Monitoring

1
Monitoring Evaluation of ComMod Processesto
facilitate concerted management of land systems
2
Objective of Companion Modelling(F. Bousquet,
1998)

• To facilitate dialogue,
• shared learning
• collective decision-making
• to strenghten
• the adaptive management capacity
• of communities through
• Integrative collaborative modelling

3
Challenges difficulties

• Truly interdisciplinary approach (EcologySoc.
  Sc.)
• Intensive iterative relationships between
  researchers and other stakeholders
• Stakeholders engagement in the participatory
  process is more important for the implementaton
  of a result from the process that the result by
  itself
• Need for pertinent characterization of initial
  situation (esp. stakeholders, not always
  possible)
• No already existing suitable methodology
• ? Need to invent it

4
General effects to be monitored evaluated
objective achievement

• The capacity of a ComMod process to
• ? Create collective decision action by
  facilitating communication exchanges among the
  actors
• Contribute to community mobilization for
  sustainable development thru. more adaptive
  management of renewable resources
• ComMod capacity to  better  engage all
  concerned stakeholders in the collective
  decision-making process

5
Effects to be monitored evaluated knowledge
learning (2)

• Capacity to mobilize indigenous knowledge from
  stakeholders to integrate it with scientific
  knowledge
• Mesure characterize learning phenomena
  generated during the implementation of the
  approach
• At both individual collective / organizational
  levels
• Regarding improved understanding of the system
• Changes in stakeholders perceptions

6
Collective learning effects through

• Improved understanding of
• Different actors perceptions points of view
• Current resource management rules
• Identification testing of new management rules
• The implementation of new management rules

7
Effects to be monitored evaluated indicators
relationships (3)

• Concerted choice of indicators for monitoring
  effects of collective management on
• State of the resource
• Effects on different stakeholders livelihoods,
  etc.
• Influence of researchers in the production of the
  outcomes of the collective decision-making
  process (who is in the driving seat?)
• Evolution of the researchers - users relationship
  along the process
• Is the process sustainable?

8
Effects to be monitored evaluated
appropriation by stakeholders (4)

• Integration of ComMod in the actors network
  adoption / appropriation by them
• Actors engagement in organizing collective
  decision processes, including the conception of
  supporting tools
• Any  secondary effects on local social
  relations? (Re-activation of old conflicts? New
  ones?)

9
Implications consequences of using ComMod

• Is the emergence of new formal or informal
  institutional frameworks for the concerted
  management of the land its renewable resources
  being verified?
• What are the types of collective actions on the
  land their modes of organization generated
  through ComMod?

10
Monitoring the implementation

• Analysis of the practical implementation of the
  successive phases of this approach to support
  collective decision-making (data from logbooks)
• How the decision was reached is more important
  than the details of the decision itself (the
  process is more important than the output)
• Relationship between ComMod activities and the
  implementation of a collective concrete action
  plan

11
Monitoring Commod effects after participatory
simulation workshops

• Interviews with participants NON-participants
  (semi-structured, guidelines on domains of
  change)
• 3-4 weeks after the event is best
• Own opinions on the tools used? Compared to real
  circumstances
• New knowledge perceptions, behavioural changes,
  new practices observed?
• Communication with others about the workshop
  its outputs? (broadening social networks)
• Progress in setting up new rules / organizations
  / institutions?
• Implementation of collective action plan?

12
Influence on ComMod Process ofADD-ANR Project
comparing 30 case studies

• Ecological, institutional socio-political
  contexts local history of land management
• Influence of local context on implementation of
• The approach itself
• The concerted decision-making process
• The action plans
• Changes in the system environment during the
  ComMod process ecological or economic events,
  new policies, etc. (Changes in the  potential of
  the situation )

13
Evaluation Method

• Define precisely / explicitly the collective
  individual socio-economic indicators to monitor
  the evolution of the implicated actors
• Or selection of a method without indicators (such
  as MSC or the Story Approach)
• The evolution of the implicated actors needs to
  be characterized in term of
• Networks
• Social representations, and
• Management practices

