Table 1 Different dimensions of community-involved UGBS decision-making (derived from Concannon et al. [28]; Ferreira et al. [27]; Kliskey et al. [29])

Driver: A statutory duty; a step of an established design process; a desire to be inclusive; to create more trust in a decision-making process

Intention: Inform a decision, collaborative governance, collaborative management

Resources: Budget, time, tools, skills

Actors: National state actors, local authorities and government, civil and third sector groups, private sector, communities, individuals, and others

Directionality: Unidirectional (e.g. an information gathering or imparting exercise), or bi-directional (e.g. information is provided and gathered); top down, bottom up or partnership

Timing and longevity: The stage at which the community is involved, whether before the decision-making process has begun or during the process, and whether there is ongoing involvement and management

Scale: Relating to the extent and comprehensiveness of the engagement, ranging from a single information dissemination event to ongoing co-production

Geography: National, regional, local authority, neighbourhood/parish

Roles and responsibilities: Agency and accountability of different actors

Accountability: Legal (in accordance with local codes and frameworks), to funders/investors, to community

Agency: Level of influence e.g. are communities enabled to contribute to decision-making about meaningful, substantive issues or only trivial ones

Commitments to act: Benefitting the community, the ecosystem