Stakeholders identification: interest/power matrix and approaches
| Power | Strong | Institutional stakeholders | Key stakeholders |
| Example: Superintendents for architectural, landscape, historical and artistic heritage | Example: Mayors | ||
| Approach: Kept informed and updated | Approach: Kept informed and also consulted on choice of alternatives and their potential impacts | ||
| Weak | Marginal stakeholders | Operational stakeholders* | |
| Example: residents of neighboring municipalities not directly involved | Example: transport operators, citizens, travelers | ||
| Approach: Require least effort | Approach: Engaged in the information dissemination steps | ||
| Low | High | ||
| Interest | |||
| Power | Strong | Institutional stakeholders | Key stakeholders |
| Example: Superintendents for architectural, landscape, historical and artistic heritage | Example: Mayors | ||
| Approach: Kept informed and updated | Approach: Kept informed and also consulted on choice of alternatives and their potential impacts | ||
| Weak | Marginal stakeholders | Operational stakeholders* | |
| Example: residents of neighboring municipalities not directly involved | Example: transport operators, citizens, travelers | ||
| Approach: Require least effort | Approach: Engaged in the information dissemination steps | ||
| Low | High | ||
| Interest | |||
Source(s): Gardner et al. (1986)