Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Participatory Approaches

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Simulating Social Complexity

Part of the book series: Understanding Complex Systems ((UCS))

  • 2652 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter aims to describe the diversity of participatory approaches in relation to social simulations, with a focus on the interactions between the tools and participants. We consider potential interactions at all stages of the modelling process: conceptual design, implementation, use and simulation outcome analysis. After reviewing and classifying existing approaches and techniques, we describe two case studies with a focus on the integration of various techniques. The first case study deals with fire hazard prevention in Southern France, and the second one with groundwater management on the atoll of Kiribati. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the advantages and limitations of participatory approaches.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    More details about the AtollGame can be found online at http://cormas.cirad.fr/en/applica/atollGame.htm.

References

  • Abel, N., Ross, H., & Walker, P. (1998). Mental models in rangeland research, communication and management. The Rangeland Journal, 20, 77–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akkermans, H. A. (1995). Developing a logistics strategy through participative business modelling. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 15, 100–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akkermans, H. A., & Vennix, J. A. M. (1997). Clients’ opinions on group model building: An exploratory study. System Dynamics Review, 13, 3–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnstein, S. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 35, 216–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barreteau, O. (2003). The joint use of role-playing games and models regarding negotiation processes: Characterization of associations. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulations, 6(2). http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/6/2/3.html

  • Barreteau, O. (2007). Modèles et processus de décision collective: entre compréhension et facilitation de la gestion concertée de la ressource en eau. HDR thesis, Paris Dauphine University, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barreteau, O., & Bousquet, F. (1999). Jeux de rôles et validation de systèmes multi-agents. In M.-P. Gleizes & P. Marcenac (Eds.), Ingénierie des systèmes multi-agents, actes des 7èmes JFIADSMA (pp. 67–80). Paris: Hermès.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barreteau, O., Bousquet, F., & Attonaty, J.-M. (2001). Role-playing games for opening the black box of multi-agent systems: Method and teachings of its application to Senegal River Valley irrigated systems. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulations, 4(2). http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/4/2/5.html

  • Barreteau, O., Hare, M., Krywkow, J., & Boutet, A. (2005). Model designed through participatory processes: whose model is it? In N. Ferrand, P. Perez, & D. Batten (Eds.), Joint conference on multiagent modelling for environmental management, CABM-HEMA-SMAGET 2005, Bourg St Maurice – Les Arcs, France, 21–25 March, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barreteau, O., Le Page, C., & Perez, P. (2007). Contribution of simulation and gaming to natural resource management issues: An introduction. Simulation & Gaming, 38(2), 185–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becu, N. (2006). Identification et modélisation des représentations des acteurs locaux pour la gestion des bassins versants. PhD thesis, Sciences de l'eau, Université Montpellier 2, Montpellier, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becu, N., Barreteau, O., Perez, P., Saising, J., & Sungted, S. (2006). A methodology for identifying and formalizing farmers’ representations of watershed management: A case study from Northern Thailand. In F. Bousquet, G. Trebuil, & B. Hardy (Eds.), Companion modeling and multi-agent systems for integrated natural resource management in Asia (pp. 41–62). Los Baños: IRRI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bharwani, S. (2006). Understanding complex behavior and decision making using ethnographic knowledge elicitation tools (KnETs). Social Science Computer Review, 24, 78–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bousquet, F., Bakam, I., Proton, H., & Le Page, C. (1998). Cormas: common-pool resources and multi-agent systems. In A. Pasqual del Pobil, J. Mira, & M. Ali (Eds.), Tasks and methods in applied artificial intelligence. IEA/AIE 1998, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence) (Vol. 1416, pp. 826–837). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bousquet, F., Barreteau, O., d’Aquino, P., Etienne, M., Boissau, S., Aubert, S., et al. (2002). Multi-agent systems and role games: An approach for ecosystem co-management. In M. Janssen (Ed.), Complexity and ecosystem management: The theory and practice of multi-agent approaches (pp. 248–285). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bousquet, F., Barreteau, O., Le Page, C., Mullon, C., & Weber, J. (1999). An environmental modelling approach: The use of multi-agent simulations. In F. Blasco & A. Weill (Eds.), Advances in environmental and ecological modelling (pp. 113–122). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bousquet, F., & Voinov, A. (Eds.). (2010). Thematic issue - Modelling with stakeholders. Environmental Modelling & Software, 25(11), 1267–1488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M., & Muniesa, F. (2006). Economic experiments and the construction of markets. In D. MacKenzie, F. Muniesa, & L. Siu (Eds.), Do economists make markets? On the performativity of economics (pp. 163–189). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardenas, J.-C., Stranlund, J., & Willis, C. (2000). Local environmental control and institutional crowding-out. World Development, 28, 1719–1733.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castella, J. C., Tran Ngoc, T., & Boissau, S. (2005). Participatory simulation of land-use changes in the northern mountains of Vietnam: The combined use of an agent-based model, a role-playing game, and a geographic information system. Ecology and Society, 10(1), 27. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol10/iss1/art27/

