This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
Forest regeneration is a major land-use change in European uplands, and whether or not this is a desirable change for biodiversity is disputed. While this debate seems to be largely situated in the field of natural sciences, this paper aims to also examine its social dimensions. To do so, we adopt a comparative discourse analysis with four cases of protected areas in France, Spain, and Scotland. We draw on a conceptual framework highlighting both the ecological and social factors underpinning the construction of environmental discourses. It notably emphasises the role of interests, ideas and institutions, and the power dynamics underpinning discourse-coalitions. We show how diverging discourses emerged, gained ground, coalesced and competed differently in different contexts, explaining the adoption of seemingly opposite discourses by protected area authorities. These findings reaffirm the need to conceive environmental governance as an on-going deliberative process in order to achieve environmental justice.
Cécile Barnaud; Anke Fischer; Sam Staddon; Kirsty Blackstock; Clémence Moreau; Esteve Corbera; Alison Hester; Raphaël Mathevet; Annie McKee; Joana Reyes; Clélia Sirami; Antonia Eastwood. Is forest regeneration good for biodiversity? Exploring the social dimensions of an apparently ecological debate. Environmental Science & Policy 2021, 120, 63 -72.
AMA StyleCécile Barnaud, Anke Fischer, Sam Staddon, Kirsty Blackstock, Clémence Moreau, Esteve Corbera, Alison Hester, Raphaël Mathevet, Annie McKee, Joana Reyes, Clélia Sirami, Antonia Eastwood. Is forest regeneration good for biodiversity? Exploring the social dimensions of an apparently ecological debate. Environmental Science & Policy. 2021; 120 ():63-72.
Chicago/Turabian StyleCécile Barnaud; Anke Fischer; Sam Staddon; Kirsty Blackstock; Clémence Moreau; Esteve Corbera; Alison Hester; Raphaël Mathevet; Annie McKee; Joana Reyes; Clélia Sirami; Antonia Eastwood. 2021. "Is forest regeneration good for biodiversity? Exploring the social dimensions of an apparently ecological debate." Environmental Science & Policy 120, no. : 63-72.
Laia D'Armengol; Isabel Ruiz-Mallén; Cecile Barnaud; Esteve Corbera. What does comanagement offer? Exploring users’ knowledge through mental models in the fishery of La Encrucijada Biosphere Reserve, Mexico. Ecology and Society 2021, 26, 1 .
AMA StyleLaia D'Armengol, Isabel Ruiz-Mallén, Cecile Barnaud, Esteve Corbera. What does comanagement offer? Exploring users’ knowledge through mental models in the fishery of La Encrucijada Biosphere Reserve, Mexico. Ecology and Society. 2021; 26 (1):1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleLaia D'Armengol; Isabel Ruiz-Mallén; Cecile Barnaud; Esteve Corbera. 2021. "What does comanagement offer? Exploring users’ knowledge through mental models in the fishery of La Encrucijada Biosphere Reserve, Mexico." Ecology and Society 26, no. 1: 1.
Rural forests, including the wooded areas primarily managed by farmers (e.g. farm forests, hedgerows, isolated trees), are critical for the sustainability of agricultural landscapes. Yet with agricultural industrialization, rural forests have been in decline in many regions across Europe. To reverse this trend and promote the sustainable use of farmland, ‘greening’ measures have been introduced by the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in recent years. However, their effectiveness depends on local farmers’ values and reaction to these measures. In this study, we investigated the socio-cultural value accorded to rural forests in southwestern France by interviewing 19 farmers. The positive and negative contributions cited were categorized as ecosystem services/disservices and analyzed using qualitative and quantitative methods. The results indicate that farmers in this region have mixed views, as they cited 32 positive and 25 negative contributions (material and non-material) of rural forests. They felt trees provide services (e.g. erosion control, windbreak) and disservices to agriculture (e.g. decline in yield, damage to tractors and infrastructures). Depending on their farming practices, farmers had contrasting opinions on how to reconcile rural forests and agriculture. Our results suggest that CAP greening measures need to better target rural forest conservation and further adapt to local contexts.
