Companion modelling for multi- stakeholders dialogs in natural ressources management

1. Companionmodelling for multi-stakeholdersdialogs in natural ressources management F.Bousquet CIRAD F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

2. Organisation and networks • Green research team at Cirad, Agropolis • Resilience alliance node • Companionmodelling association F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

3. The decision-makingprocess: Interaction processamongstakeholderswithdifferentweights and representations $ Social Dynamics Ecological Dynamics Interactions & points of views F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

4. General methodology ? environment resource society A shared representation Of the system Identifying the points of view specific to the different stakeholders F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013 and collectively building a shared representation of the system

5. Methodology • The creation of an interaction arena • The use of artefacts (role-playinggames, agent-basedmodelling, maps, sets of data….) to facilitatedialogamongstakeholders • A mutualunderstanding of the different points of views, and an exploration of scenarios of change F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

6. Companionmodelling (ComMod) F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

7. Initiation of the process Inside ComMod methodology Analysis of the situation Conceptual modelling Interactive agent-based simulations Role-playing game sessions F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

8. The dynamics of collective decision processesabout renewable resources management F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

9. Experiences Irrigated schemes in Senegal Land allocation between grazing and rice cropping activities in Senegal Negotiations between a shepherd and a forester in Mediterranean forests Discussions between foresters, shepherds and a national park in an ecosystem facing pine encroachment (South of France), Environmental mediation about phytogenetics resources management in Madagascar … F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

10. Land use in Senegal delta F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

11. Land use in Senegal delta • Decentralisation -> Rural Councils have to manage the resources • Problems of allocation of space : multiple uses of the same space (agriculture-grazing) • Two years process (GIS, workshops,etc.) • A MAS to facilitate discussions F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

12. Context : Land use in Senegal • The valley of the Senegal river, • deeply modified by hydraulic buildings • disturbed by the dryness's • A strictly hydro-agricultural policy always operating (no complementarity between the various activities). • A theoretically complete but not very effective decentralization (assimilation; transfer of competence; supports for communities) • A confusion of the roles between institutions (technical services, local councils, civil company, NGO)

13. Stakes • Provide to the Local Communities the knowledge and the capacity to act. • Obtain the support of all institutional actors for the actions of the Rural Councils. • Facilitate for the populations, the knowledge, the follow-up and the control of this management. • Build a reproducible method to introduce a real transfer of competence for the management of territory.

14. Land use in Senegal delta • The objective of this past intervention was to empower rural councils • (i) to design then manage a local land uses planning, (ii) to oppose to higher powers (specially centralized State agencies); (iii) to embed their local voices into national policy frameworks. F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

15. Land-use workshops • Day 1 • Definition of resources • and space, rules • Day 2 • Role game • Problems and scenarios • Day 3 • Simulations F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

16. Farmer : - raining season crops on - dry season crops near permanent water Herder: - distance to water < 5km - does not cross the crops - better grazing areas = crops residuals and Agents’ behaviour F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

17. Basic simulation F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

18. Channels F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

19. Channels and access rules F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

20. Outputs • Facilitate discussions on : • Ngnith village : new water points or new channels, access rules to the water • Nboudoum village : necessity of grazing management (technical expertise), access to a park • Ndiaye village : positive impact of agricultural diversification F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

21. F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

22. Assessment 2012 • Between April and July 2012, IFAD has supported the evaluation F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

23. Evaluation shows sustainable local impacts, • In short term (e.g. after three 2 days-workshops, the district council has designed and implemented his own planning to deal with the key issues he has himself chosen), • or in medium term (e.g. after the end of the support, the district council found alone the means for infrastructures, for an internal organization managing the issue, and even to efficiently oppose local needs to top-down programs and behaviors), • and in long term (e.g. 12 years after, some local councils still use outputs to oppose to land grabbing). F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

24. Evaluation shows also national impact • 2 years after the end of the support, a council of ministers council stipulates the method must be spread out to the whole country, • or in midterm (e.g. every regional plan takes into account the advocacy infrastructures previously identified during the local ComMod experiment), • 12 years after, the methodology designed by the local council during the ComMod experiment is acknowledged in the whole country, but also in some bordering countries, to set district land uses planning. F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

25. weakness • Appropriation of the process by state agencies • But not support for local animation F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

26. Discusion on Commod F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

27. History • Need of sharing experiences -> creation of the COMMOD group in 1999 • Writing of some common papers, special issues of journals, organisation of workshops • Writing of a charter, 2 types of uses of companion modelling approach F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

28. 2 types of situations for ComMod users • 1st situation: Understanding complex systems • Systems research with specific tools & relation to the field • Structure of exchanges: Preliminary researcher model -> Validation with actors -> New model, more adapted to actors’ concerns -> Validation -> Simulations of stakeholders’ scenarios -> New questions, etc. • Production of new knowledge on the problem & relevant processes dominates • Mutual recognition of knowledge & representations • A learning process through interactions among actors F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

29. 2 types of situations for ComMod users (2) • 2nd situation: To support & improve collective decision-making regarding a key NRM problem • Methodological research to facilitate/accompany concerted (evolving, iterative, continuous) processes • Particular relationship to field work • Make the diversity of points of view explicit • Quality of the decision-making process is important / « Imperfect decisions » in uncertain environments • A joint use is advocated F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

30. Support for collective decision-making processes • Companion modelling comes into play upstream of the technical decision. It guides the discussions of the various stakeholders involved, with a view to producing a shared representation of the problem, and identifying effective ways of dealing with it. • When facing a complex situation, the decision-making process is evolutive, iterative, and continuous. This means that the process always produces imperfect “decisions”, but following each iteration they are less imperfect and more widely shared • The question is not the quality of the choice, but the quality of the process leading up to it. It is not about finding the best solution, but about examining the uncertainties of the situation with as much clarity as possible F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013

31. Support for collective decision-making processes • Identifying the various viewpoints and subjective criteria to which the different stakeholders refer implicitly or even unconsciously • Stakeholders learn collectively by creating, modifying, and observing simulations because simulation provides a mean to act on the decision-making process by creating or modifying representations • More effective dialogue among stakeholders (including experts) through a framework for discussion and information sharing, an exchange of viewpoints, knowledge, and beliefs F. Bousquet, Rural'Est, Crisan 2013