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cockes, D., & Ive, J. (1996). Mediation support for forest land allocation: The SIRO-MED system. Environmental Management, 20(1), 41–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Aquino, P., Le Page, C., Bousquet, F., & Bah, A. (2003). Using self-designed role-playing games and a multi-agent system to empower a local decision-making process for land use management: The SelfCormas Experiment in Senegal. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulations, 6(3). http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/6/3/5.html

  • Daniell, K. A., Ferrand, N., & Tsoukias, A. (2006). Investigating participatory modelling processes for group decision aiding in water planning and management. In S. Seifert & C. Weinhardt (Eds.),Proceedings of the international conference Group decision and negotiation (GDN) 2006, Karlsruhe, Germany, June 25–28 2006 (pp. 207–210). Karlsruhe: Universitätsverlag Karlsruhe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, E. J. (1999). Joint application design (JAD) in practice. Journal of Systems and Software, 45, 215–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeSanctis, G., & Gallupe, R. B. (1987). A foundation for the study of group decision support systems. Management Science, 33, 589–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewulf, A., Bouwen, R., & Tailleu, T. (2006). The multi-actor simulation ‘Podocarpus National Park’ as a tool for teaching and researching issue framing. In Proceedings of IACM 2006 Montreal meetings. http://ssrn.com/abstract=915943

  • Dray, A., Perez, P., Jones, N., Le Page, C., D’Aquino, P., White, I., et al. (2006). The AtollGame experience: From knowledge engineering to a computer-assisted role playing game. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulations, 9(1). http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/9/1/6.html

  • Dray, A., Perez, P., Le Page, C., D’Aquino, P., & White, I. (2006). AtollGame: A companion modelling experience in the Pacific. In P. Perez & D. Batten (Eds.), Complex science for a complex world: Exploring human ecosystems with agents (pp. 255–280). Canberra: ANU E Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driessen, P. P. J., Glasbergen, P., & Verdaas, C. (2001). Interactive policy making: A model of management for public works. European Journal of Operational Research, 128, 322–337.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Drogoul, A., Vanbergue, D., & Meurisse, T. (2003). Multi-agent based simulation: Where are the agents? In J.S. Sichman, F. Bousquet, & P. Davidsson (Eds.), Multi-agent-based simulation II: third international workshop, MABS 2002, Bologna, Italy, July 15–16, 2002, revised papers (Lecture notes in computer science, 2581) (pp. 1–15). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dudley, R. G. (2003). Modeling the effects of a log export ban in Indonesia. System Dynamics Review, 20, 99–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duke, R. D., & Geurts, J. L. A. (2004). Policy games for strategic management. Amsterdam: Dutch University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Étienne, M. (2006). Companion modelling: A tool for dialogue and concertation in biosphere reserves. In M. Bouamrane (Ed.), Biodiversity and stakeholders: Concertation itineraries, biosphere reserves - Technical notes 1 (pp. 44–52). Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Étienne, M. (Ed.). (2011). Companion modeling: A participatory approach to support sustainable development. Versailles: QUAE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Étienne, M., Le Page, C., & Cohen, M. (2003). A step by step approach to build up land management scenarios based on multiple viewpoints on multi-agent systems simulations. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulations, 6(2). http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/6/2/2.html

  • Eversole, R. (2003). Managing the pitfalls of participatory development: Some insight from Australia. World Development, 31, 781–795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, G., Giaccardi, E., Eden, H., Sugimoti, M., & Ye, Y. (2005). Beyond binary choices: Integrating individual and social creativity. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 63, 482–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, D., & Sunder, S. (1994). Experimental methods, a primer for economists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Administration Review, 66, 66–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Funtowicz, S. O., Martinez-Alier, J., Munda, G., & Ravetz, J. R. (1999). Information tools for environmental policy under conditions of complexity, Environmental issues series (Vol. 9). Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, N., & Troitzsch, K. G. (1999). Simulation for the social scientist. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, K. C. (2002). Forecasting decisions in conflict situations: A comparison of game theory, role-playing and unaided judgment. International Journal of Forecasting, 18, 321–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guyot, P. (2006). Simulations multi-agents participatives. PhD thesis, Informatique, Université Paris VI, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guyot, P., & Honiden, S. (2006). Agent-based participatory simulations: Merging multi-agent systems and role-playing games. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulations, 9(4). http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/9/4/8.html

