Skip to main content

Table 3 Key steps and activities in the stakeholder workshop

From: An assessment of the capacity and responsiveness of a national system to address the threat of invasive species: a systems approach

Key steps

Detail on activity

Invasive species system functions

Discussion on function definitions (Table 1): whether the functions were correctly structured, whether the definitions were correct?

Actors in the invasive species system

Discussion on actor list (Table 4): were any actors missing; did the actor groups need breaking down into smaller groupings or combining to form a larger overall actor?

Actors within each invasive species system function

Discussion on actors within each function (Table 5): were the actors listed per function correct; did any actors need to be added or removed?

Actor scoring within functionsa

Discussion and scoring of actors by function against predetermined indicators (scale of one to five) (Additional file 1: Table S1). For analysis the average score for each function (across all actors) and for each actor (across functions) were calculated

Actor mapping within the system (qualitative tool providing assessment of the system in its entirety)

Discussion on how actors worked and interacted together, and whether the relationship was one way (i.e. top down) or truly interactive. The exercise provided an overall picture of the complexities that are often intrinsic in such systems

Interaction scoringb (complementary to the mapping, a quantitative assessment of actor interactions)

Discussion and scoring of each actor-to-actor interaction on a scale of zero to four, with zero being no interaction, even though there should be, and four being a very strong interaction. Discussions focused on information and knowledge exchange, the level of coordination and feedback, and whether any financial mechanisms were involved

Invasive species system indicator performance scoringc

Assessment and rating of how each function as a whole performed against the defined performance indicators (Additional file 2: Table S2), as well as system-level performance indicators and the contextual factors

Planning a way forward

Review of findings, key issues, and current actions. Development of concrete plans for way forward

  1. a,b,cAdditional file 1: Table S1 and Additional file 2: Table S2 provide specific indicators however, in general the indicator scores for a and c are equivalent to: 1 = no or very limited delivery of responsibilities; 2 = some delivery of responsibilities; 3 = average delivery of responsibilities; 4 = strong delivery of responsibilities; and 5 = very strong delivery of responsibilities. Interaction scores for b are 0 = no interaction (but there should be interaction); 1 = weak interaction; 2 = average interaction; 3 = strong interaction; and 4 = very strong interaction