pratt, J. Gordon, P., Plamping, D. (1999). Working whole systems. Putting theory into practice in organisations. King’s Fund, LondonGoogle Scholar
  57. Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making Democracy work. Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  58. Putnam, R. D. (2002). The Collapse of the Fact/Value Dichotomy and other Essays. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  59. Renn, O. (2006). Participatory Processes for Natural Resource Management. In: Stoll-Kleemann, S., Welp, M. (eds). Stakeholder Dialogues in Natural Resources Management. Springer-Verlag, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  60. Rosenhead, J. (2001). Introduction: old and new paradigms of analysis. In: Rosenhead, J., Mingers, J. (eds). Rational Analysis for a Problematic World Revisited: Problem Structuring Methods for Complexity, Uncertainty and Conflict. John Wiley and Sons Ltd, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  61. Scheffran, J. (2006). Tools for Stakeholder Assessment and Interaction. In: Stoll-Kleemann, S., Welp, M. (eds). Stakeholder Dialogues in Natural Resources Management. Springer-Verlag, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  62. Scheffran, J., Stoll-Kleemann, S. (2003). Participatory Governance in Environmental Conflict Resolution: Developing a Framework of Sustainable Action and Interaction. In: Deb, K., Srivastava, L. (eds.). Transitions Towards Sustainable Development in South Asia. The Energy and Resources Institute. India, New Delhi, 307–327Google Scholar
  63. Seibold, D.R. (1999). The Impact of Formal Procedures on Group Processes, Members, and Task Outcomes. In: Frey, L.R. (ed). The Handbook of Group Communication Theory and Research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 395–431Google Scholar
  64. Senge, P. (1998). The fifth discipline. The art and practice of the learning organisations. Century Business, LondonGoogle Scholar
  65. Sherif, M. (1966). Group conflict and cooperation: their social psychology. Routledge and Kegan Paul, LondonGoogle Scholar
  66. Sherif, M., Sherif, C.W. (1953). Groups in Harmony and Tension. Harper, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  67. Simon, H.A. (1957). Models of Man. Social and Rational. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  68. Smith, E.R., Mackie, D.M. (2000). Social Psychology. Psychology Press, Sussex, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  69. Sterman, J.D. (1991). A Skeptic’s Guide to Computer Models. Available from World Wide Web: <’s_Guide.pdf>Google Scholar
  70. Sterman, J.D. (2002). All models are wrong: reflections on becoming a systems scientist. System Dynamics Review 18(4), 501–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Stoll-Kleemann, S. (2001a). Reconciling Opposition to Protected Areas Management in Europe: The German experience. Environment 43(5), 32–44Google Scholar
  72. Stoll-Kleemann, S. (2001b). Barriers to Nature Conservation in Germany: A model explaining opposition to protected areas. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21(4), 369–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Stoll-Kleemann, S. (2003). Integrating social psychological theories for interdisciplinary global change research. GAIA 12(4), 325–326Google Scholar
  74. Stoll-Kleemann, S. (2005). Voices for Biodiversity Management in the 21st Century. Environment 47(10), 24–36Google Scholar
  75. Stoll-Kleemann, S., O’Riordan, T. (2002a). From participation to partnership in biodiversity protection: experience from Germany and South Africa. Society and Natural Resources 15(2), 157–173Google Scholar
  76. Stoll-Kleemann, S., O’Riordan, T. (2002b). Enhancing Biodiversity and Humanity. In: O’Riordan, T., Stoll-Kleemann, S. (eds). Biodiversity, Sustainability and Human Communities. Protecting Beyond the Protected. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 295–310Google Scholar
  77. Stoll-Kleemann, S., Bertzky, M. (2006). Biodiversity Management and Monitoring in Protected Areas — State of the Art and Current Trends. In: Sonak, S. (ed). Multiple Dimensions of Global Environmental Change. Teri Press, New Delhi, India, 143–169Google Scholar
  78. Stoll-Kleemann, S., O’Riordan, T., Jaeger, C.C. (2001). The psychology of denial concerning climate mitigation measures: evidence from Swiss focus groups. Global Environmental Change 11(2), 107–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Stoll-Kleemann, S., O’Riordan, T., Burns, T. (2003). Linking the citizen to governance for sustainable climate futures. In: Kasemir, B., Gardner, M., Jäger, J., Jaeger, C.C. (eds). Public Participation in Sustainability Science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 239–248Google Scholar
  80. Stoll-Kleemann, S., Bender, S., Berghöfer, A., Bertzky, M., Fritz-Vietta, N., Schliep, R., Thierfelder, B. (2006). Linking Governance and Management Perspectives with Conservation Success. Perspectives on Biodiversity Governance and Management 1(1), 1–40Google Scholar
  81. Tajfel, H. (1978). Differentiation between Social Groups. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  82. Tajfel, H., Turner, J.C. (1979). The social identity theory of intergroup conflict. In: Worchel, S., Austin, W.G. (eds). The Social Psychology of Intergroup relations. Brooks/Cole, Monterey, CA, 188–204Google Scholar
  83. Triandis, H.C., Hall, E.R., Ewen, R.B. (1965). Member Heterogeneity and Dyadic Creativity. Human Relations 18(1), 33–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Turner, J.C. (1982). Towards a cognitive redefinition of the social group. In: Tajfel, H. (ed). Social identity and intergroup relations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 15–40Google Scholar
  85. Tyler, T.R., Degoey, P. (1995). Collective Restraint in Social Dilemmas: Procedural Justice and Social Identification Effects on Support for Authorities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69, 482–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. University of Dortmund (2006). Available from World Wide Web: URL:, [07.08.2006]Google Scholar
  87. Von Neumann, J., Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  88. Weber, S. (1998). Organisationsentwicklung und Frauenförderung: Eine exemplarische Untersuchung in 3 Organisationstypen der privaten Wirtschaft. Ulrike Helmer Verlag, Königstein/TaunusGoogle Scholar
  89. Welp, M., de la Vega-Leinert, A.C., Stoll-Kleemann, S., Jaeger, C.C. (2006a). Science-based stakeholder dialogues: Theories and tools. Global Environmental Change 16(2), 170–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Welp, M., de la Vega-Leinert, A.C., Stoll-Kleemann, S., Fürstenau, C. (2006b). Science-based stakeholder dialogues in climate change research. In: Stoll-Kleemann, S., Welp, M. (eds). Stakeholder Dialogues in Natural Resources Management. Springer-Verlag, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  91. Welp, M., Kasemir, B., Jaeger, C. C. (in press). Citizens’ Voices in Environmental Policy: The Contribution of Integrated Assessment Focus Groups to Accountable Decision Making. In: Coenen, F.H.J.M., Paterson, R. (eds). The Promise and Limits of Participatory Processes for the Quality of Environmentally Related Decision-making, Springer-Verlag, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  92. Wheatley, M.J. (1992). Leadership and the new science: Learning about organisation from an orderly universe. Berret-Koehler Publishers, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  93. Wynne, B. (2005). Risk as globalising ‘democratic’ discourse? Framing subjects and citizens. In: Leach, M., Scoones, I., Wynne, B. (eds). Science and Citizens. Globalisation and the challenge of engagement. Zed Books, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Welp
    • 1
  • Susanne Stoll-Kleemann
    • 2
  1. 1.University of Applied Sciences EberswaldeGermany
  2. 2.Humboldt University of BerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations