Conciliate Agriculture with Landscape and Biodiversity Conservation: A Role-Playing Game to Explore Trade-Offs among Ecosystem Services through Social Learning
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Concepts, Case Study and Methods
2.1. Conceptual Framework
2.2. Case Study and Context Analysis
2.3. Materials and Methods
2.3.1. A Social–Ecological Context Analysis
2.3.2. The Design of the RPG
2.3.3. The Role-Playing Sessions
2.3.4. Individual Post-Session Interviews
2.3.5. The Analysis of the RPG Session
3. Results: Effects of Role-Playing on Social Learning—Analysis of SECOLOZ RPG Sessions
3.1. Higher Awareness of Interdependencies
3.2. Increased Mutual Understanding
3.3. Improved Ability to Deal with Uncertainties
3.4. Greater Willingness to Explore Innovative Methods of Governance
4. Discussion
4.1. The Role-Playing Game, a Tool for the Implementation of the ES Concept?
4.2. Role of the ES Concept in the Social Learning Effects
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Indicators of the SECOLOZ Role-Playing Game
Ecosystem Service | Beneficiaries | Indicator | Drivers of ES | Information on ES Drivers Given to Players? | Visualisation on the Game Board | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Yes | No | ||||||
Provisioning ESs | Production of hay | Farmers | Unit of hay |
| Green cubes given to farmers after the harvest | ||
Production of grass | Farmers | Number of pastured grassland |
| Cow pawns put on the grassland by farmers | |||
Drinking water | The mayor | Level of water quality (not drinkable/alarm level/drinkable) | Number of temporary meadows around the source:
| Score given by the facilitator each year | |||
Cultural ES | Heritage value of open grasslands | NP agents responsible for Tourism and Agriculture | Number of plots of open grasslands | Number of plots of open grasslands | Number of squares on the board game | ||
Heritage value of rocks and tourism satisfaction | NP agent responsible for tourism | Note of tourism satisfaction (…/10) | Starting from a note of 10/10:
| Score given by the facilitator each year | |||
Existence value of biodiversity: whinchat | NP agent responsible for conservation | Number of whinchats observed each year |
| Bird pawns put by the facilitator each year | |||
Existence value of biodiversity: hen harrier | NP agent responsible for conservation | Number of hen harriers observed each year |
| Bird pawns put by the facilitator each year |
Appendix B. Rules of the SECOLOZ Role-Playing Game
Type of Plot | Number in the Initial Game Board | Production of Hay or Grass |
---|---|---|
Permanent meadow | 13 | 1 unit of hay/square |
Temporary pastureland | 2 | 2 units of hay/square |
Open grassland | 30 | 1 unit of grass/square |
Shrubland | 43 | 0 (except with pasture+ option) |
Rocks (on grassland or shrubland) | 65 | / |
FARMERS | ||||
Name | Initial situation | Objective | Initial level of ES | Needed level of ES |
Violet | 8 suckler cows
| Enlarge the herd to 10 cows | Hay: 1 Grass: 6 | Hay: 4 Grass: 8 |
Blue | 12 suckler cows
| Maintain the herd | Hay: 2 Grass: 12 | Hay: 6 Grass: 12 |
Red | 4 dairy cows
| Enlarge the herd to 8 cows | Hay: 4 Grass:2 | Hay: 8 Grass: 2 |
Yellow | 8 dairy cows
| Maintain the herd | Hay: 10 Grass:4 | Hay: 16 Grass: 4 |
NP AGENTS | ||||
Name | Objectives | Initial level of ES | Needed level of ES | |
NP Agent Responsible for Agriculture |
| Open grasslands: 30 plots | Open grasslands: 35 plots | |
NP Agent Responsible for Tourism |
|
|
| |
NP Agent Responsible for Conservation | Conserve the species of birds | Whinchats: 4 Hen harriers: 6 | Whinchats: 6 Hen harriers: 4 |
STEP | EXPLANATION | |
---|---|---|
1 | Previsions of the farmers’ actions | The farmers explain their projects and express their needs for permits and AEM to NP agents |
2 | Granting of permits and allocation of AEMs | The NP managers discussed between themselves and with the farmers to take final decisions |
3 | Implementation of farming actions | Farmers implement actions:
|
4 | Hazards | Facilitator select randomly a hazard |
5 | Feeding livestock | Farmers feed their livestock They can borrow units of hay if necessary |
6 | Selling/buying cows | Farmers can sell cows if they are too indebted They can buy cows if they want to enlarge their herds. |
7 | Natural dynamic of encroachment | Grasslands which have not been pastured for two consecutive years turn into shrubland |
8 | Overview of the game board | NP agents make an overview of the number of rocks and of each type of plot on the game board |
9 | Overview of the ESs indicators | Facilitator make an overview with players of the level of ES indicators |
Farmers | |||
---|---|---|---|
Action | Cost | Permits | |
Rock removal | Remove rock from open grassland or shrubland | 2 units of hay/plot | Yes |
Ploughing | Plough a permanent meadow or a grassland without rock to obtain a temporary pastureland | Free | |
Re-opening a grassland | Transform a shrubland into a grassland (removing shrub) | 0.5 unit of hay/plot | No |
Let evolve pastureland | Let a temporary pastureland evolve into a permanent meadow | Free | |
Pasture+ | Adopt more extensive practices (for dairy livestock farmers only) | 2 units of hay (initial investment) | |
Selling cows | Sell cows in case of significant debt | Dairy: 10 units of hay/2cows Suckler: 6 units of hay/2cows | |
Buying cows | Buy cows to enlarge the herd | Dairy: 5 units of hay/2cows Suckler: 3 units of hay/2cows | |
NP Agents | |||
Granting of permits | Allow or forbid the actions requested by farmers | ||
Attribution of 2 AEMs | AEM 1: “Permanent meadow” | This AEM is attributed to one plot of permanent meadow | 3 units of hay |
AEM 2: “Re-opening” | This AEM helps the farmer re-open 2 plots of shrubland | 3 units of hay | |
AEM 3: “Pasturing on shrubland” | This AEM makes possible the pasturing on 2 plots of shrubland | 3 units of hay |
Hazards | |
---|---|
Drought year | Each farmer loses 2 units of hay |
Wet year | Each farmer wins 2 units of hay |
Wild boar damages | Each farmer loses 1 unit of hay |
UNESCO control | UNESCO controls the level of the heritage landscape value, they can decide to take off the label if the level of ESs is too low |
References
- O’Rourke, E.; Charbonneau, M.; Poinsot, Y. High nature value mountain farming systems in Europe: Case studies from the Atlantic Pyrenees, France and the Kerry Uplands, Ireland. J. Rural Stud. 2016, 46, 47–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bignal, E.M.; McCracken, D.I. The nature conservation value of European traditional farming systems. Environ. Rev. 2000, 8, 149–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MacDonald, D.; Crabtree, J.R.; Wiesinger, G.; Dax, T.; Stamou, N.; Fleury, P.; Gutierrez Lazpita, J.; Gibon, A. Agricultural abandonment in mountain areas of Europe: Environmental consequences and policy response. J. Environ. Manag. 2000, 59, 47–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- García-Martínez, A.; Olaizola, A.; Bernués, A. Trajectories of evolution and drivers of change in European mountain cattle farming systems. Animal 2009, 3, 152–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- MEA. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis; World Health Organization, Ed.; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005; ISBN 978-1-59726-040-4. [Google Scholar]
- Briner, S.; Huber, R.; Bebi, P.; Elkin, C.; Schmatz, D.R.; Grêt-Regamey, A. Trade-Offs between Ecosystem Services in a Mountain Region. Ecol. Soc. 2013, 18, 35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gibon, A.; Ladet, S.; Balent, G. Diagnostic socioécologique de la gestion des prairies en référence aux services écosystémiques attendus des paysages dans le Parc National des Pyrénées (France). Fourrages 2015, 224, 305–319. [Google Scholar]
