CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 428

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Tools and methods in participatory modeling: Selecting the right tool for the job

Voinov, Alexey, Jenni, Karen, Gray, Steven, Kolagani, Nagesh, Glynn, Pierre D., Bommel, Pierre, Prell, Christina, Zellner, Moira, Paolisso, Michael, Jordan, Rebecca, Sterling, Eleanor, Schmitt Olabisi, Laura, Giabbanelli, Philippe J., Sun, Zhanli, Le Page, Christophe, Elsawah, Sondoss, BenDor, Todd K., Hubacek, Klaus, Laursen, Bethany K., Jetter, Antonie, Basco-Carrera, Laura, Singer, Alison, Young, Laura, Brunacini, Jessica, Smajgl, Alex·2018·Environmental Modelling & Software
DOI 10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.08.028
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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 · 10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.08.028

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 112

  1. Abar, 2017, Agent Based Modelling and Simulation tools: a review of the state-of-art software, Computer Sci. Rev., 24, 13, 10.1016/j.cosrev.2017.03.001 · DOI
  2. Ahmad, 2004, Spatial system dynamics: new approach for simulation of water resources systems, J. Comput. Civ. Eng., 18, 331, 10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3801(2004)18:4(331) · DOI
  3. Amer, 2013, A review of scenario planning, Futures, 46, 23, 10.1016/j.futures.2012.10.003 · DOI
  4. An, 2012, Modeling human decisions in coupled human and natural systems: review of agent-based models, Ecol. Model., 229, 25, 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.07.010 · DOI
  5. Barnaud, 2013, Equity, power games, and legitimacy: dilemmas of participatory natural resource management, Ecol. Soc., 18, 10.5751/ES-05459-180221 · DOI
  6. Barreteau, 2001, Role-playing games for opening the black box of multi-agent systems: method and lessons of its application to Senegal River Valley irrigated systems, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simulat., 2
  7. Barreteau, 2003, Our companion modelling approach, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simulat., 6
  8. Basco-Carrera, 2017, Collaborative modelling for informed decision making and inclusive water development, Water Resour. Manag., 31, 2611, 10.1007/s11269-017-1647-0 · DOI
  9. Basco-Carrera, 2017, Collaborative modelling or participatory modelling? A framework for water resources management, Environ. Model. Software, 95, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.01.014 · DOI
  10. Batty, 1999, Modeling urban dynamics through GIS-based cellular automata, Comput. Environ. Urban Syst., 23, 205, 10.1016/S0198-9715(99)00015-0 · DOI
  11. Belete, 2017, An overview of the model integration process: from pre-integration assessment to testing, Environ. Model. Software, 49, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.10.013 · DOI
  12. Bell, 2015, Rich pictures: sustainable development and stakeholders–the benefits of content analysis, Sustain. Dev., 2, 136
  13. Bell, 2013, Rich pictures: a means to explore the ‘sustainable mind’?, Sustain. Dev., 1, 30, 10.1002/sd.497 · DOI
  14. BenDor, 2012, A theory of spatial system archetypes, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 28, 109, 10.1002/sdr.1470 · DOI
  15. Bodin, 2016, Theorizing benefits and constraints in collaborative environmental governance: a transdisciplinary social-ecological network approach for empirical investigations, Ecol. Soc., 21, 10.5751/ES-08368-210140 · DOI
  16. Bonabeau, 2002, Agent-based modeling: methods and techniques for simulating human systems, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. Unit. States Am., 99, 7280, 10.1073/pnas.082080899 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Bosch, 2013, Managing complex issues through evolutionary learning laboratories, Syst. Res. Behav. Sci., 30, 116, 10.1002/sres.2171 · DOI
  18. Bousquet, 2004, Multi-agent simulations and ecosystem management: a review, Ecol. Model., 176, 313, 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2004.01.011 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Cahill, 2007, Participatory ethics: politics, practices, institutions, ACME: Int. J. Critic. Geograph., 6, 304
  20. Campo, 2010, Modelling with stakeholders within a development project, Environ. Model. Software, 25, 1302, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2010.01.005 · DOI
  21. Carmona, 2013, Participatory modelling to support decision making in water management under uncertainty: two comparative case studies in the Guadiana river basin, Spain, J. Environ. Manag., 128, 400, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.05.019 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Castelletti, 2007, Bayesian Networks and participatory modelling in water resource management, Environ. Model. Software, 22, 1075, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2006.06.003 · DOI
  23. Chambers, 2006, Participatory mapping and geographic information systems: whose map? Who is empowered and who disempowered? Who gains and who loses?, Electron. J. Inf. Syst. Dev. Ctries., 1, 10.1002/j.1681-4835.2006.tb00163.x · DOI
  24. Chen, 2012, Good practice in Bayesian network modelling, Environ. Model. Software, 134, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2012.03.012 · DOI
  25. Davies, 2011, Concept mapping, mind mapping and argument mapping: what are the differences and do they matter?, High Educ., 3, 279, 10.1007/s10734-010-9387-6 · DOI
  26. d'Aquino, 2002, A novel mediating participatory modelling: the self-design process to accompany collective decision making, Int. J. Agric. Resour. Govern. Ecol., 2, 59
  27. d'Aquino, 2003, Using self-designed role-playing games and a multi-agent system to empower a local decision-making process for land use management: the SelfCormas experiment in Senegal, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simulat., 6, 5
  28. Earle, 2012, Twitter earthquake detection: earthquake monitoring in a social world, Ann. Geophys., 6
  29. Eden, 2004, Cognitive mapping expert views for policy analysis in the public sector, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 152, 615, 10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00061-4 · DOI
  30. Etienne, 2011, ARDI: a co-construction method for participatory modeling in natural resources management, Ecol. Soc., 16, 10.5751/ES-03748-160144 · DOI
  31. Filatova, 2013, Spatial agent-based models for socio-ecological systems: challenges and prospects, Environ. Model. Software, 45, 1, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2013.03.017 · DOI
  32. Giabbanelli, 2017, Combining fuzzy cognitive maps with agent-based modeling: frameworks and pitfalls of a powerful hybrid modeling approach to understanding human-environment interactions, Environ. Model. Software, 320, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.06.040 · DOI
  33. Goodchild, 2007, Citizens as sensors: the world of volunteered geography, Geojournal, 69, 211, 10.1007/s10708-007-9111-y · DOI
  34. Gray, 2015, Using fuzzy cognitive mapping as a participatory approach to analyze change, preferred states, and perceived resilience of social-ecological systems, Ecol. Soc., 20, 10.5751/ES-07396-200211 · DOI
  35. Gray, 2017, Collaborative modeling approaches to understand community perceptions about the causes, consequences and solutions to the Flint Water Crisis, Environ. Justice, 10, 10.1089/env.2017.0016 · DOI
  36. Gray, 2018, Purpose, processes, partnerships, and products: four Ps to advance participatory socio‐environmental modeling, Ecol. Appl., 28, 46, 10.1002/eap.1627 · DOI · Paper page
  37. Haasnoot, 2013, Dynamic adaptive policy pathways: a method for crafting robust decisions for a deeply uncertain world, Global Environ. Change, 2, 485, 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.12.006 · DOI
  38. Haasnoot, 2014, Fit for purpose? Building and evaluating a fast, integrated model for exploring water policy pathways, Environ. Model. Software, 99, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.05.020 · DOI
  39. Hajkowicz, 2008, A comparison of multiple criteria analysis techniques for water resource management, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 184, 255, 10.1016/j.ejor.2006.10.045 · DOI
  40. Haklay, 2010, How good is volunteered geographical information? A comparative study of OpenStreetMap and Ordnance Survey datasets, Environ. Plann. Plann. Des., 682, 10.1068/b35097 · DOI
  41. Hanna-Attisha, 2016, Elevated blood lead levels in children associated with the Flint drinking water crisis: a spatial analysis of risk and public health response, Am. J. Publ. Health, 106, 283, 10.2105/AJPH.2015.303003 · DOI
  42. Hassenforder, 2015, Towards understanding participatory processes: framework, application and results, J. Environ. Manag., 157, 84, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.04.012 · DOI
  43. Hauser, 1996, The analytic hierarchy process in an uncertain environment: a simulation approach, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 91, 27, 10.1016/0377-2217(95)00002-X · DOI
  44. Herrera, 2016, A graph-theoretic framework for assessing the resilience of sectorised water distribution networks, Water Resour. Manag., 30, 1685, 10.1007/s11269-016-1245-6 · DOI