Julien Blanco; Anne Sourdril; Marc Deconchat; Cecile Barnaud; Magali San Cristobal; Emilie Andrieu. How farmers feel about trees: Perceptions of ecosystem services and disservices associated with rural forests in southwestern France. Ecosystem Services 2020, 42, 101066 .
AMA StyleJulien Blanco, Anne Sourdril, Marc Deconchat, Cecile Barnaud, Magali San Cristobal, Emilie Andrieu. How farmers feel about trees: Perceptions of ecosystem services and disservices associated with rural forests in southwestern France. Ecosystem Services. 2020; 42 ():101066.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJulien Blanco; Anne Sourdril; Marc Deconchat; Cecile Barnaud; Magali San Cristobal; Emilie Andrieu. 2020. "How farmers feel about trees: Perceptions of ecosystem services and disservices associated with rural forests in southwestern France." Ecosystem Services 42, no. : 101066.
Cockburn, J., M. Schoon, G. Cundill, C. Robinson, J. A. Aburto, S. M. Alexander, J. A. Baggio, C. Barnaud, M. Chapman, M. Garcia Llorente, G. A. García-López, R. Hill, C. Ifejika Speranza, J. Lee, C. L. Meek, E. Rosenberg, L. Schultz, and G. Thondhlana. 2020. Understanding the context of multifaceted collaborations for social-ecological sustainability: a methodology for cross-case analysis. Ecology and Society 25(3):7. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-11527-250307
Jessica Cockburn; Michael Schoon; Georgina Cundill; Cathy Robinson; Jaime A. Aburto; Steven M. Alexander; Jacopo A. Baggio; Cecile Barnaud; Mollie Chapman; Marina Garcia Llorente; Gustavo García López; Rosemary Hill; Chinwe Ifejika Speranza; Jean Lee; Chanda L. Meek; Eureta Rosenberg; Lisen Schultz; Gladman Thondhlana. Understanding the context of multifaceted collaborations for social-ecological sustainability: a methodology for cross-case analysis. Ecology and Society 2020, 25, 1 .
AMA StyleJessica Cockburn, Michael Schoon, Georgina Cundill, Cathy Robinson, Jaime A. Aburto, Steven M. Alexander, Jacopo A. Baggio, Cecile Barnaud, Mollie Chapman, Marina Garcia Llorente, Gustavo García López, Rosemary Hill, Chinwe Ifejika Speranza, Jean Lee, Chanda L. Meek, Eureta Rosenberg, Lisen Schultz, Gladman Thondhlana. Understanding the context of multifaceted collaborations for social-ecological sustainability: a methodology for cross-case analysis. Ecology and Society. 2020; 25 (3):1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJessica Cockburn; Michael Schoon; Georgina Cundill; Cathy Robinson; Jaime A. Aburto; Steven M. Alexander; Jacopo A. Baggio; Cecile Barnaud; Mollie Chapman; Marina Garcia Llorente; Gustavo García López; Rosemary Hill; Chinwe Ifejika Speranza; Jean Lee; Chanda L. Meek; Eureta Rosenberg; Lisen Schultz; Gladman Thondhlana. 2020. "Understanding the context of multifaceted collaborations for social-ecological sustainability: a methodology for cross-case analysis." Ecology and Society 25, no. 3: 1.
The multifunctionality of agriculture is often understood as a normative political notion aimed at fostering the sustainable development of rural areas. Considering it as a locally, socially-constructed concept, the objective of this paper is to analyse how the idea of agricultural multifunctionality was appropriated, re-constructed and negotiated in local arenas dedicated to land-use management. Conceptually, we adopt a political ecology approach which uses a constructivist and relational approach to the concept of ‘ecosystem services’. Drawing on a case study in the French Pyrénées mountains, we analyse the diversity of discourses on the roles of livestock farming held by local stakeholders and unpack the ways that these different discourses interact with each other in the local action arenas. We show that a coalition of interests led to the emergence of a dominant and apparent consensus around the need to support livestock farming to maintain open landscapes. We also show that behind this apparent consensus, there are in fact tensions between people who want to maintain livestock farming for different reasons, with some having more instrumental visions than others. Finally, we demonstrate that the dominant consensus has generated a local taboo, hiding an unvoiced pro-rewilding perspective which considers that farmland abandonment could be an opportunity in terms of biodiversity. Incorporating the two concepts of ecosystem services and agricultural multifunctionality, this study allows us to discuss their respective heuristic values and policy implications.
