Many have advocated for collaborative governance and the participation of citizens and stakeholders on the basis that it can improve the environmental outcomes of public decision making, as compared to traditional, top-down decision making. Others, however, point to the potential negative effects of participation and collaboration on environmental outcomes. This article draws on several literatures to identify five clusters of causal mechanisms describing the relationship between participation and environmental outcomes. We distinguish (i) mechanisms that describe how participation impacts on the environmental standard of outputs, from (ii) mechanisms relating to the implementation of outputs. Three mechanism clusters focus on the role of representation of environmental concerns, participants' environmental knowledge, and dialogical interaction in decision making. Two further clusters elaborate on the role of acceptance, conflict resolution, and collaborative networks for the implementation of decisions. In addition to the mechanisms, linking independent with dependent variables, we identify the conditions under which participation may lead to better (or worse) environmental outcomes. This helps to resolve apparent contradictions in the literature. We conclude by outlining avenues for research that builds on this framework for analysis.
很多人支持合作治理和公民与利益相关方的参与, 因为与传统的自上而下地决策相比较, 它可以改善公共决策对环境的影响。然而, 另一些人指出参与和合作会对环境造成负面影响。本文通过不同文献分支识别了关于描述参与和环境结果之间因果机制的五个类群。我们将（a）那些描述了参与如何影响环境产出标准的机制与（b）那些与产出执行的机制相区别。这三个机制群聚焦于环境问题代表, 参与者的环境知识和决策过程中的对话互动。另外两个类群阐述了决策执行中接受, 冲突处理和合作网络的角色。除了这些机制, 我们将自变量与因变量相联系, 识别了何种情况下参与会导致更好的（或更坏的）环境结果。这帮助我们解决文献中的明显冲突。我们以在此研究框架下可研究的问题作结。.
Keywords: causal hypotheses; collective learning; deliberation; effectiveness; environmental governance; modes of governance; public policy; stakeholder involvement.