Integrated participatory modelling of actual farms to support policy making on sustainable intensification

Vayssières, Jonathan; Vigne, Mathieu; Alary, Véronique; Lecomte, Philippe

doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2010.05.008

Cited by 65 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These techniques have led to relevant results, but have been constrained by the time required for field work (immersion, Vayssieres et al, 2007) or for the analysis of raw data (Darré et al, 2004;Mathieu, 2004). As a result, the number of surveyed or involved farms has been limited (n = 31, (Cristofini et al, 1978); n = 5, (Mathieu, 2004); n = 33, (Farmar-Bowers and Lane, 2009); n = 10, (Madelrieux et al, 2009); n = 6, (Vayssieres et al, 2011)). CMASOP, based on FCM approaches, has the advantage of being less time consuming (Özesmi and Özesmi, 2004).…”

Section: The Possibility Of Exploring a Wider Diversity Than With Tramentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a broadened cognitive mapping approach for analysing systems of practices in social–ecological systems

Vanwindekens

Stilmant

Baret

2013

Ecological Modelling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Possibility Of Exploring a Wider Diversity Than With Tramentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a broadened cognitive mapping approach for analysing systems of practices in social–ecological systems

Vanwindekens

Stilmant

Baret

2013

Ecological Modelling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Moreover, there are examples of projects that do not stand for a specific tradition (Smajgl 2010;de Mey et al 2011). Interestingly, among those articles explicitly citing functional-dynamic process issues, none follows the ComMod approach but each comes from a different modeling community (Smajgl 2010;deReynier, Levin, and Shoji 2010;de Mey et al 2011;Franzén et al 2011;Molina et al 2011;Salerno et al 2010;Squires and Renn 2011;Vayssieres et al 2011) or addresses ''mediated modeling'' (Vayssieres et al 2011).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A functional-dynamic reflection on participatory processes in modeling projects

Seidl

2015

Ambio

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The participation of nonscientists in modeling projects/studies is increasingly employed to fulfill different functions. However, it is not well investigated if and how explicitly these functions and the dynamics of a participatory process are reflected by modeling projects in particular. In this review study, I explore participatory modeling projects from a functional-dynamic process perspective. The main differences among projects relate to the functions of participation-most often, more than one per project can be identified, along with the degree of explicit reflection (i.e., awareness and anticipation) on the dynamic process perspective. Moreover, two main approaches are revealed: participatory modeling covering diverse approaches and companion modeling. It becomes apparent that the degree of reflection on the participatory process itself is not always explicit and perfectly visible in the descriptions of the modeling projects. Thus, the use of common protocols or templates is discussed to facilitate project planning, as well as the publication of project results. A generic template may help, not in providing details of a project or model development, but in explicitly reflecting on the participatory process. It can serve to systematize the particular project's approach to stakeholder collaboration, and thus quality management.

show abstract

“…The approach identifies the productive gains of work and the adjustments obtained from the equipment. The method is based on an analysis of the work to be done through interactions between workforce, tasks and equipment facilities at different time scales (year, period, day), whereas most of the previous studies of livestock systems lend priority to the yearly scale (Jouven and Baumont, 2008), or sometimes to monthly or weekly scales (Hervé et al, 2002;Vayssiè res et al, 2011). Farm changes such as the departure of a retired worker, a son joining the Assessing work organization in livestock farms business or diversification of agricultural activities can modify the work organization (who does what, when and how long) on these three temporal scales.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A method for assessing work productivity and flexibility in livestock farms

Hostiou¹,

Dedieu²

2012

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Changes affecting livestock farming systems have made farm work a central concern for both the sector and for farmers themselves. Increased pressure on farms to be competitive and productive together with farmers' demand for greater autonomy, holidays or time to spend on private activities and the family converge to underline the two key dimensions of work -productivity and flexibility -required for the assessment of work organization. This paper proposes a method called the QuaeWork (QUAlification and Evaluation of Work in livestock farms) to assess work productivity and flexibility on a farm, and its use to identify how livestock management can contribute to work organization on dairy farms. The QuaeWork method was set up through an iterative process combining surveys conducted with farmers in two regions of France, discussions with different experts and literature review. The QuaeWork was applied on a sample of seven dairy farms in the southern Massif Central in France to identify patterns of how livestock management contributes to work organization. The QuaeWork was used to analyse work organization over the year through a systemic approach to the farm, integrating interactions between herd and land management, workforce composition, equipment facilities and combinations of activities through a characterization of 'who does what, when and for how long'. The criteria for assessing work productivity were work duration (routine work, seasonal work) and work efficiency (per livestock unit or hectare of utilized agricultural area). The criteria for assessing work flexibility were room for manoeuvre and adjustments to internal and external events. The three main patterns of livestock management practices to work organization were identified. In pattern-1, farmers used indoor stable feeding practices with delegated work, with moderate room for manoeuvre and efficiency. In pattern-3, farmers used simplified milking, reproduction and breeding practices to seasonalize work and make it efficient with consistent room for manoeuvre. The method suggests social sustainability criteria to assess work productivity and flexibility, which are important for making reasoned decisions on livestock farm changes, especially innovations. Researchers could usefully exploit the QuaeWork to integrate work objectives (productivity, flexibility) into technical and economic goals.

show abstract

Integrated participatory modelling of actual farms to support policy making on sustainable intensification

Cited by 65 publications

References 51 publications

Development of a broadened cognitive mapping approach for analysing systems of practices in social–ecological systems

Development of a broadened cognitive mapping approach for analysing systems of practices in social–ecological systems

A functional-dynamic reflection on participatory processes in modeling projects

A method for assessing work productivity and flexibility in livestock farms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About