A framework for mapping and comparing behavioural theories in models of social-ecological systems
TL;DR: In this article, the authors provide a framework, MoHuB (Modelling Human Behavior), to facilitate a broader inclusion of theories on human decision-making in formal natural resource management models.
About: This article is published in Ecological Economics.The article was published on 2017-01-01. It has received 291 citations till now.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors review the findings from the last 20 years on the behavioural factors that influence farmers' decisions to adopt environmentally sustainable practices and propose policy options to increase adoption, based on these behavioural factors and embedded in the EU Common Agricultural Policy.
Abstract: This paper reviews the findings from the last 20 years on the behavioural factors that influence farmers’ decisions to adopt environmentally sustainable practices. It also proposes policy options to increase adoption, based on these behavioural factors and embedded in the EU Common Agricultural Policy. Behavioural factors are grouped into three clusters, from more distal to more proximal: (i) dispositional factors; (ii) social factors and (iii) cognitive factors. Overall, the review demonstrates that considering behavioural factors enriches economic analyses of farmer decision-making, and can lead to more realistic and effective agri-environmental policies.
373 citations
Université catholique de Louvain1, Clark University2, University of Maryland, College Park3, University of Bern4, University of Maryland, Baltimore County5, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna6, University of Technology, Sydney7, University of Twente8, Boston University9, United States Department of Agriculture10, Humboldt University of Berlin11, University of Lausanne12, Stanford University13, Indiana University14, McGill University15, Leibniz Association16, Stockholm University17, Arizona State University18, VU University Amsterdam19, Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research20
TL;DR: The authors reviewed and synthesized the theories that explain the causal mechanisms of land-use change, including systemic linkages between distant landuse changes, with a focus on agriculture and forestry processes.
Abstract: Changes in land systems generate many sustainability challenges Identifying more sustainable land-use alternatives requires solid theoretical foundations on the causes of land-use/cover changes Land system science is a maturing field that has produced a wealth of methodological innovations and empirical observations on land-cover and land-use change, from patterns and processes to causes We take stock of this knowledge by reviewing and synthesizing the theories that explain the causal mechanisms of land-use change, including systemic linkages between distant land-use changes, with a focus on agriculture and forestry processes We first review theories explaining changes in land-use extent, such as agricultural expansion, deforestation, frontier development, and land abandonment, and changes in land-use intensity, such as agricultural intensification and disintensification We then synthesize theories of higher-level land system change processes, focusing on: (i) land-use spillovers, including land sparing and rebound effects with intensification, leakage, indirect land-use change, and land-use displacement, and (ii) land-use transitions, defined as structural non-linear changes in land systems, including forest transitions Theories focusing on the causes of land system changes span theoretically and epistemologically disparate knowledge domains and build from deductive, abductive, and inductive approaches A grand, integrated theory of land system change remains elusive Yet, we show that middle-range theories – defined here as contextual generalizations that describe chains of causal mechanisms explaining a well-bounded range of phenomena, as well as the conditions that trigger, enable, or prevent these causal chains –, provide a path towards generalized knowledge of land systems This knowledge can support progress towards sustainable social-ecological systems
292 citations
Cites background from "A framework for mapping and compari..."
...change, and social norms related to land use (Meyfroidt, 2013; Schlüter et al., 2017; Groeneveld et al., 2017; van Duinen et al., 2015)....
[...]
...…to address the diversity of motivations and cognitive processes as well as the role of social networks that determine land-use choices, responses to environmental change, and social norms related to land use (Meyfroidt, 2013; Schlüter et al., 2017; Groeneveld et al., 2017; van Duinen et al., 2015)....
[...]
TL;DR: It is shown that most human decision sub-models are not explicitly based on a specific theory and if so they are mostly based on economic theories, such as the rational actor, and mainly ignoring other relevant disciplines.
Abstract: Recent reviews stated that the complex and context-dependent nature of human decision-making resulted in ad-hoc representations of human decision in agent-based land use change models (LUCC ABMs) and that these representations are often not explicitly grounded in theory. However, a systematic survey on the characteristics (e.g. uncertainty, adaptation, learning, interactions and heterogeneities of agents) of representing human decision-making in LUCC ABMs is missing. Therefore, the aim of this study is to inform this debate by reviewing 134 LUCC ABM papers. We show that most human decision sub-models are not explicitly based on a specific theory and if so they are mostly based on economic theories, such as the rational actor, and mainly ignoring other relevant disciplines. Consolidating and enlarging the theoretical basis for modelling human decision-making may be achieved by using a structural framework for modellers, re-using published decision models, learning from other disciplines and fostering collaboration with social scientists. Review on human decisions in agent-based models of land use change.Most human decision models are not based on theory.Used theories are mainly from economics and not from psychology.A framework to guide modellers how to implement human decision is needed.
226 citations
Cites background from "A framework for mapping and compari..."
...…gaps and to advance in this field: (1) To develop a structured guided framework which enables modellers to make informed decisions about what decision model to use and which factors to include (see for instance the framework MoHuB (Modelling Human Behavior) presented in Schlüter et al., 2017)....
[...]
01 Dec 2019
TL;DR: In this article, a complex adaptive system approach is proposed to capture human behaviour as "enculturated" and "enearthed" with socio-cultural and biophysical contexts, which can be used to understand and address sustainability problems.