  • Hamel, A., & Pinson, S. (2005). Conception participative de simulations multi-agents basée sur une approche d’analyse multi-acteurs. In A. Drogoul & E. Ramat (Eds.), Systèmes multi-agents: Vers la conception de systèmes artificiels socio-mimétiques (JFSMA 2005) (pp. 1–15). Paris: Hermès.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanneman, R. A. (1995). Simulation modeling and theoretical analysis in sociology. Sociological Perspectives, 38, 457–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henriksen, H.J., Rasmussen, P., Brandt, G., von Bülow, D., & Jensen, F.V. (2004). Engaging stakeholders in construction and validation of Bayesian belief networks for groundwater protection. In Proceeding of IFAC workshop on modelling and control for participatory planning and managing water systems, September 29–October 1, 2004, Venice, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henry, C. (1974). Investment decisions under uncertainty: The irreversibility effect. The American Economic Review, 64, 1006–1012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hochman, Z., Hearnshaw, H., Barlow, R., Ayres, J. F., & Pearson, C. J. (1995). X-breed: A multiple domain knowledge based system integrated through a blackboard architecture. Agricultural Systems, 48, 243–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irvin, R. A., & Stansbury, J. (2004). Citizen participation in decision making: Is it worth the effort. Public Administration Review, 64, 55–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johannessen, J.-A., Olaisen, J., & Olsen, B. (2001). Mismanagement of tacit knowledge: The importance of tacit knowledge, the danger of information technology, and what to do about it. International Journal of Information Management, 21, 3–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinzig, A., Ryan, P., Etienne, M., Allyson, H., Elmqvist, T., & Walker, B. (2006). Resilience and regime shifts: Assessing cascading effects. Ecology and Society, 11(1), 20. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klopfer, E., Yoon, S., & Rivas, L. (2004). Comparative analysis of Palm and wearable computers for participatory simulations. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, 347–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kujala, S. (2003). User involvement: A review of the benefits and challenges. Behaviour and Information Technology, 22, 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landry, M., Banville, C., & Oral, M. (1996). Model legitimation in operational research. European Journal of Operational Research, 92, 443–457.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Le Bars, M., Le Grusse, P., Allaya, M., Attonaty, J.-M., & Mahjoubi, R. (2004). NECC: Un jeu de simulation pour l’aide à la décision collective; Application à une région méditerranéenne virtuelle. In Projet INCO-WADEMED, Séminaire Modernisation de l’Agriculture Irriguée, Rabat, Morocco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loucks, D. P., Kindler, J., & Fedra, K. (1985). Interactive water resources modeling and model use: An overview. Water Resources Research, 21, 95–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maier, F. H., & Grössler, A. (2000). What are we talking about? A taxonomy of computer simulations to support learning. System Dynamics Review, 16, 135–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manson, S. M. (2002). Validation and verification of multi-agent systems. In M. Janssen (Ed.), Complexity and ecosystem management: The theory and practice of multi-agent approaches (pp. 63–74). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marengo, L., & Pasquali, C. (2003). How to construct and share a meaning for social interactions? In Conventions et Institutions: Approfondissements théoriques et Contributions au Débat Politique, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, L., Magnuszewski, P., Sendzimir, J., Rydzak, F., Krolikowska, K., Komorowski, H., et al. (2007). Microworld gaming of a local agricultural production chain in Poland. Simulation and Gaming, 38(2), 211–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, I. S., van Bueren, E. M., Bots, P. W. G., van der Voort, H. G., & Seijdel, R. R. (2005). Collaborative decision-making for sustainable urban renewal projects: A simulation-gaming approach. Environment and Planning B – Planning & Design, 32, 403–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKinnon, J. (2005). Mobile interactive GIS: Bringing indigenous knowledge and scientific information together; a narrative account. In A. Neef (Ed.), Participatory approaches for sustainable land use in Southeast Asia (pp. 217–231). White Lotus: Bangkok.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mermet, L. (1993). Une méthode de prospective: Les exercices de simulation de politiques. Nature Sciences Sociétés, 1, 34–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miettinen, R., & Virkkunen, J. (2005). Epistemic objects, artefacts and organizational change. Organization, 12, 437–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molin, E. (2005). A causal analysis of hydrogen acceptance. Transportation Research Records, 1941, 115–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moss, S., Downing, T., & Rouchier, J. (2000). Demonstrating the role of stakeholder participation: An agent based social simulation model of water demand policy and response (CPM Report, 00-76). Manchester: Centre for Policy Modelling, Manchester Metropolitan University. http://cfpm.org/cpmrep76.html

  • Mostert, E. (2006). Participation for sustainable water management. In C. Giupponi, A. J. Jakeman, D. Karssenberg, & M. P. Hare (Eds.), Sustainable management of water resources(pp. 153–176). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nancarrow, B. (2005). When the modeller meets the social scientist or vice-versa. In A. Zerger & R. M. Argent (Eds.), MODSIM 2005 international congress on modelling and simulation (pp. 38–44). Melbourne, Australia: Modelling and Simulation Society of Australia and New Zealand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E., Gardner, R., & Walker, J. (1994). Rules, games and common-pool resources. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wostl, C., & Hare, M. (2004). Processes of social learning in integrated resources management. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 14, 193–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pateman, C. (1990). Participation and democratic theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perez, P., Dray, A., White, I., Le Page, C., & Falkland, T. (2003). AtollScape: Simulating freshwater management in Pacific atolls, spatial processes and time dependence issues. In: D. Post (Ed.), Proceedings of the international congress on modelling and simulation, Townsville, Australia, July 14–17 2003 (Vol. 4, pp. 514–518). Townsville: MODSIM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perez, P., Dray, A., Le Page, C., D'Aquino, P., & White, I. (2004). Lagoon, agents and kava: A companion modelling experience in the Pacific. In C. van Dijkum, J. Blasius & C. Durand (Eds.), Recent developments and applications in social research methodology: Proceedings of RC33 sixth international conference on social science methodology, Amsterdam 2004 (p. 282). Opladen: Barbara Budrich Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramanath, A. M., & Gilbert, N. (2004). The design of participatory agent based simulations. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulations, 7(4). http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/7/4/1.html

  • Reitsma, R., Zigurs, I., Lewis, C., Wilson, V., & Sloane, A. (1996). Experiment with simulation models in water-resources negotiations. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 122, 64–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richard, A., & Barreteau, O. (2006). Concert’eau: un outil de sociologie expérimentale pour l'étude de dispositifs de gestion locale et concertée de l'eau. In Proceedoing of 2e Congrès de l'Association Française de Sociologie, Bordeaux, 5–8 Septembre, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richard, A., & Trometter, M. (2001). Les caractéristiques d’une décision séquentielle: Effet irréversibilité et endogénéisation de l’environnement. Revue Economique, 52, 739–752.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, J. B. (1991). Modelling the interactions between human and natural systems. International Social Sciences Journal, 130, 629–647.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rocha, E. M. (1997). A ladder of empowerment. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 17, 31–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rouchier, J. (2003). Re-implementation of a multi-agent model aimed at sustaining experimental economic research: The case of simulations with emerging speculation. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulations, 6(4). http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/6/4/7.html

  • Rouwette, E. A. J. A., Vennix, J. A. M., & van Mullekorn, T. (2002). Group model building effectiveness: A review of assessment studies. System Dynamics Review, 18, 5–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2004). Evaluating public-participation exercises: A research agenda. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 29(4), 512–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, T. (2000). The role of simulation gaming in policy making. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 17, 359–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schelling, T. C. (1961). Experimental games and bargaining theory. World Politics, 14, 47–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuler, D., & Namioka, A. (Eds.). (1993). Participatory design: Principles and practices. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shakun, M. E. (1996). Modeling and supporting task-oriented group processes: Purposeful complex adaptive systems and evolutionary systems design. Group Decision and Negotiation, 5, 305–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1977). The new science of management decision. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, ‘Translations’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berleley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, 19, 387–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sterman, J. D. (1992). Teaching takes off – Flight simulators for management education. OR/MS Today, 35, 40–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ticehurst, J., Rissik, D., Letcher, R. A., Newham, L. T. H., & Jakeman, A. J. (2005). Development of decision support tools to assess the sustainability of coastal lakes. In A. Zerger & R.M. Argent (Eds.), MODSIM 2005 international congress on modelling and simulation (pp. 2414–2420). Melbourne: Modelling and Simulation Society of Australia and New Zealand. http://www.mssanz.org.au/modsim05/papers/ticehurst.pdf

