The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evaluating Public-Participation Exercises: A Research Agenda
Open accessAbstract
The concept of public participation is one of growing interest in the UK and elsewhere, with a commensurate growth in mechanisms to enable this. The merits of participation, however, are difficult to ascertain, as there are relatively few cases in which the effectiveness of participation exercises have been studied in a structured (as opposed to highly subjective) manner. This seems to stem largely from uncertainty in the research community as to how to conduct evaluations. In this article, one agenda for conducting evaluation research that might lead to the systematic acquisition of knowledge is presented. This agenda identifies the importance of defining effectiveness and of operationalizing one’s definition (i.e., developing appropriate measurement instruments and processes). The article includes analysis of the nature of past evaluations, discussion of potential difficulties in the enactment of the proposed agenda, and discussion of some potential solutions.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
A Ladder Of Citizen Participation
Arnstein, S. R. (1969) · Journal of the American Institute of Planners · doi:10.1080/01944366908977225 · Cited by 17,064
Cited by
Governance and the Capacity to Manage Resilience in Regional Social-Ecological Systems
Lebel, L., Anderies, J. M., Campbell, B., Folke, C., Hatfield-Dodds, S., Hughes, T. P., & Wilson, J. (2006) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-01606-110119 · Cited by 1,377
Reed, M. S., Vella, S., Challies, E., de Vente, J., Frewer, L., Hohenwallner‐Ries, D., Huber, T., Neumann, R. K., Oughton, E. A., Sidoli del Ceno, J., et al. (2018) · Restoration Ecology · doi:10.1111/rec.12541 · Cited by 746
Self-citationDesigning Public Participation Processes
Bryson, J. M., Quick, K. S., Slotterback, C. S., & Crosby, B. C. (2013) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02678.x · Cited by 626
Evaluating patient and stakeholder engagement in research: moving from theory to practice
Esmail, L., Moore, E., & Rein, A. (2015) · Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research · doi:10.2217/cer.14.79 · Cited by 502
Public participation in health care priority setting: A scoping review
Mitton, C., Smith, N., Peacock, S., Evoy, B., & Abelson, J. (2009) · Health Policy · doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2009.01.005 · Cited by 396
Metadata
- Authors
- Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J.
- Venue
- Science, Technology, & Human Values
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2004-10
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 512-556
- ISSN
- 0162-2439 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-8251
- OpenAlex
- W2092377820
- Cited by
- 879
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 35.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Evaluating Public-Participation Exercises: A Research Agenda. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0162243903259197
- The paper
- Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2004). Evaluating Public-Participation Exercises: A Research Agenda. Science, Technology, & Human Values. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243903259197
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.