Author
Bethany K. Laursen
Other affiliations: University of Maryland College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Bio: Bethany K. Laursen is an academic researcher from Michigan State University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Participatory modeling & Power (social and political). The author has an hindex of 6, co-authored 16 publications receiving 262 citations. Previous affiliations of Bethany K. Laursen include University of Maryland College of Agriculture and Natural Resources & University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Papers
More filters
••
University of Technology, Sydney1, University of Twente2, United States Geological Survey3, Michigan State University4, Indian Institutes of Information Technology5, University of California, Riverside6, University of Maryland, College Park7, University of Illinois at Chicago8, Rutgers University9, American Museum of Natural History10, Furman University11, Leibniz Association12, University of New South Wales13, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill14, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis15, Masaryk University16, Portland State University17, UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education18
TL;DR: Putting more thought into the method selection process and choosing the most appropriate method for the project can produce better results, according to expert opinion and a survey of modelers engaged in participatory processes.
Abstract: Various tools and methods are used in participatory modelling, at different stages of the process and for different purposes. The diversity of tools and methods can create challenges for stakeholders and modelers when selecting the ones most appropriate for their projects. We offer a systematic overview, assessment, and categorization of methods to assist modelers and stakeholders with their choices and decisions. Most available literature provides little justification or information on the reasons for the use of particular methods or tools in a given study. In most of the cases, it seems that the prior experience and skills of the modelers had a dominant effect on the selection of the methods used. While we have not found any real evidence of this approach being wrong, we do think that putting more thought into the method selection process and choosing the most appropriate method for the project can produce better results. Based on expert opinion and a survey of modelers engaged in participatory processes, we offer practical guidelines to improve decisions about method selection at different stages of the participatory modeling process.
236 citations
••
Michigan State University1, University of Technology, Sydney2, University of Maryland, College Park3, Rutgers University4, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill5, University of Costa Rica6, United States Geological Survey7, Karlstad University8, Indian Institutes of Information Technology9, American Museum of Natural History10, University of Illinois at Chicago11
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors propose a four-dimensional framework (4P) that includes reporting on dimensions of (1) the Purpose for selecting a participatory modeling 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).
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.
71 citations
••
Rutgers University1, Michigan State University2, University of Illinois at Chicago3, United States Geological Survey4, University of Technology, Sydney5, Karlstad University6, American Museum of Natural History7, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration8, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis9, Masaryk University10, University of Maryland, College Park11, University of Costa Rica12, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill13, Portland State University14, Furman University15, Indian Institutes of Information Technology16
TL;DR: In the field of participatory modeling, the implicit and explicit knowledge of stakeholders to create formalized and shared representations of reality has evolved into a field of study as well as a practice.
Abstract: Participatory modeling engages the implicit and explicit knowledge of stakeholders to create formalized and shared representations of reality and has evolved into a field of study as well as a practice. Participatory modeling researchers and practitioners who focus specifically on environmental resources met at the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC) in Annapolis, Maryland, over the course of 2 years to discuss the state of the field and future directions for participatory modeling. What follows is a description of 12 overarching groups of questions that could guide future inquiry.
61 citations
••
01 Jan 2019
TL;DR: This chapter highlights research that illuminates the challenge of disciplinary diversity as well as research that describes effective responses to this challenge.
Abstract: In this chapter we highlight research that illuminates the challenge of disciplinary diversity as well as research that describes effective responses to this challenge. After a few preliminary remarks, we unfold this challenge in three steps. First, we discuss the process of identifying relevant disciplinary resources. Second, we examine what it is for a team to be ready to marshal these resources in integrative, cross-disciplinary team science. Finally, we discuss the process of combining, or integrating, these resources in a research project.
28 citations
••
Karlstad University1, Michigan State University2, University of Maryland, College Park3, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill4, Northern Arizona University5, University of Illinois at Chicago6, Miami University7, United States Geological Survey8, Portland State University9, Centurion University of Technology and Management10, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration11, American Museum of Natural History12
TL;DR: It is found that significant work likely remains for PM to fully support participatory and integrated planning processes and key research and practice issues for improving PM as an approach for real-world participatory planning and governance are reviewed.