  • Toth, F. L. (1988). Policy exercises: Objectives and design elements. Simulation and Games, 19, 235–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Asselt, M. B. A., Mellors, J., Rijkens-Klomp, N., Greeuw, S. C. H., Molendijk, K. G. P., Beers, P. J., et al. (2001). Building blocks for participation in integrated assessment: A review of participatory methods. Maastricht: ICIS.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Daalen, C. E., & Bots, P. W. G. (2006). Participatory model construction and model use in natural resource management. In Proceeding of the workshop on formalised and non-formalised methods in resource management - knowledge and learning in participatory processes, 21–22 September, 2006, Osnabrück, Germany. http://www.partizipa.uni-osnabrueck.de/wissAbschluss.html

  • van Daalen, C. E., Thissen, W. A. H., & Berk, M. M. (1998). The Delft process: Experiences with a dialogue between policy makers and global modellers. In J. Alcamo, R. Leemans, & E. Kreileman (Eds.), Global change scenarios of the 21st century: Results from the IMAGE 2.1 model (pp. 267–285). London: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Belt, M. (2004). Mediated modeling: A system dynamics approach to environmental consensus building. Washington D.C.: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vennix, J. A. M. (1996). Group model building, facilitating team learning using system dynamics. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webler, T., Kastenholz, H., & Renn, O. (1995). Public participation in impact assessment: A social learning perspective. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 15, 443–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitworth, B., Gallupe, B., & McQueen, R. (2000). A cognitive three-process model of computer mediated group interaction. Group Decision and Negotiation, 9, 431–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, J., & Silver, D. (1995). Joint application development. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IRSTEA, UMR G-EAU, Montpellier, France

    Olivier Barreteau

  2. Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands

    Pieter Bots

  3. Research School of Social Sciences, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia

    Katherine Daniell

  4. Ecodevelopment Unit, National Institute for Agronomic Research, Avignon, France

    Michel Etienne

  5. SMART, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia

    Pascal Perez

  6. Dynafor, Centre INRA de Toulouse, Castanet Tolosan, France

    Cécile Barnaud

  7. Cirad GREEN, TA C-47/F. Campus international de Baillarguet, Montpellier, France

    Didier Bazile, William’s Daré & Guy Trebuil

  8. CNRS, Laboratoire de geographie PRODIG 2, Paris, France

    Nicolas Becu

  9. IRD (Institute of Research for Development) and CIRAD (UR ÄDA), Vientiane, Laos

    Jean-Christophe Castella

Authors
  1. Olivier Barreteau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pieter Bots
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katherine Daniell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michel Etienne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Pascal Perez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Cécile Barnaud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Didier Bazile
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Nicolas Becu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Jean-Christophe Castella
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. William’s Daré
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Guy Trebuil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Olivier Barreteau .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Policy Modelling, Manchester Metropolitan University, Business School, Manchester, United Kingdom

    Bruce Edmonds

  2. Centre for Policy Modelling, Manchester Metropolitan University, Business School, Manchester, United Kingdom

    Ruth Meyer

Further Reading

Further Reading

Participatory modelling is increasingly present in special sessions of conferences or special features of scientific journals. A first source of further readings consists in case studies. Among others, Environmental Modelling & Software had a special issue on modelling with stakeholders (Bousquet and Voinov 2010), where readers will find a whole set of well-described case studies using various methods. The biennial international environmental modelling and software conferences have also specific tracks for participatory modelling; proceedings are available online (see http://www.iemss.org/society/ under publications). For specific tools, refer to the papers of a symposium on simulation and gaming in natural resource management, published as a special issue of Simulation & Gaming (volume 38, issues 2 & 3). The introductory paper giving an overview is Barreteau et al. (2007).

Reflexivity is crucial for practitioners of participatory processes, as part of the need for more cautious evaluation of participatory processes as pointed out by Rowe and Frewer (2004). Another direction for reading consists in methods for evaluation and assessment of stakeholder involvement in modelling processes. Etienne edited a whole book aiming at assessing consequences of a specific approach, so-called companion modelling (Étienne 2011).

Readers who are more interested in stakeholder involvement in modelling at a more technical level should go for the review paper of Ramanath and Gilbert (2004) which provides a nice overview of this point of view.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Barreteau, O. et al. (2017). Participatory Approaches. In: Edmonds, B., Meyer, R. (eds) Simulating Social Complexity. Understanding Complex Systems. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66948-9_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66948-9_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-66947-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-66948-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation