Combining participatory modeling and multi-criteria analysis for community-based forest management

Participatory approaches to forest management have gained wide acceptance and have also become the primary guiding principle in the management of natural resources worldwide. Despite their widespread popularity, participatory methods developed so far have often been criticized as lacking in rigor and in need of better structuring and analytical capabilities. This paper proposes and combines two approaches, namely multi-criteria analysis (MCA) and participatory modeling. MCA offers an analytical environment where multiple goals, objectives, and perspectives can be accommodated and analyzed collectively and holistically. Such framework is deemed appropriate under a community-based forest management (CBFM) setting that is typically characterized by plurality of opinions and interests. Participatory modeling, on the other hand, is a general framework that subscribes to the principles of participatory action research, where direct participation of local communities is deemed crucial to the success of any management strategy. To ensure that the modeling process is participatory, the modeling environment, model formulation, and model development must be transparent and within the grasp of local participants. This paper describes how these two approaches can be integrated in a decision support system. The integration of the two approaches takes advantage of the analytical capabilities of MCA and the open and collaborative nature of participatory modeling. Applications of these two approaches as stand alone models are briefly described. A more detailed case study describing the integration of the two approaches is also described.

[1]  D. Selener,et al.  Participatory action research and social change , 1997 .

[2]  C. Eden,et al.  Making Strategy: The Journey of Strategic Management , 1998 .

[3]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  Multiple criteria decision analysis - an integrated approach , 2001 .

[4]  Gilbert Probst,et al.  Self-Organization and Management of Social Systems , 1984 .

[5]  Guillermo A. Mendoza,et al.  Multiple criteria decision making approaches to assessing forest sustainability using criteria and indicators: a case study , 2000 .

[6]  P. Checkland Soft systems methodology: an overview , 1988 .

[7]  Jonathan Davies,et al.  Can PRA methods be used to collect economic data? A non-timber forest product case study from Zimbabwe , 1999 .

[8]  I. M. Wilson,et al.  Combining quantitative and qualitative survey work. Methodological framework, practical issues, and case studies , 2001 .

[9]  Peter Checkland,et al.  Systems Thinking, Systems Practice , 1981 .

[10]  J. Mingers,et al.  Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited : problem structuring methods for complexity, uncertainty and conflict , 1989 .

[11]  R. K. Maikhuri,et al.  Integrated Natural Resource Management: Approaches and Lessons from the Himalaya , 2001 .

[12]  Herry Purnomo,et al.  Model for collaborative planning of community-managed resources based on qualitative soft systems approach , 2004 .

[13]  Geoff Coyle,et al.  Qualitative and quantitative modelling in system dynamics: some research questions , 2000 .

[14]  Eric F. Wolstenholme,et al.  System Enquiry: A System Dynamics Approach , 1990 .

[15]  E F Wolstenholme,et al.  Qualitative vs quantitative modelling: the evolving balance , 1999, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[16]  P. B. Checkland,et al.  Systems Thinking in Management: The Development of Soft Systems Methodology and Its Implications for Social Science , 1984 .

[17]  John D. Sterman,et al.  System Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World , 2002 .

[18]  Guillermo A. Mendoza,et al.  Development of a Methodology for Selecting Criteria and Indicators of Sustainable Forest Management: A Case Study on Participatory Assessment , 2000, Environmental management.

[19]  Guillermo A. Mendoza,et al.  Qualitative multi-criteria approaches to assessing indicators of sustainable forest resource management , 2003 .