- Bennett, E.M.; Peterson, G.D.; Gordon, L.J. Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecol. Lett. 2009, 12, 1394–1404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Reed, M.S.; Hubacek, K.; Bonn, A.; Burt, T.P.; Holden, J.; Stringer, L.C.; Beharry-Borg, N.; Buckmaster, S.; Chapman, D.; Chapman, P.J.; et al. Anticipating and Managing Future Trade-offs and Complementarities between Ecosystem Services. Ecol. Soc. 2013, 18, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barnaud, C.; Antona, M. Deconstructing ecosystem services: Uncertainties and controversies around a socially constructed concept. Geoforum 2014, 56, 113–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Turkelboom, F.; Leone, M.; Jacobs, S.; Kelemen, E.; García-Llorente, M.; Baró, F.; Termansen, M.; Barton, D.N.; Berry, P.; Stange, E.; et al. When we cannot have it all: Ecosystem services trade-offs in the context of spatial planning. Ecosyst. Serv. 2018, 29, 566–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barnaud, C.; Corbera, E.; Muradian, R.; Salliou, N.; Sirami, C.; Vialatte, A.; Choisis, J.-P.; Dendoncker, N.; Mathevet, R.; Moreau, C.; et al. Ecosystem services, social interdependencies, and collective action: A conceptual framework. Ecol. Soc. 2018, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galafassi, D.; Daw, T.; Munyi, L.; Brown, K.; Barnaud, C.; Fazey, I. Learning about social-ecological trade-offs. Ecol. Soc. 2017, 22, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reed, M.S.; Evely, A.C.; Cundill, G.; Fazey, I.; Glass, J.; Laing, A.; Newig, J.; Parrish, B.; Prell, C.; Raymond, C.; et al. What is Social Learning? Ecol. Soc. 2010, 15, r1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daré, W.; Paassen, A.V.; Ducrot, R.; Mathevet, R.; Queste, J.; Trébuil, G.; Barnaud, C.; Lagabrielle, E. Apprentissage des interdépendances et des dynamiques. In La Modélisation D’accompagnement; Editions Quae: Versailles, France, 2010; pp. 223–250. [Google Scholar]
- Bousquet, F.; Barreteau, O.; D’Aquino, P.; Etienne, M.; Boissau, S.; Aubert, S.; Page, C.L.; Babin, D.; Castella, J.C. Multi-agent systems and role games: Collective learning processes for ecosystem management. In Complexity and Ecosystem Management: The Theory and Practice of Multi-Agent Systems; Janssen Marco, A., Ed.; E. Elgar: Cheltenham, UK, 2002; pp. 249–285. [Google Scholar]
- Mathevet, R.; Page, C.L.; Etienne, M.; Lefebvre, G.; Poulin, B.; Gigot, G.; Proréol, S.; Mauchamp, A. BUTORSTAR: A role-playing game for collective awareness of wise reedbed use. Simul. Gaming 2007, 38, 233–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Barnaud, C.; Promburom, T.; Trébuil, G.; Bousquet, F. An evolving simulation and gaming process to facilitate adaptive watershed management in mountain northern Thailand. Simul. Gaming 2007, 38, 398–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Etienne, M.; Collective. La modélisation d’accompagnement: Une démarche participative en appui au développement durable; Quae Editions: Versailles, France, 2010; ISBN 978-2-7592-0620-9. [Google Scholar]
- Gourmelon, F.; Chlous-Ducharme, F.; Kerbiriou, C.; Rouan, M.; Bioret, F. Role-playing game developed from a modelling process: A relevant participatory tool for sustainable development? A co-construction experiment in an insular biosphere reserve. Land Use Policy 2013, 32, 96–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boyle, E.A.; Hainey, T.; Connolly, T.M.; Gray, G.; Earp, J.; Ott, M.; Lim, T.; Ninaus, M.; Ribeiro, C.; Pereira, J. An update to the systematic literature review of empirical evidence of the impacts and outcomes of computer games and serious games. Comput. Educ. 2016, 94, 178–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salvini, G.; van Paassen, A.; Ligtenberg, A.; Carrero, G.C.; Bregt, A.K. A role-playing game as a tool to facilitate social learning and collective action towards Climate Smart Agriculture: Lessons learned from Apuí, Brazil. Environ. Sci. Policy 2016, 63, 113–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taylor, Z.P.; Bennett, D.E. Ecosystem Services Valuation as an Opportunity for Inquiry Learning. J. Geosci. Educ. 2016, 64, 175–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Villamor, G.B.; Palomo, I.; Santiago, C.A.L.; Oteros-Rozas, E.; Hill, J. Assessing stakeholders’ perceptions and values towards social-ecological systems using participatory methods. Ecol. Process. 