Beyond the usual suspects?

The role of expert knowledge in sustainability indicator

development for Scotland’s upland estates

Jayne H Glass (Centre for Mountain Studies, Perth College UHI, UK jayne.glass@perth.uhi.ac.uk)
Alister J Scott (Birmingham City University, UK alister.scott@bcu.ac.uk)
Martin F Price (Centre for Mountain Studies, Perth College UHI, UK
martin.price@perth.uhi.ac.uk)

Introduction

In Scotland, upland areas have a unique pattern of landownership with much of the land divided
into ‘estates’ owned by private individuals and organisations, public bodies, and non-
governmental and community organisations. The extent to which estate management practices
seek a balance between the use of natural resources and the economic and social needs of
communities is a key aspect of sustainability. However, little academic or policy attention has
been devoted to translating sustainability principles into practical upland estate management
strategies due to the varied range of estate ownership types, estate management objectives and
values of opinions of numerous external stakeholders.

Sustainability indicators are a useful tool that can be used to monitor progress towards
sustainability and define the central tenets of the concept. However, rationales for indicator
selection are often unclear and their ‘top-down’ nature can antagonise stakeholders and hinder
their effective implementation, particularly when they do not take into account the values of
relevant stakeholders. The development of sustainability indicators in a participatory manner
may improve communication and increase consensus among stakeholders with contrasting
management objectives, however, problems arise when participants represent different
backgrounds or expertise, or do not collectively have a history of good communication. We
argue that there remains scope to develop sustainability indicators in a creative manner,
bringing different types of expert knowledge together to seek joint learning opportunities and
develop indicators in a collective, more accountable manner.

A novel approach

We propose a widely-applicable methodological approach that was used to develop

sustainability indicators for Scotland’s upland estates, centred around an anonymous, iterative
process that involved four developmental stages. Adapting a policy Delphi approach, we
worked with a multi-disciplinary group of nineteen stakeholders who comprised expertise in
sustainability, rural/upland land use and/or estate management, incorporating land
management professionals, researchers, policy-makers and members of representative bodies.
This secured a range of experts that had not previously discussed sustainability in this context
and went beyond traditional definitions of ‘expert’ knowledge, recognising local managerial
knowledge as having expert quality. Panellists did not know the identity of other participants
during the process so that a safe environment for open dialogue was created.

The first stage was carried out in interview format to establish rapport between the researcher
and the experts, increasing motivation and buy-in. This resulted in an 89% response rate over
the whole process. In the first round, interviews with each panellist explored the participants’
perceptions of sustainability. In the second round, interview findings were collated by the
researcher and returned to the panel in an unattributable, combined feedback and
questionnaire document, and each was invited to comment on points made by other panellists.
The results of the first two rounds were then analysed by the researcher who actively reframed
the panel’s ideas into the first draft of a suite of indicators. Using clear explanations and
diagrams, the indicators were presented to the panel for their comments; these were
incorporated into a new version that was presented to the panel in round four for further
comment and subsequent amendment.

A sustainability toolkit

Spending time at the outset exploring different perceptions of sustainability allowed a working
definition of sustainable upland estate management to be developed prior to selecting
indicators. This gave a sound, rational basis to the process. Five ‘sustainable estate principles’
comprise this definition, around which the assessment tool is organised (Adapting
Management; Broadening Options; Ecosystem Thinking; Linking into Social Fabric; Thinking
beyond the Estate).

Sixteen ‘opportunities’ for sustainable upland estates were identified, developed and endorsed
by the panel (these are the indicators). The extent to which an estate takes advantage of each
opportunity can be assessed by the tool’s user to judge whether an estate’s management
practices are deemed ‘proactive’ (more sustainable), ‘active’ or ‘underactive’ (less sustainable).
‘Creativity’, ‘innovation’ and a ‘proactive’ attitude were regularly cited by more than half of the
panel as crucial for moving beyond traditional ideas to promote management that demonstrates
a shift towards a more sustainable approach.

Reflections

The indicators were developed by the researcher, using only the participants’ opinions and
ideas for the content; the format of the tool was not pre-determined. This allowed the
participants to have ownership over the evolution of the process and recognised the creative
role that the facilitator can play in collating and feeding back the responses for further
reflection.

This approach proved very effective for bringing together different types of expert knowledge in
order to find common solutions, going beyond what can be achieved using more traditional
methods. The active role that the facilitator played in developing and feeding back material
(based on the experts’ input) created an excellent platform for continual deliberation, reflection
and development of ideas. There is scope for this method to be applied to other situations
where bringing together different types of knowledge is problematic.