Steering initiatives meant to address challenges and change how communities deal with times of flux and uncertainty, are seldom straightforward. Underway such processes may require local actors to rethink their initiating premise and set of solutions. A core benefit to co-creation* partnerships is the different kinds of knowledge available. It creates the opportunity to build knowledge together that is more complete by integrating local and academic sources. Therefore, stepping stone 3 entails developing a deeper understanding of the issues that brought people to the table in the first place. This phase can often be initiated by a researcher presenting to the community ‘what they think they know’ about the community’s situation or challenge. This means demonstrating that a real effort has been put into examining the place and informing what is observed with broader disciplinary training that helps the researcher ask good questions and link to general insights from other studies and places grabbling with similar issues. Then these ‘outsider’ perspectives should be refined by a diverse set of stakeholders identified earlier in the process (i.e., stepping stone 1) and considerations about how to facilitate processes that are as inclusive as possible using knowledge from stepping stone 2 should be applied. Summarising, refining, and bringing back the new understanding of the issues on which to collaborate is a critical step before moving toward action.
3. Refining Purpose and Planning for Action
In setting up partnerships, it should be the intention to establish meaningful work that fits the needs of all stakeholders. In this step we encourage reflection that goes beyond these ‘good practice’ elements by drawing attention to insights, or unexpected challenging issues. This paper elaborates on several core themes on building partnerships including:
- The importance of trust and pre-existing relationships
- Local capacity or readiness for partnership
- Different ‘sensitivities’ around inclusion
- Internal power differentials within a community
The methods of stepping stone 1 and 2 allowed identification of shared obstacles and a shared purpose, followed by broadened and just inclusion*. The methods of stepping stone 3 build on acquired knowledge from previous stepping stones, and aim to facilitate future steps towards a co-created plan of action.
The workshop ‘Co-develop Tailored Empowerment Programs (TEPs)* to be tested in Pilots’*, is a workshop that should build on previously gathered knowledge to envision possible solutions of predefined challenges. In the EmpowerUs-project, this second round of workshop built from the first ‘Future scenarios’ workshops to create a shared plan for action. This guidance document offers facilitation guidelines for workshops that aim to form ideas into concrete action plans.
Reflection interviews is a method that allows reflection within and between research teams. The interviews can be used to allow for solving problems together, reflecting with peers, as well as recording information about the ongoing work in the field. This method can be done continuously throughout the project to track concerns, progress and success. Chapter 9 of the Handbook of Inclusive Methodologies offers further explanation of the process and usage of reflection interviews, while these Reflection Guides from Workshop 1 and Workshop 2 outline the questions asked in two different rounds of reflection interviews in the EmpowerUs project.
During the development of an action plan that facilitates an inclusive and just transition, researchers or local facilitators might present potential pathways to local community members and community organisations to allow communal decisions for a path forward. In EmpowerUs, these pathways were presented as Pilot-options*. Deliverable 4.2 presents the three Pilot-options for each TCL* (See Chapter 3). This video introduces the TEP concept (see also more detailed video here), and this paper by Dushkova et al. (2025) further outlines details in the process of developing ‘Tailored Empowerment Programs’ (TEPs) in the EmpowerUs project.
You have now come a long way in refining your focus. Before proceeding to experimentation, take time to reflect on the way your participatory process is evolving. The reflective checklist below will help you identify and reflect on fruitful trust-building activities and/or conflict management efforts:
- How is participation evolving over time?
- What challenges are you encountering?
- How are conflicts and internal power issues handled?
- Is trust building and growing?
- What are the core challenges that have not been solved? How do you ensure transparency about the compromises that were made?
Keep in mind that participation is sometimes a privilege that not everyone can afford. For example, it might be unethical to push migrant workers in the tourism industry to invest their time in a process that will have little benefit for them or put their reputations at risk. There are big questions about what constitutes good representation that will be highly context dependent. Moving into the action phase of the work keep thinking of ways to include the wishes, values, and needs of those who have not been heard if you have relevant knowledge that can be applied.