14
The  Most Significant Changes  approach to
monitoring

•  An evolutionary approach to facilitating
  organisational learning  (R. Davies, 1998)
• Steps of the MSC approach
• 1. Selection of the domains of change to be
  monitored
• 2. Definition of the reporting period how often?
• 3. Selection of the participants their linkages
• 4. Phrasing the questions to be asked about
  change descriptive (neutral) explanatory
  (subjective) answers
• (Positive or negative changes to be taken into
  account)

15
The  Most Significant Changes  approach to
monitoring (2)

• Steps of the MSC approach (continued)
• 5. Define the structure of participation
  (hierarchy, peers, etc.)
• 6. Feedback to the field to promote co-evolution
  of interpretative frameworks about change
• 7. Verification (and collection of more
  information on the changes)
• 8. Quantification (optional)
• 9. Monitoring the monitoring system can it fly
  last over time?

16
The  Story Approach  to monitoring

• Collection of stories of change emanating from
  the field
• Systematic selection of the most significant ones
  during meetings
• 1 story ? 1 storytellers interpretation
• 1 story ? 1 reviewers interpretation
• Promote slow but extensive dialogue among
  stakeholders, the project hierarchy, and
• Can help to improve organizational learning
• ? In both (compatible) methods identification of
  change, its interpretation, processing of
  information is done in a participatory way, at
  the fied level in a distributed fashion

17
Taking advantages from these accumulated
experiences

• To define a framework for the analysis of the
  different on-going experiences
• To analyze each experience through this framework
• To propose a methodological framework
• that must remain adaptive
• but also that must reveal some genericity

18
Developing the ComMod approach by

• Taking advantages of the numerous past or
  on-going applications in diverse contexts
  ex-post analyses to be conducted
• Defining a common framework for the in-depth
  analysis of the results from each experiment
• Analyzing each experiment according to this
  common framework
• Proposing a ComMod methodology that
• - remains adaptive
• - but underlines several generic characteristics
  of this approach
• Refining the contents of the ComMod charter as
  needed

19
Improving the visibility, legibility legitimacy
of the ComMod Approach

• Analysis of similarities differences or
  complementarities compared to other participatory
  modelling approaches
• Identification of ComMod strengths, weaknesses
  constraints
• Characterization of the contexts in which ComMod
  can be used how it should (or not) be used

20
Current scientific challenges

• Impact assessment how to measure improvement in
  stakeholders capacity for collective learning?
  Adaptive capacity?
• What indicators of system resilience How to
  identify them with stakeholders?
• Upscaling ComMod from heterogeneous agents /
  individuals to group organizations
• Progress in Modelling stakeholder perceptions
  their spatial representation

21
Rice Seed System in lower NE Thailand
1st game farmers choice of varieties sources
of seeds
Gaming sessions in different villages of Ubon
Ratchathani Province
22
2nd game the provincial seed system
Participants representatives of different
institutions providing seeds to farmers
23
2nd game in 2004-2005 Gaming sessions with
provincial national institutions
24
Co-construction of the MAS model

• Diagrammatic conceptual model implemented in
  CORMAS

25
MAS model use with stakeholders

• Stakeholders strategies implemented in the model
• Selection of relevant indicators by the
  stakeholders to assess simulation results

26

Ecole ComMod Website
27
Back home
ComMod in a nutshell
-North Thailand
-Bhutan
-Main Concepts
-Static Models
-Dynamic Models
-Exercises
-Introduction
-Reactive Agents
-Cognitive Agents
28
For more information

• On ComMod Multi-Agent Systems for renewable
  resource management with stakeholders
• http//www.commod.org
• http//www.ecole-commod.sc.chula.ac.th
• http//cormas.cirad.fr
• On current project activities / training in Asia
• christophe.le_page_at_cirad.fr
• guy.trebuil_at_cirad.fr
• CU-Cirad ComMod Project
• Faculty of Science, Chulalongkorn University,
  Bangkok