Participatory Modelling and Decision Support for Natural Resources Management in Climate Change Research

Giupponi, Carlo; Myšiak, Jaroslav; Sgobbi, Alessandra

doi:10.2139/ssrn.1105109

Cited by 10 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 43 publications

(31 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Visual simulation software programs that have been applied to support decision making in PM include Simile (Vanclay et al 2006) and mDSS (Giupponi et al 2006) to record systems and causal linkages (feedback loops) and data input on stock and flows to run alternative management scenarios. Significant research contributions in this growing field are reported by d 'Aquino and Le Page (2002), Prabhu et al (2003), Standa-Gunda et al (2003), Giupponi et al (2006Giupponi et al ( , 2008, Vanclay et al (2006), Voinov and Gaddis (2008) and Gaddis et al (2009). This paper contributes further to the literature through an evaluation of the effectiveness of PM situated in a broader process of social learning.…”

Section: Participatory Modelling As a Tool In Social Learningmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…A variety of alternative strategies were used which helped motivate and foster engagement with technical competence, consistent with findings of Giupponi et al (2006Giupponi et al ( , 2008, Mostert et al (2007) and Pahl-Wostl et al (2007) including open discussion with local actors, scientific researchers and invited expert speakers to develop an improved understanding of problems, build confidence and capacity for collective decision making.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Participatory modelling (PM) has been posited as a collective of innovative tools that incorporates local stakeholders, the public and decision makers into an analytical modelling process to support decisions involving complex natural resource management problems (Giupponi et al 2006(Giupponi et al , 2008Voinov and Gaddis 2008) and in this study is embedded into the social learning process (PahlWostl et al 2007). It uses an action research methodology (Dick 1990) to allow iterative and reflexive responses when exploring innovative solutions for dynamic socio-ecological problems Vanclay et al 2006).…”

Section: Participatory Modelling As a Tool In Social Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Stakeholder engagement in social learning to resolve controversies over land-use change to plantation forestry

Leys

Vanclay

2010

Reg Environ Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Participatory Modelling As a Tool In Social Learningmentioning

confidence: 72%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Participatory Modelling As a Tool In Social Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Stakeholder engagement in social learning to resolve controversies over land-use change to plantation forestry

Leys

Vanclay

2010

Reg Environ Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The initial participation level has been identified with getting right and objective information at the right time. Delivering information is essential for participant's decision-making process, in order to achieve successful results of risk assessment (Giupponi, Mysiak, & Sgobbi, 2008). Therefore, before starting risk assessment workshops, there is needed enough time for delivering adequate knowledge to the participants.…”

Section: Phase 3: Strengtheningt With Participatory Risk Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Resilience Through Participatory Planning for the Integrated Ecological Risks in Düzce

Aydın

Tezer²,

Türkay

et al. 2018

Resilience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to develop an integrated spatial planning methodology with a participatory planning approach for building resilient settlements against complex ecological risk factors. Düzce Province is selected as a case study because of its complex ecological characteristics as witnessed many times in past. The methodology consists of four phases. (1) The first phase of the methodology joins the ecological planning aims. In the (2) second phase, ecosystem services (ES) integrated land suitability maps was produced by combining natural hazard risks and landscape vulnerabilities with the risk of degradation of valuable ES. The (3) third phase, is participatory risk governance approach, which consists of three components namely, (a) risk communication, (b) risk assessment, (c) risk management that conducted between the local and regional stakeholders within the multi-scale approach. In the (4) fourth phase, comprehensive outputs for spatial risk mitigation was provided by the integration of ecological risk synthesis and participatory planning findings. Results show that participants prioritized earthquake, landslide, and flood as the highest natural hazard risks and erosion, habitat vulnerability, and water infiltration as the highest ecological vulnerability risks respectively. Results of risk governance analysis show that, at macroscale, central government institutions have the highest responsibility predominantly for proactive roles. At mesoscale local institutions of central governance have mainly reactive responsibilities. Thus, this integrated ecological risk assessment methodology can contribute to the decision-making process of ecological risk mitigation plans in a more comprehensive way through a multi-spatial and temporal scale approach. Moreover, this method can be applied in other provinces. However, in order to disseminate the results of participatory risk governance at provincial level, participation level and diversity should be increased in future studies.

show abstract

“…For instance, cognitive mapping and causal loop diagrams allow building formal models, either qualitative or quantitative (Giupponi et al 2008).…”

Section: For Analysing Vulnerability Interactively With Stakeholdersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methods and tools for assessing the vulnerability of forests and people to climate change: an introduction

Locatelli¹,

Herawati²,

Brockhaus³

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cover photo by Bruno Locatelli AcknowledgementsThe authors thank CIFOR and associated scientists who provided information about their use of methods and tools for vulnerability assessment: Benjamin Apraku Gyampoh, Angela Diaz, Heru Santoso, Houria Djoudi, Javier Saborio, Kologo Oumarou, Luis Molina, Pablo Imbach, Placide Hien, Raffaele Vignola, Stephen Lartey Tekpetey. DisclaimersThe views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of CIFOR.This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union (EuropeAid/ENV/2004-81719). The contents of this document can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the European Union.w o r k i n g P A P e r n o . 4 3 3 Adaptation is necessary for reducing the impacts of climate change on forests and societies. So far, forests, forest ecosystem services, and forest-dependent people or sectors have not been adequately represented in adaptation studies or policies, even though many methods and tools are available to help scientists or practitioners address questions related to vulnerability and adaptation. Methods and tools can help identify the impacts of climate change at the global, national, sectoral or local scale and bring useful results for policies on climate change. Other methods and tools aim at assessing local vulnerability for prioritising policy interventions or developing and monitoring adaptation responses.This working paper provides an overview of methods and tools suitable for assessing the vulnerability of forests, forest ecosystem services and forest-dependent people or sectors to climate change. It provides a typology of methods and tools and gives examples, taken mostly from the experience of Center for International Forest Research (CIFOR) and Tropical Agricultural Research and Higher Education Center (CATIE) in the Tropical Forests and Climate Change Adaptation (TroFCCA) project in Central America, West Africa and Asia. The scope of the analysis is first described (section 2). Then generic methods and tools are presented (section 3), followed by methods and tools for the vulnerability of ecosystems (section 4), people (section 5), and integrated socio-ecological systems (section 6). KeywordsClimate change, Adaptation, Vulnerability, Forest, Forest Communities, Ecosystem Services, Tools, Methods, Models.

show abstract

Participatory Modelling and Decision Support for Natural Resources Management in Climate Change Research

Cited by 10 publications

References 43 publications

Stakeholder engagement in social learning to resolve controversies over land-use change to plantation forestry

Stakeholder engagement in social learning to resolve controversies over land-use change to plantation forestry

Resilience Through Participatory Planning for the Integrated Ecological Risks in Düzce

Methods and tools for assessing the vulnerability of forests and people to climate change: an introduction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About