Abstract: Human behaviour is of profound significance in shaping pathways towards sustainability. Yet, the approach to understanding human behaviour in many fields remains reliant on overly simplistic models. For a better understanding of the interface between human behaviour and sustainability, we take work in behavioural economics and cognitive psychology as a starting point, but argue for an expansion of this work by adopting a more dynamic and systemic understanding of human behaviour, that is, as part of complex adaptive systems. A complex adaptive systems approach allows us to capture behaviour as ‘enculturated’ and ‘enearthed’, co-evolving with socio–cultural and biophysical contexts. Connecting human behaviour and context through a complex adaptive systems lens is critical to inform environmental governance and management for sustainability, and ultimately to better understand the dynamics of the Anthropocene itself. To understand and address sustainability problems, a complex model of human behaviour is proposed, one that co-evolves with their context, as opposed to simpler models.
109 citations
University of New South Wales1, University of Twente2, Australian National University3, University of Colorado Boulder4, University of Illinois at Chicago5, Wageningen University and Research Centre6, Edith Cowan University7, George Mason University8, University of Washington9, Vanderbilt University10, Arizona State University11, University of Waterloo12, World Bank13, San Diego State University14, Stockholm University15
TL;DR: In this article, the authors identify and formulate grand challenges that need to be overcome to accelerate the development and adaptation of Socio-environmental Systems (SES) modeling, including bridging epistemologies across disciplines, multi-dimensional uncertainty assessment and management; scales and scaling issues; combining qualitative and quantitative methods and data; furthering the adoption and impacts of SES modeling on policy; capturing structural changes; representing human dimensions in SES; and leveraging new data types and sources.
Abstract: Modeling is essential to characterize and explore complex societal and environmental issues in systematic and collaborative ways. Socio-environmental systems (SES) modeling integrates knowledge and perspectives into conceptual and computational tools that explicitly recognize how human decisions affect the environment. Depending on the modeling purpose, many SES modelers also realize that involvement of stakeholders and experts is fundamental to support social learning and decision-making processes for achieving improved environmental and social outcomes. The contribution of this paper lies in identifying and formulating grand challenges that need to be overcome to accelerate the development and adaptation of SES modeling. Eight challenges are delineated: bridging epistemologies across disciplines; multi-dimensional uncertainty assessment and management; scales and scaling issues; combining qualitative and quantitative methods and data; furthering the adoption and impacts of SES modeling on policy; capturing structural changes; representing human dimensions in SES; and leveraging new data types and sources. These challenges limit our ability to effectively use SES modeling to provide the knowledge and information essential for supporting decision making. Whereas some of these challenges are not unique to SES modeling and may be pervasive in other scientific fields, they still act as barriers as well as research opportunities for the SES modeling community. For each challenge, we outline basic steps that can be taken to surmount the underpinning barriers. Thus, the paper identifies priority research areas in SES modeling, chiefly related to progressing modeling products, processes and practices.
103 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: Ajzen, 1985, 1987, this article reviewed the theory of planned behavior and some unresolved issues and concluded that the theory is well supported by empirical evidence and that intention to perform behaviors of different kinds can be predicted with high accuracy from attitudes toward the behavior, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control; and these intentions, together with perceptions of behavioral control, account for considerable variance in actual behavior.
65,095 citations
Book•
01 Jun 1975
36,032 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a critique of expected utility theory as a descriptive model of decision making under risk, and develop an alternative model, called prospect theory, in which value is assigned to gains and losses rather than to final assets and in which probabilities are replaced by decision weights.
Abstract: This paper presents a critique of expected utility theory as a descriptive model of decision making under risk, and develops an alternative model, called prospect theory. Choices among risky prospects exhibit several pervasive effects that are inconsistent with the basic tenets of utility theory. In particular, people underweight outcomes that are merely probable in comparison with outcomes that are obtained with certainty. This tendency, called the certainty effect, contributes to risk aversion in choices involving sure gains and to risk seeking in choices involving sure losses. In addition, people generally discard components that are shared by all prospects under consideration. This tendency, called the isolation effect, leads to inconsistent preferences when the same choice is presented in different forms. An alternative theory of choice is developed, in which value is assigned to gains and losses rather than to final assets and in which probabilities are replaced by decision weights. The value function is normally concave for gains, commonly convex for losses, and is generally steeper for losses than for gains. Decision weights are generally lower than the corresponding probabilities, except in the range of low prob- abilities. Overweighting of low probabilities may contribute to the attractiveness of both insurance and gambling. EXPECTED UTILITY THEORY has dominated the analysis of decision making under risk. It has been generally accepted as a normative model of rational choice (24), and widely applied as a descriptive model of economic behavior, e.g. (15, 4). Thus, it is assumed that all reasonable people would wish to obey the axioms of the theory (47, 36), and that most people actually do, most of the time. The present paper describes several classes of choice problems in which preferences systematically violate the axioms of expected utility theory. In the light of these observations we argue that utility theory, as it is commonly interpreted and applied, is not an adequate descriptive model and we propose an alternative account of choice under risk. 2. CRITIQUE
35,067 citations
27,773 citations
TL;DR: A ‘silver bullet’ strategy on the part of conservation planners, focusing on ‘biodiversity hotspots’ where exceptional concentrations of endemic species are undergoing exceptional loss of habitat, is proposed.
Abstract: Conservationists are far from able to assist all species under threat, if only for lack of funding. This places a premium on priorities: how can we support the most species at the least cost? One way is to identify 'biodiversity hotspots' where exceptional concentrations of endemic species are undergoing exceptional loss of habitat. As many as 44% of all species of vascular plants and 35% of all species in four vertebrate groups are confined to 25 hotspots comprising only 1.4% of the land surface of the Earth. This opens the way for a 'silver bullet' strategy on the part of conservation planners, focusing on these hotspots in proportion to their share of the world's species at risk.
24,867 citations