Why Engagement Methods Matter for Biodiversity
The biodiversity crisis is one of the greatest challenges for planetary life, yet knowledge and decision making in this area regarding how to tackle the crisis remains fragmented, dominated by technical expertise and constrained by limited understanding. What is often missing from the discussion is a deeper recognition of biodiversity as more than a technical measure of species or ecosystems; it is also a fabric of emotional, cultural, and relational connections that shape how we live with nature. This course introduces a set of engagement methods trialled, through the PLANET4B project, that create space for inclusive, collaborative, and effective biodiversity conversation and action. This module will provide an overview of why and how engagement methods can be used to support broader participation, capture diverse perspectives, and ultimately, make better biodiversity-related decisions. It is worth noting, that while presented here in a biodiversity context, the methods can be adapted to any setting where participatory and meaningful decision making is needed.
What is an Engagement Method?
Engagement methods are approaches designed to move beyond traditional ‘expert-led’ processes and bring a wider range of people meaningfully into decision making. They can take many forms, but share a commitment to inclusivity and collaboration.
In the PLANET4B project, the methods were grouped into four broad categories:
- Storytelling and Expression: methods that centre personal and collective narratives, creative expression, and cultural voice
- Sensory and Material Engagement: methods that involve tactile, culinary, spatial or embodied interaction with biodiversity themes
- Play and Game-Based Learning: methods that use structured play, challenge or simulation to explore biodiversity concepts and systems
- Dialogue and Reflection: methods that facilitate structured conversation, critical thinking and collective sense-making
- Behavioural and Choice-Based Approaches: methods that aim to influence decisions and actions through subtle changes in context, framing, or design - often referred to as 'choice architecture'
Across these categories, engagement methods often share some of the following features:
- creative, using imagination, art, or alternative practices to explore ideas in new ways
- participatory, involving co-creation between participants and facilitators
- enjoyable, bringing a sense of playfulness and energy
- open, fostering trust and creating space for honest, sometimes vulnerable, sharing among participants
- dialogic, supported by facilitation that enables conversation and exchange
- appreciative, recognising all forms of knowledge and experience as equally important
- celebratory, embracing diversity and difference as a source of strength
- Behaviourally informed, designed with attention to how context and framing can influence choices and actions
In this video Alex Franklin describes how engagement methods were used within PLANET4B:
Why Use Engagement Methods?
When involving people in any conversation, from policy consultations and community planning to educational initiatives and civil society campaigns, it matters that they feel connected and that their voices are valued. Traditional consultation methods often fall short, reaching only limited groups and missing the complexity of people’s experiences. Engagement methods respond to this by:
- Encouraging participation, involving individuals and communities beyond standard surveys or public meetings
- Bringing diverse perspectives, ensuring that under-represented voices and opinions are included
- Making complex issues accessible, turning challenges into tangible and relatable experiences
- Supporting innovative thinking, helping people imagine new ways of shaping their world
- Strengthening community ownership, reflecting people’s experiences so they are more likely to engage and support initiatives
- Recognising intersectionality, acknowledging that people’s experiences are shaped by overlapping factors such as gender, age, culture, or income, and ensuring these realities are part of the conversation
- Building trust, creating spaces where dialogue feels safe, respectful, and inclusive
- Fostering long-term connection, encouraging relationships that extend beyond a single event
- Being adaptive and flexible, allowing approaches to evolve in response to the group and context
- Embedding values for the future, helping ideas, practices, and relationships endure beyond the immediate activity
- Connecting people to biodiversity, helping them experience its importance in everyday life rather than something on the TV, or a statistic in a technical report
In this video Alex Franklin reflects on the range of benefits that can result from using engagement methods:
Theories Behind Engagement Methods: Systems Thinking and the Reflexivity–Situatedness Matrix
A key learning from the PLANET4B project was that engagement methods need to be used intentionally, with attention to both who you are working with and the context in which you are working. This means thinking not only about what methods support biodiversity-related transformation, but also how and why they work in different situations.
The methods introduced in this course vary in format, audience, and the type of change they aim to foster. Some invite deep reflection and personal transformation, while others shift norms or behaviours through subtle cues. Certain approaches are embedded in particular places and communities, while others are designed to be applied more generally across contexts. The Reflexivity–Situatedness Matrix (RSM) offers a useful way to make sense of these differences and to plan how methods can be used together to support transformation.
In this video Alex Franklin discusses the range of methods used in PLANET4B and their value across different contexts:
Understanding the RSM
The RSM is a simple but powerful tool that highlights two dimensions of engagement methods:
Reflexivity: the extent to which a method engages people in conscious reflection and intentional change.
- High reflexivity: methods such as storytelling, participatory theatre, or immersive workshops that prompt deep questioning and self-awareness.
- Low reflexivity: approaches such as framing or choice architecture that influence decisions through subtle cues without requiring deep reflection.
Situatedness: the extent to which a method is grounded in a particular place, community, or context.
- High situatedness: locally rooted interventions that reflect the specific histories, relationships, and dynamics of a place.
- Low situatedness: more abstract and generalisable methods that can be used in a wide range of settings.
By locating a method along these two dimensions, facilitators and decision-makers can better understand its transformative potential and how it might interact with other methods.
What the RSM Reveals
The RSM helps identify how methods contribute to change at different levels:
- Intrapersonal: shifts in individual beliefs, values, and awareness
- Interpersonal: changes in relationships, group dynamics, and shared understanding
- Institutional: influence on norms, policies, and wider systems
It also supports reflection on:
- Power relations within partnerships and decision-making spaces
- Equity and inclusion in whose voices, knowledge, and practices are recognised
- The iterative process of selecting and adapting methods to fit actors, contexts, and everyday lives
- The role of different actors in shaping both the process and the outcomes of change
Using the RSM in Practice
The RSM can guide practitioners in the strategic design of interventions. It supports:
- Planning interventions in relation to goals, contexts, and available resources
- Combining methods across the matrix to reinforce impact at different levels
- Sequencing methods to build processes that are more inclusive, context-sensitive, and transformative
By using the RSM, facilitators can think critically about where a method sits, how it can be adapted, and how different approaches might be layered to support biodiversity-related transformation in ways that are responsive to both people and place.
.png)
Using Engagement Methods
Context is key when using engagement methods. It means asking what is appropriate for the people involved, what purpose the method serves, and what participants will gain. While these methods offer many benefits, they also require careful thought and preparation. Some critical considerations include:
- Reflecting on your role - be open and honest about why you are using this tool, and not another, and how it fits into the overall process
- Time and resource demands - as engagement methods often require more planning and facilitation than traditional consultations make sure you have accounted for this in your project plan
- Responding to group dynamics - think carefully about who you are working with and remain attentive to the relationships and needs within the group
- Meaningful inclusivity - engagement methods are not automatically fair or safe; in fact, such methods can risk becoming extractive if not handled with care. Make sure you have the skills, and if needed additional training to be able to facilitate the engagement method with confidence, sensitivity, and adaptability to the group you are working with.
- A means, not an end - engagement methods used in isolation are unlikely to create lasting change; they work best when woven into the bigger picture of a project, as one piece of a wider puzzle, with space for participants’ insights to be carried forward
- Being accessible - intentionally design activities so that people of different abilities, languages, or backgrounds can participate fully
- Respecting participants - valuing contributions, securing clear consent, and ensuring people retain agency over how their input is used
- Working with care - recognising that engagement methods can create vulnerability or surface difficult conversations, and ensuring you have the training or support to manage these responsibly
In this video Alex Franklin explores the ethics of care as a foundational concern in the use of engagement methods:
Ethics of Care
Every method in tis course is only as good as the approach taken to deliver it. Care-full research practice means thinking not just about what we do, but how we do it – with attention to safety, respect, and inclusion. Whether you're facilitating a photo interview, running a biodiversity game, or hosting a community mapping session, it's important to create spaces where people feel valued, heard, and protected.
This includes practical considerations: ensuring venues are safe and accessible, avoiding emotionally difficult settings, and being mindful of how people are represented. For example, some participants may not feel comfortable sharing personal stories or being photographed – these choices must always be respected. Facilitators should offer clear information about how contributions will be used, and participants should be free to opt out at any time.
If you're collecting data, ethical approval may be needed, and you should use consent forms and participant information sheets. But ethics is not just about forms – it is about trust, transparency, and care. The Care-Full Courses and Resources platform was created to support this kind of thoughtful, relational practice. We encourage all users of this course to approach each method with curiosity, humility, and a commitment to care.
