The role of computer modelling in participatory integrated assessments
Introduction
The multi-dimensional problems that are related to global change phenomena cover complex and often nonlinear dynamic interactions between natural and social systems and occur on a multitude of temporal and spatial scales. Addressing these problems in a more comprehensive way than conventional scientific approaches requires inherent interdisciplinarity. In the last two decades, much effort has been spent on integrated assessment (IA) projects which combined different academic disciplines in order to obtain additional knowledge that provides input for political decision-making (Rotmans and Dowlatabadi, 1997, Toth and Hizsnyik, 1998, Rotmans, 1998, Sluijs and Kloprogge, 2001, Van Asselt and Rijkens-Klomp, 2002).
Experience gained from these projects revealed the apparent need for transdisciplinary approaches that additionally include societal groups and non-scientific experts into the knowledge generation process. Their knowledge and commitment is seen as pivotal for the development of practically relevant solutions to the problems at hand. Therefore, the fundamental inter-relations of social and natural processes need to be made transparent also to non-scientists. Transdisciplinarity, however, requires some recognition of the broad range of differing interests, views, knowledge structures, norms, and values which have developed in modern human societies (Becker and Jahn, 1999). To that end, the use of participatory procedures has been proposed to integrate diverging views and to incorporate knowledge from outside the traditional system of knowledge production and to increase the legitimacy of scientific research and results against societal claims (WBGU—German Advisory Council on Global Change, 1996, Kates et al., 2001).
A number of recent research projects in the participatory integrated assessment (PIA) of climate change used computer models during the participatory procedure, mostly as an additional form of scientific input. Since models are at the core of climate science and widely used even in expert assessments like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), it appears reasonable to employ them in other assessments as well. In the PIA projects, models were used as a tool during the assessments to understand the problem at hand and to explore and test scenarios developed by the participants and thus helped to evaluate policy options and envisaged solutions. In many cases, the models could be used in real-time and at the site of the assessment.
The use of computer models in PIA processes raises a number of problems both from a participatory as well as from a risk management perspective. From the participatory point of view, every introduction of authoritative forms of scientific knowledge such as computer models or expert talks to deliberative processes bears the danger of discouraging less accepted and more tacit forms of knowledge. Compared to human experts, computer models are often perceived as more comprehensive and reliable and thus more authoritative. Critics even argue that the use of computer models leads to a streamlining of cognitive frames and to uniform knowledge. Although such standardization is sometimes intended to ensure that everyone is talking about the same issue, in participative processes it counteracts the original attempt of including a variety of knowledge and cognitive frames to knowledge production. We therefore explore whether and how model use helped to achieve the objectives of participatory processes such as the generation of new insights and the development of innovative solutions. Specifically, we ask to which extent computer models facilitated mutual exchange and learning in participatory procedures and under which conditions and process designs these objectives can be achieved by the use of computer models.
The other problem focus addresses the use of models as a means in the risk assessment process that lies at the core of each integrated assessment. Although the design of existing IA models and their general appropriateness for participatory purposes has already been studied (Sluijs, 2001, Sluijs, 2002, Dahinden et al., 2000), the actual role of and the experiences with models in the various stages of a participatory risk assessment process raises additional questions: In which stages of the assessment process have computer models proven to be more fruitful than in others? Which effects did the inclusion of laypersons have on the use of models during the assessment? How did the assessment process benefit or loose through the use of models in a participatory context?
Both sets of problems will be studied by comparing experiences from three recent, model-supported PIA projects: ULYSSES, COOL and VISIONS. Section 2 addresses the problem from the participatory perspective whereas Section 3 focuses on the risk management aspects of computer models in PIA projects. The final section draws conclusions and describes perspectives for further research.
Section snippets
Rationales and criteria
In the recent past, the challenges arising from global environmental change as well as more normative claims to change the entire relation between science and society led to approaches such as Mode-2 science, post-normal science and sustainability science. All of them highlight the involvement of lay citizens and provide rationales for participatory procedures for various reasons. In Mode-2-science, the integration of non-scientific knowledge is key to generate knowledge that is likely to be
Rationales and criteria
Apart from the function of computer-based PIAs as participatory processes involving different social groups, they are also intended to provide a reliable assessment of the underlying risks for the policy process. Whereas the participatory function focuses on the inclusion of different forms and sources of knowledge, it is the risk assessment function that addresses the balanced and detailed analysis of the risks under deliberation. Therefore, the question will be addressed in this section,
Conclusions
Computer models in participatory integrated assessment projects aimed to fulfil different objectives that originate in a participatory and a risk management perspective. The former focuses on why, how and with what results different societal groups are involved in these processes, whereas the latter deals with the classical functions of integrated assessment projects to assess imminent threats, problems, possible responses to natural and human systems. At this crossroads, computer models have
Acknowledgements
This paper is part of the GELENA research project (see http://www.gelena.net) whose generous funding by the German Federal Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF) as part of its socio-ecological research initiative is gratefully acknowledged. We would also like to express our gratitude to Willemijn Tuinstra, the participants of the 2003 annual meeting of the Science and Democracy Network in Cambridge, MA, and an anonymous referee for valuable comments on earlier drafts. Jeroen van der Sluijs
References (65)
- et al.
Greenhouse gas emissions in an equity, environment- and service-oriented world: an IMAGE-based scenario for the 21st century
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change
(2000) - et al.
Science for the post-normal age
Futures
(1993) - et al.
Emergent complex systems
Futures
(1994) - et al.
The worth of a songbird: ecological economics as a post-normal science
Ecol. Econ.
(1994) - et al.
Citizens' perspectives on climate change and energy use
Glob. Environ. Change
(2000) Dialogue and debate in a post-normal practice of science: a reflexion
Futures
(1999)- et al.
Visions for a sustainable Europe
Futures
(2000) - et al.
Organisational learning II. Theory, method, and practice
(1996) - et al.
Sustainability and the social sciences. A cross-disciplinary approach to integrating environmental considerations into theoretical reorientation
(1999)
WorldScan: the core version
Exploring the use of computer models in participatory integrated assessment—experiences and recommendations for further steps
Integr. Assess.
Citizen interaction with computer models
Integrated assessment of climate change
Science
Focus groups in integrated assessments. A manual for a participatory tool, ULYSSES working paper No. WP-97-2
The logistics of public participation in environmental assessments
Int. J. Environ. Pollut.
The new production of knowledge
The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies
The national dialogue
Results and recommendations, synthesis report IVM R-01/07
The relevance of participatory approaches in integrated environmental assessment
Integr. Assess.
City of dreams
New Sci., July 27
Integrated assessment of sustainable development: multiple perspectives in interaction
Int. J. Environ. Pollut.
Involving the public in climate and energy decisions
Environment
Sustainability science
Science
Debating climate change
A study of stakeholder participation in an integrated assessment of long-term climate policy in the Netherlands
Cited by (50)
Participatory modelling and systems intelligence: A systems-based and transdisciplinary partnership
2022, Socio-Economic Planning SciencesTransformative pathways – Using integrated assessment models more effectively to open up plausible and desirable low-carbon futures
2021, Energy Research and Social ScienceWhat does the UK public want farmland to look like?
2021, Land Use PolicyCitation Excerpt :King et al. (2004) argue that landscape visualisations are key to effective consultative planning because all visually able participants can relate. However, these forms of consultative policy design have been criticised for placing too much researcher bias and direction on the process (Siebenhüner and Barth, 2005). Arts-based research, where art creation is a form of data collection (Knowles and Cole, 2012), is one form of research whereby participants create their own artwork, such as through drawing or painting, to visually communicate their ideas and perspectives (Greyson et al., 2017).
Multi-factor, multi-state, multi-model scenarios: Exploring food and climate futures for Southeast Asia
2016, Environmental Modelling and SoftwareCitation Excerpt :In order for the scenarios to be applicable in models and useful to decision-makers, this diversity must be channeled into a manageable number of alternative futures. Quantifying scenarios for use in models risks losing scenario richness, as models will need to streamline and summarize the scenario narrative (Siebenhüner and Barth, 2005). Funneling scenarios through a single model especially risks reducing the range of possibilities in the quantification of the scenarios through a single interpretation of future stressors (Volkery et al., 2008).
Participatory integrated assessment of scenarios for organic farming at different scales in Camargue, France
2016, Agricultural SystemsCitation Excerpt :Our experience corroborates that of de Kraker et al. (2011) that the development of the BEM in a participatory manner is essential to ensure a good understanding of its functioning by the local stakeholders. Siebenhüner and Barth (2005) distinguished four potential contributions of models in participatory integrated assessment: (i) problem framing, (ii) risk assessment (nature of the risk, its causes, consequences, likelihood and timing), (iii) option assessment, and finally (iv) goal and strategy formulation. On the basis of this classification, the ABM was used for problem framing, as the simulation done with farmers helped the other stakeholders to formalize hypotheses and develop new scenarios.
Lessons for model use in transition research: A survey and comparison with other research areas
2015, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions
- 1
Tel.: +49 441 798 4399; fax: +49 441 798 4379.