Cécile Barnaud; Nathalie Couix. The multifunctionality of mountain farming: Social constructions and local negotiations behind an apparent consensus. Journal of Rural Studies 2019, 73, 34 -45.
AMA StyleCécile Barnaud, Nathalie Couix. The multifunctionality of mountain farming: Social constructions and local negotiations behind an apparent consensus. Journal of Rural Studies. 2019; 73 ():34-45.
Chicago/Turabian StyleCécile Barnaud; Nathalie Couix. 2019. "The multifunctionality of mountain farming: Social constructions and local negotiations behind an apparent consensus." Journal of Rural Studies 73, no. : 34-45.
While the concept of ecosystem services (ES) is well established in the scientific and policy arenas, its operationalization faces many challenges. Indeed, ES supply, demand and flow are related to ecological and social processes at multiple space and time scales, leading to complex interactions in the provision of multiple ES. To develop a conceptual framework (CF) to facilitate the study and governance of multiple ES in agricultural social-ecological landscapes. We examined the ecological and social literatures to identify how approaches at the landscape level contribute to a better understanding of ES supply, demand and flow in agricultural systems. After detailing our CF, we use a case study to illustrate how methods from different disciplines can be combined to operationalize our CF. The literature suggests that the landscape level is likely to be the level of organization that will make it possible to (i) integrate different components of ES co-production, i.e. ecological processes, agricultural practices and social structures, (ii) understand interactions between stakeholders, including ES co-producers and beneficiaries, (iii) explicit ES trade-offs, i.e. social choices between ES. The production of multiple ES at the landscape level involves different types of interdependencies among ES co-producers and beneficiaries. These need to be addressed in concerted and integrated ways to achieve sustainable and equitable governance of agricultural landscapes.
Aude Vialatte; Cecile Barnaud; Julien Blanco; Annie Ouin; Jean-Philippe Choisis; Emilie Andrieu; David Sheeren; Sylvie Ladet; Marc Deconchat; Floriane Clement; Diane Esquerré; Clelia Sirami. A conceptual framework for the governance of multiple ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes. Landscape Ecology 2019, 34, 1653 -1673.
AMA StyleAude Vialatte, Cecile Barnaud, Julien Blanco, Annie Ouin, Jean-Philippe Choisis, Emilie Andrieu, David Sheeren, Sylvie Ladet, Marc Deconchat, Floriane Clement, Diane Esquerré, Clelia Sirami. A conceptual framework for the governance of multiple ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes. Landscape Ecology. 2019; 34 (7):1653-1673.
Chicago/Turabian StyleAude Vialatte; Cecile Barnaud; Julien Blanco; Annie Ouin; Jean-Philippe Choisis; Emilie Andrieu; David Sheeren; Sylvie Ladet; Marc Deconchat; Floriane Clement; Diane Esquerré; Clelia Sirami. 2019. "A conceptual framework for the governance of multiple ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes." Landscape Ecology 34, no. 7: 1653-1673.
Ecosystem disservices (EDS) highlight the negative effects of nature on human well-being. Like ecosystem services (ES), EDS impact economic and non-economic aspects of human life within social-ecological systems (SES). The concept of EDS has been much debated, with strongly differing opinions regarding its utility and implications. In this opinion paper, we emphasize its relevance and complementarity to the ES concept for analyzing SES, and advocate applying EDS to SES research more systematically. Firstly, we highlight that though EDS are now sometimes studied, they remain neglected compared to ES. Secondly, we propose five reasons why EDS and ES are complementary concepts. Thirdly, we suggest that EDS are critical to understanding stakeholders’ behavior regarding ecosystems. Drawing on existing studies, we illustrate how stakeholders in SES simultaneously perceive and benefit or suffer from ES and EDS. We further suggest that, under certain conditions, EDS may influence people’s behavior more than ES. Such 'EDS-biased behavior' implies that, under certain circumstances, targeting EDS reduction may be more effective than targeting ES increase to encourage nature-friendly behaviors. Finally, we provide five recommendations to further integrate ES and EDS in research, as a pathway towards improving the understanding of SES and the effectiveness of sustainability policies.
Julien Blanco; Nicolas Dendoncker; Cecile Barnaud; Clélia Sirami. Ecosystem disservices matter: Towards their systematic integration within ecosystem service research and policy. Ecosystem Services 2019, 36, 100913 .
AMA StyleJulien Blanco, Nicolas Dendoncker, Cecile Barnaud, Clélia Sirami. Ecosystem disservices matter: Towards their systematic integration within ecosystem service research and policy. Ecosystem Services. 2019; 36 ():100913.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJulien Blanco; Nicolas Dendoncker; Cecile Barnaud; Clélia Sirami. 2019. "Ecosystem disservices matter: Towards their systematic integration within ecosystem service research and policy." Ecosystem Services 36, no. : 100913.
The concept of agroecological transition revives debates on how to deal with complexity and uncertainty. While the adaptive approach and its “adjust along the way” principle have been adopted as a relevant general framework to deal with partially irreducible uncertainty, the different approaches to the definition and management of uncertainty are rarely explicitated. In this chapter we highlight the diversity of these stances through brief presentations of research work that is related to agroecology and sustainable development, and anchored in various disciplines (modelling, management sciences, economics, ecology). This gives us a first glimpse of the variety of concepts used to describe uncertainty, characterising nature and the different approaches to manage it. It shows also that these definitions of uncertainties, clearly derived from particular disciplines or school of thought, can be applied together in a more or less complementary way. Finally, we discuss how this explicitation of the diversity of approaches to uncertainty contributes to highlighting different ways of defining the agroecological transition itself – especially between determinist or more open-ended approaches–, and identifies interdisciplinary research issues.
Danièle Magda; Nathalie Girard; Valérie Angeon; Célia Cholez; Nathalie Raulet-Croset; Régis Sabbadin; Nicolas Salliou; Cécile Barnaud; Claude Monteil; Nathalie Peyrard. A Plurality of Viewpoints Regarding the Uncertainties of the Agroecological Transition. Agroecological Transitions: From Theory to Practice in Local Participatory Design 2019, 99 -120.
AMA StyleDanièle Magda, Nathalie Girard, Valérie Angeon, Célia Cholez, Nathalie Raulet-Croset, Régis Sabbadin, Nicolas Salliou, Cécile Barnaud, Claude Monteil, Nathalie Peyrard. A Plurality of Viewpoints Regarding the Uncertainties of the Agroecological Transition. Agroecological Transitions: From Theory to Practice in Local Participatory Design. 2019; ():99-120.
Chicago/Turabian StyleDanièle Magda; Nathalie Girard; Valérie Angeon; Célia Cholez; Nathalie Raulet-Croset; Régis Sabbadin; Nicolas Salliou; Cécile Barnaud; Claude Monteil; Nathalie Peyrard. 2019. "A Plurality of Viewpoints Regarding the Uncertainties of the Agroecological Transition." Agroecological Transitions: From Theory to Practice in Local Participatory Design , no. : 99-120.
Transitioning towards agroecology involves the integration of biodiversity based ecosystem services into farming systems: for example, relying on biological pest control rather than pesticides. One promising approach for pest control relies on the conservation of semi-natural habitats at the landscape scale to encourage natural enemies of insect pests. However, this approach may require coordination between farmers to manage the interdependencies between the providers and beneficiaries of this ecosystem service. The main objective of this study was to identify hindrances to landscape-scale coordination strategies to control pests. To this end, we used a theoretical framework specifically designed to explore social interdependencies linked to ecosystem services. We applied this framework to a participatory research case study on pest control in apple orchards in southwest France to identify and describe key obstacles. We found four main impediments: (1) The perception of most stakeholders that the landscape does not deliver significant pest control services, (2) the challenge of coping with agroecological uncertainties, (3) an integrated vertical supply chain focused on pesticide use, (4) the existence of independent, non-collective alternatives. We discuss the potential of overcoming these obstacles or turning them into opportunities that promote a transition to agroecology and the integration of ecosystem services in farms and their supply chains.
Nicolas Salliou; Roldan Muradian; Cécile Barnaud. Governance of Ecosystem Services in Agroecology: When Coordination is Needed but Difficult to Achieve. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1158 .
