Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen
As discussed in the previous chapter, ComMod processes, like most participatory processes, are implemented in social contexts characterized by power asymmetries and conflicts of interest between stakeholders involved at different organizational levels.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
The term designer of a ComMod process, or more broadly a participatory process, is used here to designate someone who designs, leads and coordinates the whole ComMod process.
It is a task that the ComMod group began in partnership with other designers of participatory approaches.
However, the case can be cited of an experiment led by Michel Étienne in which, following a ComMod experiment in the Causse Méjan, the SCTL called on researchers at the Avignon INRA to use ComMod to facilitate collective learning on pine forest management.
The questionnaire was sent to all the researchers of the ComMod group and ADD-ComMod project, as part of an ongoing comparative analysis on participation issues (ComMod and non-ComMod) coordinated by Patrick d’Aquino.
We used the Atlas.ti software designed for the qualitative and quantitative analysis of text.
This profile corresponds to a ‘critical companion stance’, which was stated, tested and discussed in Barnaud (2008).
The participants asked to participate in the participatory processes often ‘represent’ other stakeholders sharing common interests in relation to a given problem. However, these are not necessarily ‘real representatives’. Indeed, to be truly representative of a group calls for this group to be recognized as such, which is different from a group regarded as such by researchers, which corresponds more to the concept of category. This also calls for members of this group to have appointed or elected this person to represent them. In most cases, a number of participants correspond to false representatives, who have no responsibility with regard to those belonging to the same category. In this case, if the process is designed to support a group decision process consideration needs to be given to widening discussions to all those ‘represented’ in this way (Barnaud 2008).
Daré et al. (2007) analysed the specific role of sociologists in a team designing a ComMod process. In addition to the knowledge they provided on the social context, they ‘questioned the match between the model and its social uses’ (p. 111). They also supported a particular position: ‘we need to go beyond the debate between commitment and detachment to stake a claim to a scientific, humanist and pragmatic commitment’ (p. 113).
This calls for continuing the research efforts undertaken in the monitoring/assessment methods during the ADD-ComMod project (see Chap. 8).
- Power Asymmetries in Companion Modelling Processes
- Springer Netherlands
- Chapter 6