The Collaborative Delphi Helen Ivy Rowe

Purpose Briefly define Collaborative Delphi. Describe its use by the SRR. Provide update on issues covered by Delphi. DUBB COLLABORATIVE

Delphi Defined The Delphi is a research technique used for gathering and developing expert opinion through iterative surveys.

Collaborative Delphi Choose issues from meetings. Send questionnaires. Summarize responses. Send responses with further questions. Individuals given the opportunity to revise their original answers in response to group feedback. Use Delphi results to continue debate in meeting or in another round of Delphi. QUESTIONS MAY BE THE SAME QUESTIONS AS THE PREVIOUS ROUND, OR THEY MIGHT BE FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS.

Delphi benefits Anonymity removes fear of embarrassment for: Presenting views in public. Contradicting superiors. “Fresh” input untainted by the opinions of others. Process cannot be domineered by the few. Opportunity to freely change an opinion in response to group feedback. FREELY EXPRESS ONESELF WITHOUT THE FEAR OF PUBLIC SPEAKING OR CONTRADICTING SUPERIORS IN PUBLIC IN THE PROCESS OF GROUP DISCUSSIONS, OTHER VIEWPOINTS CAN ALTER OR SHAPE INDIVIDUAL OPINION. IN THE FIRST ROUND OF DELPHI, OPINIONS HAVE NOT BEEN AFFECTED BY THE GROUP. IN THE SECOND ROUND RESPONSES SHOULD BE MORE AFFECTED BY GROUP OPINION.

Baseline Issue Issue: From what point should SRR recommend that data be collected for each indicator? Delphi 8 and 9 results: Split between choosing present/current status and using the earliest possible data for each indicator as a starting point.

Baseline Issues Present/current status (start with now)* No bias. End user can compare with historical data Is historical data useful? Difficulty in past data sets using same protocol. Earliest possible data* Each baseline should be chosen based on the indicator. Should objectively report as much information as possible. (Why limit the information reported?) Starting with current status will limit interpretability of data. *In either case, some baselines may start in the future.

Reporting Methods Issue: SRR must decide how data for each indicator is reported. Delphi 9: Given 7 methods to spatially categorize data, indicate level of acceptability and preference, give comments. Results: 1. An array of comments indicated that more than one method should be employed by SRR. 2. Ecological Climate Zones rated most acceptable and most preferred option.

Reporting Methods Delphi 10: Should we limit the number of spatial methods we use in reporting data? If so to what number? Options: #1 Limit to two methods : political and 1 ecological (result: 2 methods) #2 Do not limit approaches: each indicator should be reported according to the most appropriate methods. (result: 7 methods) #3 Each criterion group will chose one methods to report all of its indicators (result: 4 methods)

Reporting Methods Results: mixed, Option #1 slightly preferred #1 Limit to two methods: political and 1 ecological (result: 2 methods) Simplifies the output for clearer reporting overall. Some responses here argued for using geo referencing political data and thereby using only one reporting method. All social and economic indicators might not fit with political boundaries (zip code and census tract data).

Reporting Methods #3 Each criterion group will chose one method to report all of its indicators (result: 4 methods) Standardize reporting methods within the Criterion Group, fewer methods overall than #2. Difficult to interpret data for policy makers and scientists. Not possible to form indicators into an “integrated index”. Would have to read each indicator separately. Only one method for each Criterion Group is too narrow.

Reporting Methods #2 Do not limit approaches: each indicator should be reported according to the most appropriate method. (result: 7 methods) No one good method for displaying everything. Best reflects diversity of data. Allows for the most appropriate method to be chosen for each indicator. Increases complexity permitted in reporting. Difficult to interpret data for policy makers and scientists. Not possible to form indicators into an “integrated index”. Would have to read each indicator separately. Need continuity within the overall report.

Next Steps Baseline Issues and reporting methods will be discussed at the next meeting. This meeting: Criterion groups may offer suggestions for next Delphi topics.

Thank you for your participation. Any feedback or questions? How well is Delphi serving our process? Thank you for your participation.