Abstract: In environmental participatory modeling (PM), both computer and non-computer-based modeling techniques are used to aid participatory problem description, solution, and decision-making actions in environmental contexts. Although many PM case studies have been published, few efforts have sought to systematically describe and understand dominant PM processes or establish best practices for PM. As a first step, we have reviewed a random sample of environmental PM case study articles (n = 60) using a novel PM process evaluation instrument. We found that significant work likely remains for PM to fully support participatory and integrated planning processes. While PM reports systematically address knowledge integration and learning, they often neglect the facilitation of a multi-value perspective within a democratic process, and the integration across organizations within a governance system. If not reported, we suspect these aspects are also neglected in practice. We conclude with key research and practice issues for improving PM as an approach for real-world participatory planning and governance.
22 citations
Cited by
More filters
••
1,314 citations
••
TL;DR: The percentage of children with elevated blood lead levels increased after water source change, particularly in socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods, and disadvantaged neighborhoods as having the greatest elevated bloodLead level increases and informed response prioritization during the now-declared public health emergency.
Abstract: Objectives. We analyzed differences in pediatric elevated blood lead level incidence before and after Flint, Michigan, introduced a more corrosive water source into an aging water system without adequate corrosion control. Methods. We reviewed blood lead levels for children younger than 5 years before (2013) and after (2015) water source change in Greater Flint, Michigan.We assessed the percentage of elevated blood lead levels in both time periods, and identified geographical locations through spatial analysis. Results. Incidence of elevated blood lead levels increased from 2.4% to 4.9% (P<.05) after water source change, and neighborhoods with the highest water lead levels experienced a 6.6% increase. No significant change was seen outside the city. Geospatial analysis identified disadvantaged neighborhoods as having the greatest elevated blood lead levelincreases andinformed response prioritization during the now-declared public health emergency. Conclusions. The percentage of children with elevated blood lead levels increased after water source change, particularly in socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods. Water is a growing source of childhood lead exposure because of aging infrastructure. (Am J Public Health. 2016;106:283–290. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2015.303003)
820 citations
••
University of Twente1, University of Technology, Sydney2, United States Geological Survey3, Michigan State University4, Indian Institutes of Information Technology5, University of California, Riverside6, University of Maryland, College Park7, University of Illinois at Chicago8, Rutgers University9, American Museum of Natural History10, Furman University11, Leibniz Association12, University of New South Wales13, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill14, Masaryk University15, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis16, Portland State University17, UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education18
TL;DR: Putting more thought into the method selection process and choosing the most appropriate method for the project can produce better results, according to expert opinion and a survey of modelers engaged in participatory processes.
Abstract: Various tools and methods are used in participatory modelling, at different stages of the process and for different purposes. The diversity of tools and methods can create challenges for stakeholders and modelers when selecting the ones most appropriate for their projects. We offer a systematic overview, assessment, and categorization of methods to assist modelers and stakeholders with their choices and decisions. Most available literature provides little justification or information on the reasons for the use of particular methods or tools in a given study. In most of the cases, it seems that the prior experience and skills of the modelers had a dominant effect on the selection of the methods used. While we have not found any real evidence of this approach being wrong, we do think that putting more thought into the method selection process and choosing the most appropriate method for the project can produce better results. Based on expert opinion and a survey of modelers engaged in participatory processes, we offer practical guidelines to improve decisions about method selection at different stages of the participatory modeling process.
236 citations
••
TL;DR: In this paper, Evaristo et al. proposed a water security model for Hong Kong using the Global Institute for Water Security and School of Environment and Sustainability at the University of Saskatchewan.
Abstract: Jaivime Evaristo,* Jeffrey J. McDonnell, Martha A. Scholl, L. Adrian Bruijnzeel and Kwok P. Chun 1 Global Institute for Water Security and School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 3H5, Canada 2 School of Geosciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, United Kingdom 3 US Geological Survey, Reston, VA, 20192, USA 4 Visiting Senior Research Fellow, King’s College London, London, WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom 5 Department of Geography, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong
115 citations