2014, 3, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Opdam, P.; Albert, C.; Fürst, C.; Grêt-Regamey, A.; Kleemann, J.; Parker, D.; La Rosa, D.; Schmidt, K.; Villamor, G.B.; Walz, A. Ecosystem services for connecting actors—Lessons from a symposium. Chang. Adapt. Socio-Ecol. Syst. 2015, 2, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davies, K.K.; Fisher, K.T.; Dickson, M.E.; Thrush, S.F.; Le Heron, R. Improving ecosystem service frameworks to address wicked problems. Ecol. Soc. 2015, 20, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morardet, S.; Milhau, F.; Murgue, C. Wet-WAG, a Role-Playing Game to Support Stakeholder Dialogue on Wetland Management; WETwin Project Report; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2012; Volume 7, p. 66.
- Gissi, E.; Garramone, V. Learning on ecosystem services co-production in decision-making from role-playing simulation: Comparative analysis from Southeast Europe. Ecosyst. Serv. 2018, 34, 228–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lamarque, P.; Meyfroidt, P.; Nettier, B.; Lavorel, S. How Ecosystem Services Knowledge and Values Influence Farmers’ Decision-Making. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e107572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Parc National des Cévennes (PNC). La Charte du Parc National des Cévennes; PNC: Florac, France, 2013; p. 200. [Google Scholar]
- PNC. Atlas des Paysages 2015. Available online: http://www.saone-et-loire.gouv.fr/atlas-des-paysages-a7219.html (accessed on 8 January 2019).
- Lhuillier, S. Evolution des formations végétales sur le mont Lozère et le Bougès Nord entre 1970 et 1999 à partir des photographies aériennes; Université Montpellier II: Montpellier, France, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Gautier, G. Influence de la Politique agricole commune sur les pratiques pastorales des Causses et des Cévennes: Presentation, 2017. Available online: http://draaf.occitanie.agriculture.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/4_pages_gregoiregautier_201707_cle095979.pdf (accessed on 8 January 2019).
- Moreau, C.; Barnaud, C.; Mathevet, R. L’état de référence, un angle-mort dans la gouvernance des paysages; INRA: Toulouse, France, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- ComMod La modélisation comme outil d’accompagnement. Nat. Sci. Soc. 2005, 13, 165–168. [CrossRef]
- QSR International Pty Ltd. NVivo, version 11.4.1.1064; QSR International: Melbourne, Australia, 2015.
- Vidal, M.; Simonneaux, L.; Legardez, A. Jeux de rôles et simulation: Sensibiliser les élèves à la gestion d’éco-socio-systèmes conflictuels. In Développement Durable et Autres Questions D’actualité; Educagri éditions: Dijon, France, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Ruankaew, N.; le Page, C.; Gajaseni, N.; Barnaud, C.; van Paassen, A.; Trebuil, G. Companion Modelling for Integrated Renewable Resource Management: A New Collaborative Research Approach to Create Common Values for Sustainable Development; CABI Publishing: Basel, Switzerland, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Hertzog, T.; Poussin, J.-C.; Tangara, B.; Kouriba, I.; Jamin, J.-Y. A role playing game to address future water management issues in a large irrigated system: Experience from Mali. Agric. Water Manag. 2014, 137, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farolfi, S.; Hassan, R.; Perret, S.; MacKay, H. A Role-Playing Game to Support Multi-Stakeholder Negotiations Related to Water Allocation in South Africa: First Applications and Potential Developments. Available online: http://www.ceepa.co.za/docs/paper_two.pdf (accessed on 19 December 2018).