  45. Howard, 1991, A critical look at multiple criteria decision making techniques with reference to forestry applications, Can. J. For. Res., 21, 1649, 10.1139/x91-228 · DOI
  46. Howick, 2011, Mixing OR methods in practice: past, present and future directions, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 3, 503, 10.1016/j.ejor.2011.03.013 · DOI
  47. Huang, 2011, Multi-criteria decision analysis in environmental sciences: ten years of applications and trends, Sci. Total Environ., 3578, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.06.022 · DOI
  48. Hurlbert, 2015, The split ladder of participation: a diagnostic, strategic, and evaluation tool to assess when participation is necessary, Environ. Sci. Pol., 50, 100, 10.1016/j.envsci.2015.01.011 · DOI
  49. Jetter, 2014, Fuzzy Cognitive Maps for future studies -- a methodological assessment of concepts and methods, Futures, 45, 10.1016/j.futures.2014.05.002 · DOI
  50. Johnson, 2012, Using participatory scenarios to stimulate social learning for collaborative sustainable development, Ecol. Soc., 2, 9
  51. Kelly, 2013, Selecting among five common modelling approaches for integrated environmental assessment and management, Environ. Model. Software, 159, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2013.05.005 · DOI
  52. Kolagani, 2015, Participatory model calibration for improving resource management systems: case study of rainwater harvesting in an indian village, J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 6, 1708, 10.1111/1752-1688.12351 · DOI
  53. Kolagani, 2017, A participatory framework for developing public participation GIS solutions to improve resource management systems, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci., 3, 463, 10.1080/13658816.2016.1206202 · DOI
  54. Kralik, 2012, When less is more: evolutionary origins of the affect heuristic, PLoS One, 7, 10.1371/journal.pone.0046240 · DOI
  55. Kraus, 2014, Introducing a model for analyzing the possibilities of power, help and control, Soc. Work. Soc., 3
  56. Lane, 2000, Diagramming conventions in system dynamics, J. Oper. Res. Soc., 51, 241, 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600864 · DOI
  57. Lane, 2008, The emergence and use of diagramming in system dynamics: a critical account, Syst. Res. Behav. Sci., 25, 3, 10.1002/sres.826 · DOI
  58. Laniak, 2013, Integrated environmental modeling: a vision and roadmap for the future, Environ. Model. Software, 39, 3, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2012.09.006 · DOI
  59. Lawrence, 2017, What it took to catalyse uptake of dynamic adaptive pathways planning to address climate change uncertainty, Environ. Sci. Pol., 47, 10.1016/j.envsci.2016.12.003 · DOI
  60. Levine, 2008, Simplifying Heuristics versus careful thinking: scientific analysis of millennial spiritual issues, Zygon J. Relig. Sci., 43, 797
  61. Lewis, 1992, Rich picture building in the soft systems methodology, Eur. J. Inf. Syst., 5, 351, 10.1057/ejis.1992.7 · DOI
  62. Lynam, 2007, A review of tools for incorporating community knowledge, preferences, and values into decision making in natural resources management, Ecol. Soc., 12, 10.5751/ES-01987-120105 · DOI
  63. Marshall, 2015, Selecting a dynamic simulation modeling method for health care delivery research - Part 2: report of the ISPOR dynamic simulation modeling emerging good practices task force, Value Health, 18, 147, 10.1016/j.jval.2015.01.006 · DOI
  64. Matous, 2015, Exploring dynamic mechanisms of learning networks for resource conservation, Ecol. Soc., 20, 36, 10.5751/ES-07602-200236 · DOI
  65. Mingers, 2000, Variety is the spice of life: combining soft and hard OR/MS methods, Int. Trans. Oper. Res., 7, 673, 10.1111/j.1475-3995.2000.tb00224.x · DOI
  66. Morecroft, 1982, A critical review of diagramming tools for conceptualizing feedback system models, Dynamica, 8, 20
  67. Nabavi, 2017, Boundary matters: the potential of system dynamics to support sustainability?, J. Clean. Prod., 312, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.032 · DOI
  68. Neuwirth, 2015, Modeling structural change in spatial system dynamics: a Daisyworld example, Environ. Model. Software, 30, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.11.026 · DOI
  69. Nguyen, 2011, Creating ‘learning laboratories’ for sustainable development in biospheres: a systems thinking approach, Syst. Res. Behav. Sci., 28, 51, 10.1002/sres.1044 · DOI
  70. Onono, 2011, Use of personal digital assistants for data collection in a multi-site AIDS stigma study in rural south Nyanza, Kenya, Afr. Health Sci., 11
