IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v126y2014icp62-75.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gaming for smallholder participation in the design of more sustainable agricultural landscapes

Author

Listed:
  • Speelman, E.N.
  • García-Barrios, L.E.
  • Groot, J.C.J.
  • Tittonell, P.

Abstract

Smallholder farming systems often consist of a mosaic of interlinked forested and cleared-field patches that together provide a diversity of services to local and non-local stakeholders. Designing and adopting more sustainable farming systems for such mosaic landscapes involves communal decision-making and active participation of local smallholders. Currently, a wide variety of participatory approaches to involve individual farmers in such design processes is available. However, methodologies that address communal decision-making processes as seen in complex smallholder agricultural landscapes are still rare. Here, we present a gaming methodology developed to (i) actively involve farmers in the process of agroecosystem design, and (ii) to identify factors and patterns of communal decision-making through an in-depth analysis of game strategies deployed by participants. At the basis of this methodology is the RESORTES board game; a stylized yet complex land-use game rich in ecological and social outcomes. Results of four pilot sessions in a usufruct community in the buffer zone of a Man and Biosphere Reserve in Chiapas, Mexico, showed that the game sessions created an open and active discussion among participants. Discussions concerned land-use issues in the game and in real-life. It allowed participants that were new to active involvement in communal decision-making to openly discuss and share their ideas. The highly structured monitoring and analysis scheme for ex-ante/ex-post analysis was easy in use and identified communication, leadership and relatedness among participants as influential factors that smoothened the collective decision-making process. The RESORTES board game and related games can shed light on farmer’s actual views on and responses to multifunctional agricultural landscape planning and the land sharing vs. land sparing dilemmas currently in debate in academic and policy-making settings. The findings of this paper can be useful to inform strategies for community involvement in agroecosystem design in a broader set of complex socio-environmental context, using serious game to guide agricultural landscape planning processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Speelman, E.N. & García-Barrios, L.E. & Groot, J.C.J. & Tittonell, P., 2014. "Gaming for smallholder participation in the design of more sustainable agricultural landscapes," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 62-75.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:126:y:2014:i:c:p:62-75
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2013.09.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X13001121
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2013.09.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Armin Falk & James J. Heckman, 2009. "Lab Experiments are a Major Source of Knowledge in the Social Sciences," Working Papers 200935, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    2. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & de Groot, Rudolf & Lomas, Pedro L. & Montes, Carlos, 2010. "The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1209-1218, April.
    3. Cardenas, Juan-Camilo & Ostrom, Elinor, 2004. "What do people bring into the game? Experiments in the field about cooperation in the commons," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 307-326, December.
    4. Janssen, Marco A. & Anderies, John M., 2011. "Governing the commons: Learning from field and laboratory experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(9), pages 1569-1570, July.
    5. E. Ostrom, 2010. "A Behavioral Approach to the Rational Choice Theory of Collective Action Presidential Address, American political Science Association, 1997," Public administration issues, Higher School of Economics, issue 1, pages 5-52.
    6. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List, 2007. "What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 153-174, Spring.
    7. García-Barrios, L.E. & Speelman, E.N. & Pimm, M.S., 2008. "An educational simulation tool for negotiating sustainable natural resource management strategies among stakeholders with conflicting interests," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 210(1), pages 115-126.
    8. Antonio Yunez–Naude, 2003. "The Dismantling of CONASUPO, a Mexican State Trader in Agriculture," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(1), pages 97-122, January.
    9. Olivier Barreteau, 2003. "Our Companion Modelling Approach," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 6(2), pages 1-1.
    10. Perfecto, Ivette & Vandermeer, John & Mas, Alex & Pinto, Lorena Soto, 2005. "Biodiversity, yield, and shade coffee certification," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 435-446, September.
    11. Speelman, E.N. & García-Barrios, L.E., 2010. "Agrodiversity v.2: An educational simulation tool to address some challenges for sustaining functional agrodiversity in agro-ecosystems," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(6), pages 911-918.
    12. Elinor Ostrom, 2000. "Collective Action and the Evolution of Social Norms," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 137-158, Summer.
    13. Antle, John & Capalbo, Susan & Mooney, Sian & Elliott, Edward & Paustian, Keith, 2003. "Spatial heterogeneity, contract design, and the efficiency of carbon sequestration policies for agriculture," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 231-250, September.
    14. van Keulen, Herman, 2006. "Heterogeneity and diversity in less-favoured areas," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 1-7, April.
    15. Ostrom, Elinor, 2006. "The value-added of laboratory experiments for the study of institutions and common-pool resources," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 149-163, October.
