Association of Stakeholder Dialogue Formats with Consensus Building in Environmental Planning Forums
Keywords:
Stakeholder Dialogue, Consensus Building, Environmental Planning, Difference Analysis, Multidisciplinary ResearchAbstract
Environmental planning increasingly relies on collaborative governance to address complex socio-ecological challenges. Stakeholder dialogue is widely recognized as a critical mechanism for resolving conflicts and building consensus. However, empirical evidence linking specific dialogue formats to different dimensions of consensus building remains sparse and fragmented. This study examines how three distinct dialogue formats—structured workshops, semi-structured advisory committees, and open public forums—affect consensus building outcomes. Using a comparative difference analysis framework applied to data from environmental planning forums in Southeast Asia, we assess cognitive consensus, relational consensus, and commitment to action. The statistical results show that structured workshops excel at fostering relational trust and commitment, whereas semi-structured advisory committees are highly effective for building cognitive alignment on complex technical issues. Open public forums, while valuable for democratic legitimacy, show significantly lower performance in resolving deep-seated conflicts. The findings suggest that environmental planners must strategically select and sequence dialogue formats to achieve specific consensus outcomes, balancing open participation with structured collaboration.References
1. Kairouz, P.; McMahan, H.B.; Avent, B.; Bellet, A.; Bennis, M.; Bhagoji, A.N.; Bonawitz, K.; Charles, Z.; Cormode, G.; Cummings, R.; et al. Advances and Open Problems in Federated Learning. Found. Trends Mach. Learn. 2021, 14, 1–210.
2. Shi, W.; Cao, J.; Zhang, Q.; Li, Y.; Xu, L. Edge Computing: Vision and Challenges. IEEE Internet Things J. 2016, 3, 637–646.
3. Liu, X.; Tan, J.; Ren, X.; Dai, H. Self-Attention Proximal Policy Optimization for Beam Tracking in mmWave Communications. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 2026, 44, 4552–4569.
4. Batty, M.; Axhausen, K.W.; Giannotti, F.; Pozdnoukhov, A.; Bazzani, A.; Wachowicz, M.; Ouzounis, G.; Portugali, Y. Smart Cities of the Future. Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top. 2012, 214, 481–518.
5. Gubbi, J.; Buyya, R.; Marusic, S.; Palaniswami, M. Internet of Things (IoT): A Vision, Architectural Elements, and Future Directions. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2013, 29, 1645–1660.
6. Zhu, T.; Shi, X.; Xu, X.; Gui, J.; Cao, J. HyperComm: Hypergraph-Based Communication in Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning. Neural Netw. 2024, 178, 106432.
7. Liu, X.; Xu, Y.; Jia, L.; Wu, Q.; Anpalagan, A. Anti-Jamming Communications Using Spectrum Waterfall: A Deep Reinforcement Learning Approach. IEEE Commun. Lett. 2018, 22, 998–1001.
8. Chen, X.; Ding, H.; Ma, Y.; Li, X.; An, J.; Fang, Y. A Dual-Tier Policy-Oriented Anti-Jamming Scheme Based on Deep Reinforcement Learning. IEEE Trans. Wirel. Commun. 2026, 25, 10652–10668.
9. Yang, Q.; Liu, Y.; Chen, T.; Tong, Y. Federated Machine Learning: Concept and Applications. ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol. 2019, 10, 1–19.
10. Zanella, A.; Bui, N.; Castellani, A.; Vangelista, L.; Zorzi, M. Internet of Things for Smart Cities. IEEE Internet Things J. 2014, 1, 22–32.
11. Abbas, N.; Zhang, Y.; Taherkordi, A.; Skeie, T. Mobile Edge Computing: A Survey. IEEE Internet Things J. 2018, 5, 450–465.
12. Nguyen, T.-A.; Le, L.T.; Nguyen, T.D.; Bao, W.; Seneviratne, S.; Hong, C.S.; Tran, N.H. Federated PCA on Grassmann Manifold for IoT Anomaly Detection. IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. 2024, 32, 4456–4471.
13. Huang, W.; Ye, M.; Shi, Z.; Wan, G.; Li, H.; Du, B.; Yang, Q. Federated Learning for Generalization, Robustness, Fairness: A Survey and Benchmark. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 2024, 46, 9387–9406.
14. Zhang, Y.; Luo, Y.; Yang, T.; Wu, X.; Hu, B. Eecs-Fl: Energy-Efficient Client Selection for Federated Learning in AIoT. EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw. 2025, 2025, 12.
15. Liu, J.; Liu, X.; Wang, S.; Wan, X.; Li, D.; Lu, K.; He, K. Communication-Efficient Federated Multi-View Clustering. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 2026, 48, 17–32.
16. Ben-Elia, E.; Shiftan, Y. Which road do I take? A learning-based approach to route choice. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2010, 44, 110–120.
17. Sari, R.K.; Alfarizi, M.; Ab Talib, M.S. Sustainable strategic planning and management influence on sustainable performance: Findings from halal culinary MSMEs in Southeast Asia. J. Model. Manag. 2024, 19, 2034–2060.
18. Ambrosini, V.; Bowman, C. What are dynamic capabilities and are they a useful construct in strategic management? Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2009, 11, 29–49.
19. OECD/Eurostat. Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data, 3rd ed.; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2005; Available online: https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2005/11/oslo-manual_g1gh5dba/9789264013100-en.pdf (accessed on 29 January 2026).
20. Li, Y.-H.; Huang, J.-W.; Tsai, M.-T. Entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance: The role of knowledge creation process. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2009, 38, 440–449.
21. Brammer, S.; Millington, A.; Rayton, B. The contribution of corporate social responsibility to organizational commitment. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2007, 18, 1701–1719.
22. Fojtiková, L.; Vavrek, R.; Dolezelová, P. Road of the least developed countries to sustainable development: Assessing trade participation in the context of the sustainable development goals. Sustain. Dev. 2023, 31, 2492–2506.
23. Liu, H.; Ma, S.; AlWadi, B.M.; Alam, F.; Zhang, Y. Exploring the nexus between corporate social responsibility and consumer green behavior: The interplay of corporate image, service quality, customer trust and satisfaction. Soc. Responsib. J. 2025, 21, 751–775.
24. Engert, S.; Rauter, R.; Baumgartner, R.J. Corporate sustainability strategy—Bridging the gap between formulation and implementation. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 113, 822–834.
25. Bornay Barrachina, M.; López Cabrales, Á.; Salas Vallina, A. Sensing, seizing, and reconfiguring dynamic capabilities in innovative firms: Why does strategic leadership make a difference? Bus. Res. Q. 2023, 26, 399–420.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Authors
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Articles are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), unless otherwise stated.