  71. Ormerod, 1997, The design of organisational intervention: choosing the approach, Omega, 25, 415, 10.1016/S0305-0483(97)00006-6 · DOI
  72. Özesmi, 2004, Ecological models based on people's knowledge: a multi-step fuzzy cognitive mapping approach, Ecol. Model., 176, 43, 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2003.10.027 · DOI
  73. Papageorgiou, 2013, A review of fuzzy cognitive maps research during the last decade, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 1, 66, 10.1109/TFUZZ.2012.2201727 · DOI
  74. Parker, 2003, Multi‐agent systems for the simulation of land‐use and land‐cover change: a review, Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr., 93, 314, 10.1111/1467-8306.9302004 · DOI
  75. Prell, 2007, If you have a hammer everything looks like a nail: traditional versus participatory model building, Interdiscipl. Sci. Rev., 32, 263, 10.1179/030801807X211720 · DOI
  76. Prell, 2008, ‘Who's in the network?’ when stakeholders influence data analysis, Syst. Pract. Action Res., 21, 443, 10.1007/s11213-008-9105-9 · DOI
  77. Prell, 2009, Stakeholder analysis and social network analysis in natural resource management, Soc. Nat. Resour., 22, 501, 10.1080/08941920802199202 · DOI
  78. Prell, 2016, The evolution of global trade and impacts on countries' carbon trade imbalances, Soc. Network., 46, 87, 10.1016/j.socnet.2016.03.001 · DOI
  79. Radinsky, 2017, How planners and stakeholders learn with visualization tools: using learning sciences methods to examine planning processes, J. Environ. Plann. Manag., 60, 1296, 10.1080/09640568.2016.1221795 · DOI
  80. Raskin, 2002, Constructivism in psychology: personal construct psychology, radical constructivism, and social constructionism, Am. Commun. J., 5, 1
  81. Reed, 2009, Who's in and why? Stakeholder analysis as a prerequisite for sustainable natural resource management, J. Environ. Manag., 90, 1933, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.01.001 · DOI
  82. Refsgaard, 2005, Quality assurance in model based water management–review of existing practice and outline of new approaches, Environ. Model. Software, 20, 1201, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2004.07.006 · DOI
  83. Richardson, 1997, Problems in causal loop diagrams revisited, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 13, 247, 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1727(199723)13:3<247::AID-SDR128>3.0.CO;2-9 · DOI
  84. Robins, 2007, Recent developments in exponential random graph (p*) models for social networks, Soc. Network., 192, 10.1016/j.socnet.2006.08.003 · DOI
  85. Romney, 1986, Culture as consensus: a theory of culture and informant accuracy, Am. Anthropol., 88, 313, 10.1525/aa.1986.88.2.02a00020 · DOI
  86. Rosenbloom, 1996, A probabilistic interpretation of the final rankings in AHP, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 96, 371, 10.1016/S0377-2217(96)00049-5 · DOI
  87. Ryu, 2011, A resilience-based approach for comparing expert preferences across two large-scale coastal management programs, J. Environ. Manag., 92, 92, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.08.020 · DOI
  88. Saengsupavanich, 2013, Detached breakwaters: communities' preferences for sustainable coastal protection, J. Environ. Manag., 115, 106, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.11.029 · DOI
  89. Schulze, 2017, Agent-based modelling of social-ecological systems: achievements, challenges, and a way forward, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simulat., 20
  90. Sedlacko, 2014, Participatory systems mapping for sustainable consumption: discussion of a method promoting systemic insights, Ecol. Econ., 33, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.07.002 · DOI
  91. Shirinivas, 2010, Applications of graph theory in computer science an overview, Int. J. Eng. Sci. Technol., 2, 4610
  92. Sieber, 2006, Public participation geographic information systems: a literature review and framework, Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr., 96, 491, 10.1111/j.1467-8306.2006.00702.x · DOI
  93. Singer, 2017, Translating community narratives into semi-quantitative models to understand the dynamics of socio-environmental crises, Environ. Model. Software, 97, 46, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2017.07.010 · DOI · Paper page
  94. Smajgl, 2010, Challenging beliefs through multi-level participatory modelling in Indonesia, Environ. Model. Software, 25, 1470, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2010.04.008 · DOI