    16. Anderies, John M. & Janssen, Marco A. & Bousquet, François & Cardenas, Juan-Camilo & Castillo, Daniel & Lopez, Maria-Claudio & Tobias, Robert & Vollan, Björn & Wutich, Amber, 2011. "The challenge of understanding decisions in experimental studies of common pool resource governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(9), pages 1571-1579, July.
    17. García-Amado, Luis Rico & Pérez, Manuel Ruiz & Escutia, Felipe Reyes & García, Sara Barrasa & Mejía, Elsa Contreras, 2011. "Efficiency of Payments for Environmental Services: Equity and additionality in a case study from a Biosphere Reserve in Chiapas, Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2361-2368.
    18. Castillo, Daniel & Saysel, Ali Kerem, 2005. "Simulation of common pool resource field experiments: a behavioral model of collective action," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 420-436, November.
    19. Castillo, Daniel & Bousquet, François & Janssen, Marco A. & Worrapimphong, Kobchai & Cardenas, Juan Camillo, 2011. "Context matters to explain field experiments: Results from Colombian and Thai fishing villages," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(9), pages 1609-1620, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Assefa, Samuel & Kessler, Aad & Fleskens, Luuk, 2021. "Exploring decision-making in campaign-based watershed management by using a role-playing game in Boset District, Ethiopia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    2. Mertz, Ole & Mertens, Charlotte Filt, 2017. "Land Sparing and Land Sharing Policies in Developing Countries – Drivers and Linkages to Scientific Debates," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 523-535.
    3. Silva Larson & Anne (Giger)-Dray & Tina Cornioley & Manithaythip Thephavanh & Phomma Thammavong & Sisavan Vorlasan & John G. Connell & Magnus Moglia & Peter Case & Kim S. Alexander & Pascal Perez, 2020. "A Game-Based Approach to Exploring Gender Differences in Smallholder Decisions to Change Farming Practices: White Rice Production in Laos," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-22, August.
    4. Onaindia, Miren & Peña, Lorena & de Manuel, Beatriz Fernández & Rodríguez-Loinaz, Gloria & Madariaga, Iosu & Palacios-Agúndez, Igone & Ametzaga-Arregi, Ibone, 2018. "Land use efficiency through analysis of agrological capacity and ecosystem services in an industrialized region (Biscay, Spain)," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 650-661.
    5. Michalscheck, Mirja & Groot, Jeroen C.J. & Fischer, Gundula & Tittonell, Pablo, 2020. "Land use decisions: By whom and to whose benefit? A serious game to uncover dynamics in farm land allocation at household level in Northern Ghana," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    6. Romeo Victor Ionescu & Monica Laura Zlati & Valentin Marian Antohi & Silvius Stanciu & Florina Oana Virlanuta & Cristina (Băcanu) Serban, 2020. "New Agricultural Model of Economic Sustainability for Wheat Seed Production in Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-21, May.
    7. Meine van Noordwijk & Erika Speelman & Gert Jan Hofstede & Ai Farida & Ali Yansyah Abdurrahim & Andrew Miccolis & Arief Lukman Hakim & Charles Nduhiu Wamucii & Elisabeth Lagneaux & Federico Andreotti , 2020. "Sustainable Agroforestry Landscape Management: Changing the Game," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-38, July.
    8. Meunier, Clémentine & Casagrande, Marion & Rosiès, Blandine & Bedoussac, Laurent & Topp, Cairistiona F.E. & Walker, Robin L. & Watson, Christine A. & Martin, Guillaume, 2022. "Interplay: A game for the participatory design of locally adapted cereal–legume intercrops," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    9. Laterra, Pedro & Weyland, Federico & Auer, Alejandra & Barral, Paula & González, Aira & Mastrángelo, Matías & Rositano, Florencia & Sirimarco, Ximena, 2023. "MARCHI: A serious game for participatory governance of ecosystem services in multiple-use protected areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    10. Robert-Jan Den Haan & Mascha C. Van der Voort, 2018. "On Evaluating Social Learning Outcomes of Serious Games to Collaboratively Address Sustainability Problems: A Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-26, December.
    11. Michael Mensah & Grace B. Villamor & Benedicta Y. Fosu-Mensah & Paul L. G. Vlek, 2021. "Exploring the Gender-Specific Adaptive Responses to Climate Variability: Application of Grazing Game in the Semi-Arid Region of Ghana," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-19, October.
    12. Martin, G., 2015. "A conceptual framework to support adaptation of farming systems – Development and application with Forage Rummy," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 52-61.
    13. Ditzler, Lenora & Klerkx, Laurens & Chan-Dentoni, Jacqueline & Posthumus, Helena & Krupnik, Timothy J. & Ridaura, Santiago López & Andersson, Jens A. & Baudron, Frédéric & Groot, Jeroen C.J., 2018. "Affordances of agricultural systems analysis tools: A review and framework to enhance tool design and implementation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 20-30.
