Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Purpose, processes, partnerships, and products: four Ps to advance participatory socio-environmental modeling
Michigan State Univ USA.
Univ Technol Sydney, Australia.
Univ Maryland, USA.
Rutgers State Univ, USA.
Show others and affiliations
2018 (English)In: Ecological Applications, ISSN 1051-0761, E-ISSN 1939-5582, Vol. 28, no 1, p. 46-61Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Wiley-Blackwell, 2018. Vol. 28, no 1, p. 46-61
National Category
Environmental Sciences
Research subject
Environmental Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kau:diva-67074ISI: 000429004700004PubMedID: 28922513OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kau-67074DiVA, id: diva2:1198872
Available from: 2018-04-19 Created: 2018-04-19 Last updated: 2018-06-25Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

PubMed

Authority records BETA

Hedelin, Beatrice

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hedelin, Beatrice
By organisation
Department of Environmental and Life Sciences (from 2013)Centre for Climate and Safety (from 2013)
In the same journal
Ecological Applications
Environmental Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 5 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf