What is a good public participation process? Five perspectives from the public

It is now widely accepted that members of the public should be involved in environmental decision-making. This has inspired many to search for princip les that characterize good public participation processes. In this paper we report on a study that identifies discourses about what defines a good pro cess. Our case study was a forest planning process in northern New England and New York. We employed Q methodology to learn how participants character ize a good process differently, by selecting, defining, and privileging dif ferent principles. Five discourses, or perspectives, about good process eme rged from our study. One perspective emphasizes that a good process acquire s and maintains popular legitimacy. A second sees a good process as one tha t facilitates an ideological discussion. A third focuses on the fairness of the process. A fourth perspective conceptualizes participatory processes a s a power struggle-in this instance a power play between local landowning i nterests and outsiders. A fifth perspective highlights the need for leaders hip and compromise. Dramatic differences among these views suggest an impor tant challenge for those responsible for designing and carrying out public participation processes. Conflicts may emerge about process designs because people disagree about what is good in specific contexts.