| 1. |
- Jordan, Rebecca, et al.
(författare)
-
Twelve Questions for the Participatory Modeling Community
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Earth's Future. - : American Geophysical Union (AGU). - 2328-4277. ; 6:8, s. 1046-1057
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Participatory modeling engages the implicit and explicit knowledge of stakeholders to create formalized and shared representations of reality and has evolved into a field of study as well as a practice. Participatory modeling researchers and practitioners who focus specifically on environmental resources met at the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC) in Annapolis, Maryland, over the course of 2 years to discuss the state of the field and future directions for participatory modeling. What follows is a description of 12 overarching groups of questions that could guide future inquiry.
|
|
| 2. |
- Gray, Steven, et al.
(författare)
-
Purpose, processes, partnerships, and products : four Ps to advance participatory socio-environmental modeling
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Ecological Applications. - : Wiley-Blackwell. - 1051-0761 .- 1939-5582. ; 28:1, s. 46-61
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Including stakeholders in environmental model building and analysis is an increasingly popular approach to understanding ecological change. This is because stakeholders often hold valuable knowledge about socio-environmental dynamics and collaborative forms of modeling produce important boundary objects used to collectively reason about environmental problems. Although the number of participatory modeling (PM) case studies and the number of researchers adopting these approaches has grown in recent years, the lack of standardized reporting and limited reproducibility have prevented PM's establishment and advancement as a cohesive field of study. We suggest a four-dimensional framework (4P) that includes reporting on dimensions of (1) the Purpose for selecting a PM approach (the why); (2) the Process by which the public was involved in model building or evaluation (the how); (3) the Partnerships formed (the who); and (4) the Products that resulted from these efforts (the what). We highlight four case studies that use common PM software-based approaches (fuzzy cognitive mapping, agent-based modeling, system dynamics, and participatory geospatial modeling) to understand human-environment interactions and the consequences of ecological changes, including bushmeat hunting in Tanzania and Cameroon, agricultural production and deforestation in Zambia, and groundwater management in India. We demonstrate how standardizing communication about PM case studies can lead to innovation and new insights about model-based reasoning in support of ecological policy development. We suggest that our 4P framework and reporting approach provides a way for new hypotheses to be identified and tested in the growing field of PM.
|
|
| 3. |
- Sanga, Udita, et al.
(författare)
-
Dynamic pathways of barriers and opportunities for food security and climate adaptation in Southern Mali
- 2021
-
Ingår i: World Development. - : Elsevier BV. - 0305-750X .- 1873-5991. ; 148
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Barriers to food security and climate adaptation operate in complex and dynamic ways but are often perceived as static impediments to be overcome. In this study, we apply systems thinking for the assessment of barriers in agricultural decision-making for food security and climate adaptation. Using a mixed method approach of participatory simulation game design and causal loop diagrams, we explore the dynamic pathways through which barriers inhibit farmers from achieving food security and climate adaptation in Southern Mali. Results show that the key barriers in the region are financial, land, and climate-related barriers including unavailability of formal credit sources, high input prices, inadequate land access and ownership rights, time and labor constraints in collective vs individual plots, and climate risks such as early and late season droughts, high temperature, excessive rainfall, water scarcity, and pest incidences. These barriers operate in complex, interdependent, and dynamic ways where factors that act as enablers in one context can also function as barriers in another context. We see such interdependencies in three cases: i) access to interlocked credit and loans for cotton cultivation acts as enablers of income generation for male farmers but become barriers to female farmers who do not cultivate cotton ii) land ownership and land use rights for male farmers act as enablers for cultivation of income generating cash and food crops but acts as a barrier for female farmers by way of intra-household labor dynamics within collective plots iii) increase in land allocation to cotton and maize cultivation acts as enablers for increased household income but becomes a barrier to food security due to higher vulnerability to climate risks. Assessment of causal loop diagrams identified deep and shallow leverage points. Policies and interventions that focused on input subsidies and credit facilities are shallow leverage points where incremental changes will only lead to small improvements in farmers' livelihoods. Policies that support improved access and ownership of land to female farmers are deep leverage points that can potentially shift the dominant cropping pattern to more diversified and climate-resilient production.
|
|