AMA StyleNicolas Salliou, Roldan Muradian, Cécile Barnaud. Governance of Ecosystem Services in Agroecology: When Coordination is Needed but Difficult to Achieve. Sustainability. 2019; 11 (4):1158.
Chicago/Turabian StyleNicolas Salliou; Roldan Muradian; Cécile Barnaud. 2019. "Governance of Ecosystem Services in Agroecology: When Coordination is Needed but Difficult to Achieve." Sustainability 11, no. 4: 1158.
A key challenge in the management of ecosystem services involves weighing up the trade-offs between these ecosystem services and who benefits from them. In mountainous zones, new trade-offs between ecosystem services emerge due to shifts in farming practices and their consequences on the landscapes (land abandonment and intensification), which is a source of debate and controversy between local stakeholders. To help stakeholders tackle the challenge of decision-making around trade-offs, this study tested the use of a role-playing game based on the concept of ecosystem services to facilitate the process through social learning. The game SECOLOZ was designed in cooperation with local stakeholders to explore the impacts of three farming practices (rock removal, ploughing of meadow, and pasturing) on trade-offs among ecosystem services. The game was played with various local stakeholders in the Mont Lozère, France. We found that this experience increased awareness of interdependencies, encouraged mutual understanding, improved the ability to deal with uncertainties, and fostered the exploration of innovative methods of governance. The outcomes confirm that the ecosystem service concept can be successfully used in a role-playing game process and that it significantly contributes to social learning.
Clémence Moreau; Cécile Barnaud; Raphaël Mathevet. Conciliate Agriculture with Landscape and Biodiversity Conservation: A Role-Playing Game to Explore Trade-Offs among Ecosystem Services through Social Learning. Sustainability 2019, 11, 310 .
AMA StyleClémence Moreau, Cécile Barnaud, Raphaël Mathevet. Conciliate Agriculture with Landscape and Biodiversity Conservation: A Role-Playing Game to Explore Trade-Offs among Ecosystem Services through Social Learning. Sustainability. 2019; 11 (2):310.
Chicago/Turabian StyleClémence Moreau; Cécile Barnaud; Raphaël Mathevet. 2019. "Conciliate Agriculture with Landscape and Biodiversity Conservation: A Role-Playing Game to Explore Trade-Offs among Ecosystem Services through Social Learning." Sustainability 11, no. 2: 310.
Habitat management is increasingly considered as a promising approach to favor the ecosystem service of biological control by enhancing natural enemies. However, habitat management, whether at local or landscape scale, remains very uncertain for farmers. Interactions between ecological processes and agricultural practices are indeed uncertain and site-specific, which makes implementation difficult. Thus, prospecting innovations based on habitat management may benefit from integrating local stakeholders and their knowledge. Our objective is to explore with both local and scientific stakeholders how they perceive agricultural practices, ecological processes, and services related to biological pest control and habitat management. We conducted a participatory Bayesian Network modeling approach with five stakeholders in Southwest France around apple orchard cultivation. We co-constructed such Bayesian Networks based on participants’ knowledge. We explored scenarios favoring natural enemies and habitat manipulation with each participant’s Bayesian Network. We compared how different stakeholders perceive the impact of each scenario on the biological control ecosystem service. Our results indicate that a landscape with a high proportion of semi-natural habitats does not translate into significant biological control for most participants even though some stakeholders perceive a significant impact on generalist predators’ activity within orchards. For these local stakeholders, habitat management at the orchard level such as inter-row vegetation seems currently more promising than at the landscape scale. Here, we show for the first time that the use of Bayesian modeling in a participatory manner can give precious insights into the most promising perspectives on habitat management at different scales. These different local perspectives suggest in particular that further dialogue between ecologists and local stakeholders should be sought about inter-row habitat management as the most promising practice to foster biological pest control and other ecosystem services.
Nicolas Salliou; Aude Vialatte; Claude Monteil; Cecile Barnaud. First use of participatory Bayesian modeling to study habitat management at multiple scales for biological pest control. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 2019, 39, 7 .
AMA StyleNicolas Salliou, Aude Vialatte, Claude Monteil, Cecile Barnaud. First use of participatory Bayesian modeling to study habitat management at multiple scales for biological pest control. Agronomy for Sustainable Development. 2019; 39 (1):7.
