Cited by 106

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Purpose, processes, partnerships, and products: four Ps to advance participatory socio-environmental modeling.

Gray, Steven, Voinov, Alexey, Paolisso, Michael, Jordan, Rebecca, BenDor, Todd, Bommel, Pierre, Glynn, Pierre, Hedelin, Beatrice, Hubacek, Klaus, Introne, Josh, Kolagani, Nagesh, Laursen, Bethany, Prell, Christina, Schmitt Olabisi, Laura, Singer, Alison, Sterling, Eleanor, Zellner, Moira·2018·Ecological Applications

Abstract

Including stakeholders in environmental model building and analysis is an increasingly popular approach to understanding ecological change. This is because stakeholders often hold valuable knowledge about socio‐environmental dynamics and collaborative forms of modeling produce important boundary objects used to collectively reason about environmental problems. Although the number of participatory modeling ( PM ) case studies and the number of researchers adopting these approaches has grown in recent years, the lack of standardized reporting and limited reproducibility have prevented PM 's establishment and advancement as a cohesive field of study. We suggest a four‐dimensional framework (4P) that includes reporting on dimensions of (1) the Purpose for selecting a PM approach (the why ); (2) the Process by which the public was involved in model building or evaluation (the how ); (3) the Partnerships formed (the who ); and (4) the Products that resulted from these efforts (the what ). We highlight four case studies that use common PM software‐based approaches (fuzzy cognitive mapping, agent‐based modeling, system dynamics, and participatory geospatial modeling) to understand human–environment interactions and the consequences of ecological changes, including bushmeat hunting in Tanzania and Cameroon, agricultural production and deforestation in Zambia, and groundwater management in India. We demonstrate how standardizing communication about PM case studies can lead to innovation and new insights about model‐based reasoning in support of ecological policy development. We suggest that our 4P framework and reporting approach provides a way for new hypotheses to be identified and tested in the growing field of PM .

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/eap.1627

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Research works printed but not linked: 66

  1. 10.1111/ddi.12054 · DOI
  2. 10.1080/14735903.2011.582361 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/j.envsoft.2011.11.016 · DOI
  4. Barreteau O., 2003, Our companion modelling approach, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 6, 1
  5. 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.05.014 · DOI
  6. Bommel P., 2015, Simulation and Gaming in the Network Society
  7. 10.1111/jawr.12071 · DOI
  8. 10.1080/14486563.2014.935747 · DOI
  9. 10.1023/A:1025075923297 · DOI
  10. 10.5194/nhess-12-2821-2012 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/j.ejor.2009.09.030 · DOI
  12. 10.7551/mitpress/9780262017244.003.0195 · DOI
  13. Glynn P. D.2014.W(h)ither the Oracle? Cognitive biases and other human challenges of integrated environmental modeling. Pages113–120inD. P.Ames N. W. T.Quinn andA. E.Rizzoli editors. Proceedings of the 7th International Congress on Environmental Modelling and Software.San Diego California USA.
  14. Glynn P. D., 2015, Integrated environmental modelling to solve real world problems: methods, vision and challenges, 161
  15. 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.09.011 · DOI
  16. 10.5751/ES-07396-200211 · DOI
  17. 10.1016/B978-0-12-805375-1.00022-2 · DOI
  18. Gray S., 2014, Fuzzy cognitive maps for applied sciences and engineering – from fundamentals to extensions and learning algorithms, 29
  19. 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.07.037 · DOI
  20. 10.1002/9781444398557 · DOI · Paper page
  21. 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.04.023 · DOI
  22. 10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.08.019 · DOI
  23. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.04.012 · DOI
  24. 10.1016/j.envsci.2014.10.004 · DOI
  25. 10.1016/j.techfore.2009.01.001 · DOI
  26. Hobbs B. F., 2012, Energy decisions and the environment: a guide to the use of multicriteria methods
  27. 10.1080/14649357.2015.1045015 · DOI
  28. 10.1016/j.respol.2009.09.011 · DOI
  29. 10.1007/s00267-009-9391-8 · DOI
  30. 10.5751/ES-07977-210115 · DOI
  31. 10.2166/wst.2007.453 · DOI
  32. 10.4195/nse2014.09.0019 · DOI
  33. 10.1111/cobi.12659 · DOI
  34. Kolagani N., 2016, A participatory framework for developing public participation GIS solutions to improve resource management systems, International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 2016, 1
  35. 10.18564/jasss.2550 · DOI
  36. 10.2105/AJPH.2005.082842 · DOI
  37. Linstone H. A., 1975, The Delphi method: techniques and applications
  38. 10.5751/ES-01987-120105 · DOI
  39. 10.1016/j.envsoft.2009.09.013 · DOI
  40. Maani K. E. andV.Maharaj.2001.Systemic thinking and complex problem solving: A theory building empirical study. The19th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society. Atlanta Georgia 23–27 July. System Dynamics Society Albany New York USA.
  41. 10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.04.011 · DOI
  42. National Research Council, 2008, Public participation in environmental assessment and decision making
  43. Ngahane B. F., 2013, Un modèle de gestion durable des Céphalophes bleus en cours de construction sous CORMAS: Perception des populations riveraines au Parc National de Korup, Sud‐ouest Cameroun
  44. 10.1111/cobi.12124 · DOI
  45. 10.1111/cobi.12316 · DOI
  46. Radinsky J., 2016, How planners and stakeholders learn with visualization tools: using learning sciences methods to examine planning processes, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 60, 1
  47. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.01.001 · DOI
  48. 10.3996/082011-JFWM-045 · DOI
  49. 10.5751/ES-03400-150213 · DOI
  50. 10.1007/s13280-015-0670-8 · DOI
  51. 10.1016/j.eiar.2004.10.002 · DOI
  52. 10.1016/j.envsoft.2009.09.004 · DOI
  53. 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2009.01337.x · DOI
  54. 10.2307/3802581 · DOI
  55. 10.3390/su2092762 · DOI
  56. Stec S., 2000, The Aarhus convention: an implementation guide
  57. 10.1126/science.1162574 · DOI
  58. Stern P. C., 2008, Public participation in environmental assessment and decision making
  59. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.08.010 · DOI
  60. Van den Belt M., 2004, Mediated modeling: A system dynamics approach to environmental consensus building
  61. 10.1017/S0030605308000288 · DOI
  62. 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.03.010 · DOI
  63. 10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.11.016 · DOI
  64. 10.1080/14649350802481470 · DOI
  65. 10.1080/14649357.2015.1084360 · DOI
  66. Zellner M. L., 2012, Modeling, learning and planning together: an application of participatory agent‐based modeling to environmental planning, URISA Journal, GIS in Spatial Planning Issue, 24, 77

