Joint fact finding defines an approach to bring different – conflicting – parties together, to jointly establish a strategy to find facts, and to derive an agreement.
|Strength of the method:
|The method helps to find a common ground when facts are disputed.
|To be considered:
Read here about the rationale of the brief factsheets (in comparison to method profiles of the td-net toolbox):
|The method aims at producing an evidence-informed agreement on a contested issue.
|Location in td process phases:
|The method can be applied as stand-alone fact finding exercise in the problem framing and problem analysis phase. If it is “embedded in collaborative efforts to seek consensus around policy and planning matters“ Matsuura/Schenk 2017, p. 4), it may rather be seen as an approach to which td research contributes (than a method within td research).
|Bridging thought styles:
|The method helps to bridge thought styles by providing guiding principles for collaboration and stating from the beginning that an agreement – e.g. with respect to policy implications – must be reached.
|Time required to implement the method:
Extensive, e.g. data gathering and organisation of several meetings
High moderation skills
Convener should be considered as legitimate decision-maker by the involved parties.
|Convener & participants:
|Convener: governmental body
Participants: stakeholder, researcher
The open access User's Guide to Joint Fact Finding provides a first overview and examples of application. The User’s Guide describes the overall procedure, but further reading is needed to be able to apply the method, e.g. see further, descriptions of the concrete process steps, consult: Matsuura M, Schenk T 2017: Joint Fact-Finding in Urban Planning and Environmental Disputes (not open access)
|Peter Adler, with reference to Andrews Clinton J (2002) and Herman Karl A, Susskind, Lawrence E, Wallace, Katherine H (2007), amongst others