Chicago/Turabian StyleNicolas Salliou; Aude Vialatte; Claude Monteil; Cecile Barnaud. 2019. "First use of participatory Bayesian modeling to study habitat management at multiple scales for biological pest control." Agronomy for Sustainable Development 39, no. 1: 7.
Vallet, A., B. Locatelli, H. Levrel, N. Dendoncker, C. Barnaud, and Y. Quispe Conde. 2019. Linking equity, power, and stakeholders’ roles in relation to ecosystem services. Ecology and Society 24(2):14. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10904-240214
Améline Vallet; Bruno Locatelli; Harold Levrel; Nicolas Dendoncker; Cecile Barnaud; Yésica Quispe Conde. Linking equity, power, and stakeholders’ roles in relation to ecosystem services. Ecology and Society 2019, 24, 1 .
AMA StyleAméline Vallet, Bruno Locatelli, Harold Levrel, Nicolas Dendoncker, Cecile Barnaud, Yésica Quispe Conde. Linking equity, power, and stakeholders’ roles in relation to ecosystem services. Ecology and Society. 2019; 24 (2):1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleAméline Vallet; Bruno Locatelli; Harold Levrel; Nicolas Dendoncker; Cecile Barnaud; Yésica Quispe Conde. 2019. "Linking equity, power, and stakeholders’ roles in relation to ecosystem services." Ecology and Society 24, no. 2: 1.
Nicolas Dendoncker; Fanny Boeraeve; Emilie Crouzat; Marc Dufrêne; Ariane König; Cecile Barnaud. How can integrated valuation of ecosystem services help understanding and steering agroecological transitions? Ecology and Society 2018, 23, 1 .
AMA StyleNicolas Dendoncker, Fanny Boeraeve, Emilie Crouzat, Marc Dufrêne, Ariane König, Cecile Barnaud. How can integrated valuation of ecosystem services help understanding and steering agroecological transitions? Ecology and Society. 2018; 23 (1):1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleNicolas Dendoncker; Fanny Boeraeve; Emilie Crouzat; Marc Dufrêne; Ariane König; Cecile Barnaud. 2018. "How can integrated valuation of ecosystem services help understanding and steering agroecological transitions?" Ecology and Society 23, no. 1: 1.
Barnaud, C., E. Corbera, R. Muradian, N. Salliou, C. Sirami, A. Vialatte, J.-P. Choisis, N. Dendoncker, R. Mathevet, C. Moreau, V. Reyes-García, M. Boada, M. Deconchat, C. Cibien, S. Garnier, R. Maneja, and M. Antona. 2018. Ecosystem services, social interdependencies, and collective action: a conceptual framework. Ecology and Society 23(1):15. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09848-230115
Cecile Barnaud; Esteve Corbera; Roldan Muradian; Nicolas Salliou; Clélia Sirami; Aude Vialatte; Jean-Philippe Choisis; Nicolas Dendoncker; Raphael Mathevet; Clémence Moreau; Victoria Reyes-García; Martí Boada; Marc Deconchat; Catherine Cibien; Stephan Garnier; Roser Maneja; Martine Antona. Ecosystem services, social interdependencies, and collective action: a conceptual framework. Ecology and Society 2018, 23, 1 .
AMA StyleCecile Barnaud, Esteve Corbera, Roldan Muradian, Nicolas Salliou, Clélia Sirami, Aude Vialatte, Jean-Philippe Choisis, Nicolas Dendoncker, Raphael Mathevet, Clémence Moreau, Victoria Reyes-García, Martí Boada, Marc Deconchat, Catherine Cibien, Stephan Garnier, Roser Maneja, Martine Antona. Ecosystem services, social interdependencies, and collective action: a conceptual framework. Ecology and Society. 2018; 23 (1):1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleCecile Barnaud; Esteve Corbera; Roldan Muradian; Nicolas Salliou; Clélia Sirami; Aude Vialatte; Jean-Philippe Choisis; Nicolas Dendoncker; Raphael Mathevet; Clémence Moreau; Victoria Reyes-García; Martí Boada; Marc Deconchat; Catherine Cibien; Stephan Garnier; Roser Maneja; Martine Antona. 2018. "Ecosystem services, social interdependencies, and collective action: a conceptual framework." Ecology and Society 23, no. 1: 1.