- Étienne, M. Companion Modelling: A Participatory Approach to Support Sustainable Development; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin, Germany, 2013; ISBN 978-94-017-8557-0. [Google Scholar]
- Brugnach, M.; Dewulf, A.; Pahl-Wostl, C.; Taillieu, T. Toward a Relational Concept of Uncertainty: About Knowing Too Little, Knowing Too Differently, and Accepting Not to Know. Ecol. Soc. 2008, 13, 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pahl-Wostl, C. The Importance of Social Learning in Restoring the Multifunctionality of Rivers and Floodplains. Ecol. Soc. 2006, 11, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Etienne, M. SYLVOPAST: A multiple target role-playing game to assess negotiation processes in sylvopastoral management planning. J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul. 2003, 6, 5. [Google Scholar]
- Duru, M.; Therond, O.; Fares, M. Designing agroecological transitions; A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2015, 35, 1237–1257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Daily, G.C.; Polasky, S.; Goldstein, J.; Kareiva, P.M.; Mooney, H.A.; Pejchar, L.; Ricketts, T.H.; Salzman, J.; Shallenberger, R. Ecosystem services in decision making: Time to deliver. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2009, 7, 21–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grêt-Regamey, A.; Sirén, E.; Brunner, S.H.; Weibel, B. Review of decision support tools to operationalize the ecosystem services concept. Ecosyst. Serv. 2017, 26, 306–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Carmen, E.; Watt, A.; Carvalho, L.; Dick, J.; Fazey, I.; Garcia-Blanco, G.; Grizzetti, B.; Hauck, J.; Izakovicova, Z.; Kopperoinen, L.; et al. Knowledge needs for the operationalisation of the concept of ecosystem services. Ecosyst. Serv. 2018, 29, 441–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Spyra, M.; Kleemann, J.; Cetin, N.I.; Vázquez Navarrete, C.J.; Albert, C.; Palacios-Agundez, I.; Ametzaga-Arregi, I.; La Rosa, D.; Rozas-Vásquez, D.; Adem Esmail, B.; et al. The ecosystem services concept: A new Esperanto to facilitate participatory planning processes? Landsc. Ecol. 2018, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Page, C.L.; Dray, A.; Perez, P.; Garcia, C. Exploring how knowledge and communication influence natural resources management with REHAB. Simul. Gaming 2016, 47, 257–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Parents Nodes: Main Effects of RPG on Social Learning | References | Child Nodes: Specific Contributions to Social Learning |
---|---|---|
Higher awareness of interdependencies | [15,17,18] | Improving awareness of interdependencies:
|
Increased mutual understanding | [16,37,38] | Enabling:
|
Improved ability to deal with uncertainties | [39,40] | Identifying different kinds of uncertainties:
|
Willingness to explore innovative methods of governance | [15,41] | Encouraging collective discussion on:
|
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Moreau, C.; Barnaud, C.; Mathevet, R. Conciliate Agriculture with Landscape and Biodiversity Conservation: A Role-Playing Game to Explore Trade-Offs among Ecosystem Services through Social Learning. Sustainability 2019, 11, 310. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020310
Moreau C, Barnaud C, Mathevet R. Conciliate Agriculture with Landscape and Biodiversity Conservation: A Role-Playing Game to Explore Trade-Offs among Ecosystem Services through Social Learning. Sustainability. 2019; 11(2):310. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020310
Chicago/Turabian StyleMoreau, Clémence, Cécile Barnaud, and Raphaël Mathevet. 2019. "Conciliate Agriculture with Landscape and Biodiversity Conservation: A Role-Playing Game to Explore Trade-Offs among Ecosystem Services through Social Learning" Sustainability 11, no. 2: 310. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020310