Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 306

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Using system dynamics to improve public participation in environmental decisions

Stave, Krystyna A.·2002·System Dynamics Review

Abstract

Dana Meadows believed that computer simulation models and systems thinking could be powerful tools for democracy, helping make social decisions and the assumptions on which they are based more transparent and open to public debate. She also believed that people should be more involved in making conscious and informed choices about their future. In the environmental arena, pressure to increase public participation in decision‐making is growing. Not only is public involvement seen as a cornerstone of democratic ideals, it is increasingly seen by decision‐makers as a practical means of putting decisions into effect. Involving the public in decision‐making helps avoid public obstruction of decisions and garners public resources for their implementation. However, traditional approaches to public involvement, which rely heavily on information campaigns, facilitated discussions, and public hearings for conveying information and capturing stakeholder input, frequently leave participants dissatisfied. They are often perceived as one‐way communication from agency experts to stakeholders or as a mechanism for powerful special interest groups to serve their own ends. System dynamics has the potential to improve public participation in environmental decisions by providing a framework for structured deliberation when stakeholders are involved in making decisions and a more transparent and participatory educational framework to persuade stakeholders to help implement decisions. This article describes a case study using group model building to support a stakeholder advisory group examining transportation and related air quality problems. One of the most valuable effects of the approach was the information feedback it added to the advisory process. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/sdr.237

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 17 references

Cited by

See all 306

Metadata

Authors
Stave, K. A.
Venue
System Dynamics Review
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-06
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
139-167
ISSN
  • 0883-7066 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1727
OpenAlex
W2157982262
Cited by
306
References
17
FWCI
7.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Using system dynamics to improve public participation in environmental decisions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/sdr.237
The paper
Stave, K. A. (2002). Using system dynamics to improve public participation in environmental decisions. System Dynamics Review. https://doi.org/10.1002/sdr.237

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.