This chapter aims to describe the diversity of participatory approaches in relation to social simulations, with a focus on the interactions between the tools and participants. We consider potential interactions at all stages of the modelling process: conceptual design, implementation, use and simulation outcome analysis. After reviewing and classifying existing approaches and techniques, we describe two case studies with a focus on the integration of various techniques. The first case study deals with fire hazard prevention in Southern France, and the second one with groundwater management on the atoll of Kiribati. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the advantages and limitations of participatory approaches.
Olivier Barreteau; Pieter Bots; Katherine Daniell; Michel Etienne; Pascal Perez; Cecile Barnaud; Didier Bazile; Nicolas Becu; Jean-Christophe Castella; William’S Daré; Guy Trebuil. Participatory Approaches. Understanding Complex Systems 2017, 253 -292.
AMA StyleOlivier Barreteau, Pieter Bots, Katherine Daniell, Michel Etienne, Pascal Perez, Cecile Barnaud, Didier Bazile, Nicolas Becu, Jean-Christophe Castella, William’S Daré, Guy Trebuil. Participatory Approaches. Understanding Complex Systems. 2017; ():253-292.
Chicago/Turabian StyleOlivier Barreteau; Pieter Bots; Katherine Daniell; Michel Etienne; Pascal Perez; Cecile Barnaud; Didier Bazile; Nicolas Becu; Jean-Christophe Castella; William’S Daré; Guy Trebuil. 2017. "Participatory Approaches." Understanding Complex Systems , no. : 253-292.
Participatory modelling must often deal with the challenge of ambiguity when diverse stakeholders do not share a common understanding of the problem and measures for its solution. In this paper, we propose a framework and a methodology to elicit ambiguities among different stakeholders by using a participatory Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) modelling approach. Our approach consists of four steps undertaken with stakeholders: (1) co-construction of a consensual conceptual model of their socio-ecological system, (2) translation of the model into a consensual Bayesian Net structure, (3) individual parametrization of conditional probabilities, and (4) elicitation of ambiguity through the use of scenarios. We tested this methodology on the ambiguity surrounding the effect of an ecological process on a potential innovation in biological control, and it proved useful in eliciting ambiguity. Further research could explore more conflictual or controversial ambiguities to test this methodology in other settings
Nicolas Salliou; Cécile Barnaud; Aude Vialatte; Claude Monteil. A participatory Bayesian Belief Network approach to explore ambiguity among stakeholders about socio-ecological systems. Environmental Modelling & Software 2017, 96, 199 -209.
AMA StyleNicolas Salliou, Cécile Barnaud, Aude Vialatte, Claude Monteil. A participatory Bayesian Belief Network approach to explore ambiguity among stakeholders about socio-ecological systems. Environmental Modelling & Software. 2017; 96 ():199-209.
Chicago/Turabian StyleNicolas Salliou; Cécile Barnaud; Aude Vialatte; Claude Monteil. 2017. "A participatory Bayesian Belief Network approach to explore ambiguity among stakeholders about socio-ecological systems." Environmental Modelling & Software 96, no. : 199-209.
Galafassi, D., T. Daw, L. Munyi, K. Brown, C. Barnaud, and I. Fazey. 2017. Learning about social-ecological trade-offs. Ecology and Society 22(1):2. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08920-220102
Diego Galafassi; Tim M. Daw; Lydiah Munyi; Katrina Brown; Cecile Barnaud; Ioan Fazey. Learning about social-ecological trade-offs. Ecology and Society 2017, 22, 1 .
AMA StyleDiego Galafassi, Tim M. Daw, Lydiah Munyi, Katrina Brown, Cecile Barnaud, Ioan Fazey. Learning about social-ecological trade-offs. Ecology and Society. 2017; 22 (1):1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleDiego Galafassi; Tim M. Daw; Lydiah Munyi; Katrina Brown; Cecile Barnaud; Ioan Fazey. 2017. "Learning about social-ecological trade-offs." Ecology and Society 22, no. 1: 1.
