"Participation" has emerged as a key to sustainable development and, in particular, to the management of local resources and conflict. This chapter summarises and discusses research on participatory environmental management carried out under the Swiss Priority Programme Environment (1993-2000). The seven papers presented in Part I of this volume focus on innovative forms of participatory management that are often combined with the political empowerment of communities. Two papers describe and analyse the effects of particular cases of participation in environmental management in the urban area. The other papers describe, illustrate, and discuss particular methods and approaches that promote co-operation and co-ordination as well as the empowerment of disadvantaged citizens. This synthesis and overview chapter proposes a distinction between two dimensions of participation: (1) political participation, the degree of involvement of individual citizens and their social organisations in policy and related decision-making; (2) participation in public management, the role citizens and groups of the civil society play in the management of public affairs. Although the two dimensions are not mutually required, in reality many participatory approaches in environmental management promote both more efficient solutions and empowerment of weaker strata of society by redistributing the control of decisions and resources. The following are the key findings of and lessons to be learnt from Part I of this volume: 1. There is a substantial potential in environmental management for new co-operation between emerging actors, such as civil society organisations and commercially oriented micro enterprises. Co-operation brings benefits from the comparative advantages of the different actors with respect to social mobilisation, technical support and operations, and financial management. 2. Civil society organisations become empowered when they obtain greater control of resources and decisions (the "winners"). Their empowerment can go hand in hand with the disempowerment of other social entities, such as conventional local public administration or legislative institutions (the "losers"). The disempowerment of these entities may, however, negatively affect the delivery of public services. One solution lies in decentralisation processes with concurrent new institutional constellations, which could reinforce local authorities in new regulative functions. However, the evidence shows that the political power structures in place tend to persist as long as unorganised interests are not strengthened in a targeted way. 3. Public participation, in the sense of public control of decisions and resources, may reinforce the "local visions" of authorities. The participation of (yet) informal groups of citizens can contribute to the acquisition of legitimisation by political actors. For creating sustainable solutions, the mechanisms of participation, that is the definition of rules and guidelines for participation, need to be formalised and legitimised. 4. The role and degree of control exerted by funding institutions remain unchanged in the cases described here, particularly in the South. Funding institutions retain the greatest influence on decisions and resources. 5. Communication platforms of a non-committal nature constitute an arena for common learning and reflection among the actors, which allows the capitalisation, communication, and reproduction of knowledge and experience. Platforms provide opportunities for coordination and eventual agreement on formal, committal, and binding collaborative arrangements among the interested participants. Those arrangements require legal recognition. 6. Communication of individual perceptions and realities forms the basis for common learning and action. Mental mapping and comparable visualisation approaches as well as facilitation prove to be meaningful aids to communication among different parties with varying and often divergent interests. 7. Conditions of successful participation in environmental management include a common interest and co-operation among the actors; the preparedness of political authorities to provide legitimacy; the availability of monetary, social, and psychological resources; professional process moderation, transparency, and the growing legitimisation of such endeavours in politico-institutional terms. The evidence shows that "participation" can link efficient environmental management with empowerment aims. In this, it can provide for sustainable solutions for increasingly complex environmental problems. On the other hand, the same case experiences reveal that participation is not a "panacea" that can be applied always and everywhere. Social hierarchies, heterogeneous interests of the social actors involved, and their diverging perceptions hinder collective efforts towards action that is environmentally sound and socially just. More research is needed on pre-conditions for environmentally effective collective action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]