Metadata

Authors
Gray, S., Voinov, A., Paolisso, M., Jordan, R., BenDor, T., Bommel, P., Glynn, P., Hedelin, B., Hubacek, K., Introne, J., Kolagani, N., Laursen, B., Prell, C., Schmitt Olabisi, L., Singer, A., Sterling, E., & Zellner, M.
Affiliations
  • Department of Community Sustainability Michigan State University Natural Resource Building 480, Wilson Road, Room 151 East Lansing Michigan 48824 USA
  • University of Technology Sydney School of Systems Management and Leadership CB11.06.217 (PO Box 123) Ultimo NSW 2007 81 Broadway Sydney Australia
  • Department of Anthropology University of Maryland College Park Maryland 20742 USA
  • Human Ecology & Ecology, Evolution and Natural Resources School of Environmental and Biological Sciences Rutgers University 59 Lipman Drive New Brunswick New Jersey 08901 USA
  • Department of City and Regional Planning University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill New East Building, CB #3140 Chapel Hill North Carolina 27599 USA
  • Green Research Unit CIRAD Avenue Agropolis 34398 Montpellier Cedex 5 France
  • U.S. Geological Survey 432 National Center Reston Virginia 20191 USA
  • Department of Environmental and Life Sciences Centre for Climate and Safety Karlstad University SE‐651 88 Karlstad Sweden
  • Department of Geographical Sciences University of Maryland College Park Maryland 20742 USA
  • Department of Media and Information Michigan State University 404 Wilson Road, Room 417 East Lansing Michigan 48824 USA
  • Indian Institute of Information Technology (IIIT) Chittoor Sri City Andhra Pradesh 517588 India
  • Departments of Community Sustainability and Philosophy Michigan State University Natural Resource Building 480, Wilson Road, Room 151 East Lansing Michigan 48824 USA
  • Department of Sociology University of Maryland 2112 Parren Mitchell Art‐Sociology Building, 3834 Campus Drive College Park Maryland 20742 USA
  • American Museum of Natural History Center for Biodiversity and Conservation 200 Central Park West New York New York 10024 USA
  • Department of Urban Planning & Policy Institute for Environmental Science and Policy University of Illinois at Chicago 412 South Peoria Street, MC 348 Chicago Illinois 60607 USA
Venue
Ecological Applications
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-12-08
Volume
28
Issue
1
Pages
46-61
ISSN
  • 1051-0761
  • 1939-5582
Cited by
106
References
3
Language
en
Funders
  • Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation
  • National Science Foundation (EF‐1427091, 1444184)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Purpose, processes, partnerships, and products: four Ps to advance participatory socio-environmental modeling. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/eap.1627
The paper
Gray, S., Voinov, A., Paolisso, M., Jordan, R., BenDor, T., Bommel, P., Glynn, P., Hedelin, B., Hubacek, K., Introne, J., Kolagani, N., Laursen, B., Prell, C., Schmitt Olabisi, L., Singer, A., Sterling, E., & Zellner, M. (2018). Purpose, processes, partnerships, and products: four Ps to advance participatory socio-environmental modeling. Ecological Applications. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.1627