Salliou, N., and C. Barnaud. 2017. Landscape and biodiversity as new resources for agro-ecology? Insights from farmers’ perspectives. Ecology and Society 22(2):16. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09249-220216
Nicolas Salliou; Cecile Barnaud. Landscape and biodiversity as new resources for agro-ecology? Insights from farmers’ perspectives. Ecology and Society 2017, 22, 1 .
AMA StyleNicolas Salliou, Cecile Barnaud. Landscape and biodiversity as new resources for agro-ecology? Insights from farmers’ perspectives. Ecology and Society. 2017; 22 (2):1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleNicolas Salliou; Cecile Barnaud. 2017. "Landscape and biodiversity as new resources for agro-ecology? Insights from farmers’ perspectives." Ecology and Society 22, no. 2: 1.
Si de nombreux auteurs dénoncent le manque de prise en compte des asymétries de pouvoir entre les acteurs dans les processus participatifs, plus rares sont ceux qui abordent la question du comment, à savoir comment prendre en compte ces asymétries de pouvoir dans la mise en œuvre d’un processus participatif ? Cette question implique pour les porteurs de ces processus (chercheurs ou professionnels de la participation) de réfléchir à leur positionnement vis-à-vis de ces asymétries, et donc d’interroger un certain nombre de présupposés théoriques voire idéologiques, souvent inconscients et rarement formulés. Revendiquent-ils une certaine neutralité, une absence de parti pris, au risque de participer à une simple reproduction voire à un renforcement des asymétries de pouvoir initiales ? Revendiquent-ils au contraire une non-neutralité, en choisissant de renforcer la voix des acteurs ou des points de vue les moins influents, au risque de voir questionnée leur légitimité à intervenir ainsi sur les rapports de force au sein d’une société ? Dans cet article, nous présentons un outil que nous avons développé, un test destiné à faire expliciter aux porteurs de processus participatifs leur positionnement vis-à-vis des asymétries de pouvoir. Nous l’avons soumis à une cinquantaine de chercheurs et professionnels de la participation. L’analyse des résultats nous a permis de mettre en évidence cinq grands types de positionnements dont la cohérence interne renvoie à différentes façons de concevoir la légitimité de leur intervention.
Cécile Barnaud; Patrick D’Aquino; William’S Daré; Raphaël Mathevet. Dispositifs participatifs et asymétries de pouvoir : expliciter et interroger les positionnements. Participations 2016, 16, 137 -166.
AMA StyleCécile Barnaud, Patrick D’Aquino, William’S Daré, Raphaël Mathevet. Dispositifs participatifs et asymétries de pouvoir : expliciter et interroger les positionnements. Participations. 2016; 16 (3):137-166.
Chicago/Turabian StyleCécile Barnaud; Patrick D’Aquino; William’S Daré; Raphaël Mathevet. 2016. "Dispositifs participatifs et asymétries de pouvoir : expliciter et interroger les positionnements." Participations 16, no. 3: 137-166.
Facing contemporary environmental crisis implies fostering agroecological innovations that take into account local ecological regulations and rely on multiple stakeholders' innovation capacities. This paper draws on two fields of literature that remain unconnected so far: participatory approaches and design sciences. It proposes an analysis grid to support a reflexive analysis of cases of implementation of three participatory design methods: ComMod (Companion Modelling for concerted management of natural resources), Forage Rummy (simulation-based board game for designing farming systems) and KCP (collective design workshops to foster innovation). This analysis highlights key features of the methods in view of agroecological innovation challenges, focusing on knowledge management and organisation for exploration.
Elsa T.A. Berthet; Cecile Barnaud; Nathalie Girard; Julie Labatut; Guillaume Martin. How to foster agroecological innovations? A comparison of participatory design methods. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2015, 59, 280 -301.
AMA StyleElsa T.A. Berthet, Cecile Barnaud, Nathalie Girard, Julie Labatut, Guillaume Martin. How to foster agroecological innovations? A comparison of participatory design methods. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 2015; 59 (2):280-301.
Chicago/Turabian StyleElsa T.A. Berthet; Cecile Barnaud; Nathalie Girard; Julie Labatut; Guillaume Martin. 2015. "How to foster agroecological innovations? A comparison of participatory design methods." Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 59, no. 2: 280-301.