Over the past few months, we’ve shared insights from focus groups conducted in DUST's case study regions in Poland, Bulgaria, and Sweden. Today, we shift our focus to the Netherlands, specifically Groningen. The purpose of these focus groups is to elaborate on previous quantitative DUST research, including a comprehensive population survey. By engaging with representatives from these least engaged communities in conversation, we aim to understand their perceptions and expectations regarding sustainability transitions. So read on to discover insights from Groningen’s focus groups with people living in rural areas, the youth, the elderly, and residents from financially deprived areas.
The prevailing perceptions of sustainability transitions in Groningen were generally negative, although they vary among different groups. Youth, consisting of students in urban areas, often have a better understanding of transition policies and tended to view the transition positively, seeing it as an opportunity for employment and environmental improvement. This optimism contrasts with the more critical views expressed by rural communities in Oude Pekela. Here, older and younger residents as well as individuals facing difficult life circumstances often felt excluded from the benefits of the transition due to a lack of financial means and not being consulted on transition activities. Therefore, they perceived the transition as disproportionately disadvantaging their communities.
Despite these diverse perceptions, discussions reveal a common desire for improved connectivity between urban and rural areas. Participants across different groups emphasise the need for better public transport and increased investment in rural infrastructure, as this causes a major impediment to participation and accessibility. They also call for a fair distribution of the benefits and burdens associated with sustainability transitions, with some advocating for more affordable energy, the preservation of local landscapes affected by renewable energy projects, and the creation of more employment. Rural focus group participants particularly stressed the need for cultural sensitivity in transition policies. They call for policies that recognise, respect and address the specific perspectives of and challenges faced by rural communities, ensuring that these groups are not disproportionately disadvantaged.
Amongst several other barriers, focus group discussions in Groningen reaffirm a lack of trust in government institutions as a major obstacle to participation, a sentiment that was echoed in other DUST regions. For example, in rural areas focus groups expressed a deep-rooted distrust towards provincial and national levels of government. This is due to tensions between the Randstad and Groningen area, and disparities between the city and rural Groningen, where the latter regions are left behind. In contrast, in some areas municipal governments were more trusted while in others, focus group participants expressed how governments have a mutual distrust of their citizens. Gocus groups in both urban and rural contexts highlighted how bottom-up activities can work to further re-establish and build broken trust.
Meanwhile, significant barriers for youth include time constraints, a lack of perceived impact from participation, and feelings of powerlessness regarding global issues like climate change. Additionally, there is a sense that existing policies do not effectively reach younger citizens or incorporate their feedback. For elderly and economically disadvantaged individuals, barriers include language and knowledge gaps, financial constraints, and a sense of exclusion from decision-making processes. The lack of accessible information and the stigma associated with being less engaged further exacerbate these issues. Instead, youth advocate for early-age education on sustainability and civic engagement to enable improved participation for future generations, while all focus groups explained that their social group were instrumental for engagement and motivation to participate. Similarly, rural residents face unique challenges such as geographic isolation and inadequate public transport, which significantly hinder their ability to participate. The perception of being overlooked by policymakers contributes to feelings of frustration and disengagement.
Lastly, one of the most salient insights gained during the focus groups in Groningen was the critical role that language and tone play in effectively involving less engaged communities. This does not only apply to participation processes but also to DUST’s research efforts in general. For example, during the two focus groups in rural Groningen, and with DUST’s partners best intentions to tailor conversations to the participants' level, partners explained how they occasionally fell short, failing to clearly convey DUST’s messages or questions. Thankfully, some participants were straightforward in pointing this out. Several noted that discussions on sustainability felt “out of their depth” or “not meant for them,” leaving them intimidated by the seemingly technical, expert-driven conversation on transitions. Partners described how this issue could have arisen with the initial focus group invitation had they not explicitly stated “no prior knowledge needed”. Another challenge that emerged was the stigmatising language often used in outreach efforts aimed at less engaged groups, such as referring to them as "vulnerable" or "lower-educated," which did little to foster a sense of belonging. Here, the need for more culturally sensitive communication was a recurring and paramount theme.
To truly grasp how decision-making in sustainability transitions works, what challenges to participation exist and how these obstacles can be addressed, we need more than just numbers. Talking directly to people reveals the personal impacts of these changes, complimenting and adding depth to the data. Stay updated with DUST on our website and social media to learn about our findings and how we plan to bridge the gap between communities and policymakers!
Comments