  95. Smajgl, 2009, Water policy impact assessment - combining modelling techniques in the Great Barrier Reef region, Water Pol., 11, 191, 10.2166/wp.2009.022 · DOI
  96. Smajgl, 2015, Evaluating participatory research: framework, methods and implementation results, J. Environ. Manag., 157, 311, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.04.014 · DOI
  97. Smajgl, 2013, A framework for bridging Science and Decision making, Futures, 52, 52, 10.1016/j.futures.2013.07.002 · DOI
  98. Snijders, 2010, Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics, Soc. Network., 44, 10.1016/j.socnet.2009.02.004 · DOI · Paper page
  99. Stave, 2010, Participatory system dynamics modeling for sustainable environmental management: observations from four cases, Sustainability, 2, 2762, 10.3390/su2092762 · DOI
  100. Sun, 2009, The land-use evolution and impact assessment model: a comprehensive urban planning support system, URISA J., 21, 57
  101. Tian, 2013, Application of the analytic hierarchy process to a sustainability assessment of coastal beach exploitation: a case study of the wind power projects on the coastal beaches of Yancheng, China, J. Environ. Manag., 115, 251, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.11.015 · DOI
  102. Tomlinson, 2009, The use of mobile phones as a data collection tool: a report from a household survey in South Africa, BMC Med. Inf. Decis. Making, 9, 51, 10.1186/1472-6947-9-51 · DOI · Paper page
  103. van Zanten, 2016, Mapping landscape values using social media, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. Unit. States Am., 46, 12974, 10.1073/pnas.1614158113 · DOI
  104. Veldkamp, 1996, CLUE-CR: an integrated multi-scale model to simulate land use change scenarios in Costa Rica, Ecol. Model., 231, 10.1016/0304-3800(95)00158-1 · DOI
  105. Vennix, 1999, Group model-building: tackling messy problems, Syst. Dynam. Rev., 15, 379, 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1727(199924)15:4<379::AID-SDR179>3.0.CO;2-E · DOI
  106. Verburg, 2006, Scenario-based studies of future land use in Europe, Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 1, 1, 10.1016/j.agee.2005.11.023 · DOI
  107. Voinov, 2014, Values in socio-environmental modelling: persuasion for action or excuse for inaction, Environ. Model. Software, 53, 207, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2013.12.005 · DOI
  108. Voinov, 2016, Modelling with stakeholders–next generation, Environ. Model. Software, 77, 196, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.11.016 · DOI
  109. Voinov, 2017, Virtual geographic environments in socio-environmental modeling: a fancy distraction or a key to communication?, Int. J. Digital Earth, 4, 408
  110. Weller, 2007, Cultural consensus theory: applications and frequently asked questions, Field Meth., 19, 339, 10.1177/1525822X07303502 · DOI
  111. Zellner, 2008, Embracing complexity and uncertainty: the potential of agent-based modeling for environmental planning and policy, Plann. Theor. Pract., 4, 437, 10.1080/14649350802481470 · DOI
  112. Zellner, 2015, Planning for deep-rooted problems: what can we learn from aligning complex systems and wicked problems?, Plann. Theor. Pract., 4, 457, 10.1080/14649357.2015.1084360 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 428

Metadata

Authors
Voinov, A., Jenni, K., Gray, S., Kolagani, N., Glynn, P. D., Bommel, P., Prell, C., Zellner, M., Paolisso, M., Jordan, R., Sterling, E., Schmitt Olabisi, L., Giabbanelli, P. J., Sun, Z., Le Page, C., Elsawah, S., BenDor, T. K., Hubacek, K., Laursen, B. K., Jetter, A., Basco-Carrera, L., Singer, A., Young, L., Brunacini, J., & Smajgl, A.
ORCID
Venue
Environmental Modelling & Software
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-11
Volume
109
Pages
232-255
ISSN
1364-8152
DOI
10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.08.028
Cited by
428
References
4
Language
en
Licence
Funders
  • National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center
  • National Science Foundation (DBI-1052875)

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: Tools and methods in participatory modeling: Selecting the right tool for the job. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.08.028
The paper
Voinov, A., Jenni, K., Gray, S., Kolagani, N., Glynn, P. D., Bommel, P., Prell, C., Zellner, M., Paolisso, M., Jordan, R., Sterling, E., Schmitt Olabisi, L., Giabbanelli, P. J., Sun, Z., Le Page, C., Elsawah, S., BenDor, T. K., Hubacek, K., Laursen, B. K., . . . Smajgl, A. (2018). Tools and methods in participatory modeling: Selecting the right tool for the job. Environmental Modelling & Software. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.08.028