Dealing with Power Games in a Companion Modelling Process: Lessons from Community Water Management in Thailand Highlands

Abstract Although stakeholder participation is expected to promote equitable and sustainable natural resource management, lessons from the past tell us that more careful attention needs to be paid to achieving equitable impacts. Now the question is how to address social inequities and power asymmetries. Some authors emphasize the need for more dialogue, while others prefer a critical perspective, arguing that dialogue might not be sufficient to avert the risk of a process deepening existing social inequities. This article aims to enrich this debate and question the practical implications of the critical perspective through an in-depth analysis of power games in a participatory process. A Companion Modelling (ComMod) process was conducted in an Akha community of Northern Thailand with a critical perspective, i.e. with a concern for the less influent stakeholders. Simulation tools such as role-playing games were used to mediate a cross-cultural learning process among researchers, farmers and administrators about a local irrigation water management problem. The detailed analysis of power games in this learning and negotiation process reveals that in spite of initial power asymmetries, the poorest farmers of the community started to voice and assert their interests. This was very much due to the role of a Western researcher who put the equity issue on the public agenda and to the strategic support of a charismatic Christian leader. We identify a set of practical facilitation methods that helped to manage power asymmetries and to level the playing field, but we also discuss the main limits of our cultural-embedded methodological choices. Acknowledging that ‘the facilitators’ neutrality' is an illusion, this study allows us to raise the question of their social legitimacy. We suggest that they should systematically make explicit and reflect on their cultural-ideological background and methodological hypothesis and choices and their effects on the socio-political context. This article is an original attempt to accept this challenge.

[1]  UMRONGROJWATTHANA ARIEPongchai,et al.  Area Study Prior to Companion Modelling to Integrate Multiple Interests in Upper Watershed Management of Northern Thailand , 2008 .

[2]  D. Edmunds,et al.  Pluralism and the less powerful: accommodating multiple interests in local forest management , 2001 .

[4]  François Bousquet,et al.  Multi-agent systems companion modeling for integrated watershed management : a northern Thailand experience , 2003 .

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

[6]  Andrea Bartoli,et al.  The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice , 2006 .

[7]  Cees Leeuwis,et al.  Reconceptualizing Participation for Sustainable Rural Development: Towards a Negotiation Approach , 2000 .

[8]  J. Ribot,et al.  Integral local development: ‘accommodating multiple interests’ through entrustment and accountable representation , 2001 .

[9]  Robert L. Flood,et al.  Enhancing the process of methodology choice in total systems intervention (TSI) and improving chances of tackling coercion , 1995 .

[10]  C. Leeuwis.  Communication for Rural Innovation: Rethinking Agricultural Extension , 2004 .

[11]  W. Ulrich,et al.  Beyond methodology choice: critical systems thinking as critically systemic discourse , 2003, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[12]  C.J.H. Mann,et al.  Systems approaches to management , 2002 .

[13]  N. G. Roling,et al.  A new practice: facilitating sustainable agriculture. , 1998 .

[14]  Jeffrey Z. Rubin.  Models of Conflict Management , 1994 .

[15]  Michel Etienne,et al.  SYLVOPAST: a multiple target role-playing game to assess negotiation processes in sylvopastoral management planning , 2003, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[16]  L. Roudart,et al.  A History of World Agriculture: From the Neolithic Age to the Current Crisis , 2006 .

[17]  L. Urwick,et al.  Dynamic Administration: The Collected Papers of Mary Parker Follett , 1942 .

[18]  François Bousquet,et al.  Companion modeling and multi-agent systems for integrated natural resource management in Asia , 2005 .

[19]  D. Arghiros.  Democracy, Development and Decentralization in Provincial Thailand , 2001 .

[20]  A. Kellerman,et al.  The Constitution of Society : Outline of the Theory of Structuration , 2015 .

[21]  C. Leeuwis,et al.  Communication for Rural Innovation , 2004 .

[22]  C. Mullon,et al.  An environmental modelling approach : the use of multi-agent simulations , 1988 .

[23]  Bart Pijnenburg.  Keeping it Vague : Discourses and practices of participation in Rural Mozambique , 2002 .

[24]  A. Berle.  The three faces of power , 1967 .

[25]  François Bousquet,et al.  Multi-Agent Simulations to Explore Rules for Rural Credit Management in a Highland Farming Community of Northern Thailand , 2006, WCSS.

[26]  Susan Wright,et al.  1. Participation and power , 1995 .

[27]  François Bousquet,et al.  Role-playing games for opening the black box of multi-agent systems: method and lessons of its application to Senegal River Valley irrigated systems , 2001, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[28]  François Bousquet,et al.  Using Self-Designed Role-Playing Games and a Multi-Agent System to Empower a Local Decision-Making Process for Land Use Management: The SelfCormas Experiment in Senegal , 2003, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[29]  A. Marty.  Getting to YES. Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In , 1983 .

[30]  Olivier Barreteau,et al.  Our Companion Modelling Approach , 2003, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul..

[31]  Marcel Mazoyer,et al.  Histoire des agricultures du monde : du néolithique à la crise contemporaine , 1997 .

[32]  P. Carnevale.  Creativity in the Outcomes of Conflict , 2006 .

[33]  Ricardo Ramirez,et al.  Understanding the approaches for accommodating multiple stakeholders' interests , 2001 .

[34]  Charley Richardson.  Participation and Power , 1992 .

[35]  J. Rowlands.  Empowerment examined. , 1995, Development in practice.

[36]  A. Paassen.  Bridging the gap: computer model enhanced learning for natural resource management in Burkina Faso , 2004 .

[37]  Eva K. Wollenberg,et al.  A Strategic Approach to Multistakeholder Negotiations , 2001 .

[38]  François Bousquet,et al.  An evolving simulation/gaming process to facilitate adaptive watershed management in northern mountainous Thailand , 2007 .

[39]  Thomas Webler,et al.  The craft and theory of public participation: a dialectical process , 1999 .

[40]  Richard D. Duke,et al.  Gaming: The Future's Language , 2014 .

[41]  Guy Trébuil,et al.  Regional agrarian systems and sustainability of agricultural production systems in Thailand , 1993 .

[42]  Jules Pretty,et al.  Participatory learning for sustainable agriculture , 1995 .

[43]  G. Poggi.  Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology , 1969 .

[44]  Irene Guijt,et al.  Deepening the basis of rural resource management: learning processes and decision support , 2002 .

[45]  Nicolas Faysse,et al.  Troubles on the way: An analysis of the challenges faced by multi-stakeholder platforms , 2006 .

[46]  François Bousquet,et al.  Multi-agent simulations to explore rules for rural credit in a highland farming community of Northern Thailand , 2008, Ecological Economics.