    14. El Mujtar, Verónica Andrea & Zamor, Ronie & Salmerón, Francisco & Guerrero, Adela del Socorro & Laborda, Luciana & Tittonell, Pablo & Hogan, Rose, 2023. "Lexical analysis improves the identification of contextual drivers and farm typologies in the assessment of transitions to agroecology through TAPE – A case study from rural Nicaragua," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    15. Moojen, Fernanda Gomes & Ryschawy, Julie & dos Santos, Davi Teixeira & Barth Neto, Armindo & Vieira, Paulo Cardozo & Portella, Elisa & de Faccio Carvalho, Paulo César, 2022. "The farm coaching experience to support the transition to integrated crop–livestock systems: From gaming to action," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    16. Ryschawy, Julie & Grillot, Myriam & Charmeau, Anaïs & Pelletier, Aude & Moraine, Marc & Martin, Guillaume, 2022. "A participatory approach based on the serious game Dynamix to co-design scenarios of crop-livestock integration among farms," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    17. González, Cecilia, 2023. "Evolution of the concept of ecological integrity and its study through networks," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 476(C).
    18. María Elena Orduña Alegría & Niels Schütze & Samuel C. Zipper, 2020. "A Serious Board Game to Analyze Socio-Ecological Dynamics towards Collaboration in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-19, June.
    19. Sari, Rika Ratna & Tanika, Lisa & Speelman, Erika N. & Saputra, Danny Dwi & Hakim, Arief Lukman & Rozendaal, Danaë M.A. & Hairiah, Kurniatun & van Noordwijk, Meine, 2024. "Farmer Options and Risks in Complex Ecological-Social systems: The FORCES game designed for agroforestry management of upper watersheds," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Torres-Guevara, Luz Elba & Schlüter, Achim, 2016. "External validity of artefactual field experiments: A study on cooperation, impatience and sustainability in an artisanal fishery in Colombia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 187-201.
    2. Röttgers, Dirk, 2016. "Conditional cooperation, context and why strong rules work — A Namibian common-pool resource experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 21-31.
    3. Fijnanda van Klingeren & Vincent Buskens, 2024. "Graduated sanctioning, endogenous institutions and sustainable cooperation in common-pool resources: An experimental test," Rationality and Society, , vol. 36(2), pages 183-229, May.
    4. Saldarriaga-Isaza, Adrián & Arango, Santiago & Villegas-Palacio, Clara, 2015. "A behavioral model of collective action in artisanal and small-scale gold mining," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 98-109.
    5. Marco A. Janssen & Therese Lindahl & James J. Murphy, 2015. "Advancing the Understanding of Behavior in Social-Ecological Systems: Results from Lab and Field Experiments," Working Papers 2015-05, University of Alaska Anchorage, Department of Economics.
    6. Midler, Estelle & Pascual, Unai & Drucker, Adam G. & Narloch, Ulf & Soto, José Luis, 2015. "Unraveling the effects of payments for ecosystem services on motivations for collective action," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 394-405.
    7. Stefan Gehrig & Achim Schlüter & Peter Hammerstein, 2019. "Sociocultural heterogeneity in a common pool resource dilemma," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-16, January.
    8. Narloch, Ulf & Pascual, Unai & Drucker, Adam G., 2012. "Collective Action Dynamics under External Rewards: Experimental Insights from Andean Farming Communities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 2096-2107.
    9. de Melo, Gioia & Piaggio, Matías, 2015. "The perils of peer punishment: Evidence from a common pool resource framed field experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 376-393.
    10. Fijnanda van Klingeren, 2020. "Playing nice in the sandbox: On the role of heterogeneity, trust and cooperation in common-pool resources," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-36, August.
    11. Otto, Ilona M. & Wechsung, Frank, 2014. "The effects of rules and communication in a behavioral irrigation experiment with power asymmetries carried out in North China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 10-20.
    12. Matilde Casuccio & Enrico Giovannetti, 2008. "The Cooperative Movement in Bolivia: Fair Trade in Amazzonia Nuts," Department of Economics 0592, University of Modena and Reggio E., Faculty of Economics "Marco Biagi".
    13. Daniel A. DeCaro & Marco A. Janssen & Allen Lee, 2015. "Synergistic effects of voting and enforcement on internalized motivation to cooperate in a resource dilemma," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(6), pages 511-537, November.
    14. Howe, E. Lance & Murphy, James J. & Gerkey, Drew & Stoddard, Olga B. & West, Colin Thor, 2023. "Sharing, social norms, and social distance: Experimental evidence from Russia and Western Alaska," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 345-358.
    15. Freya Harrison & Claire El Mouden, 2011. "Exploring the Effects of Working for Endowments on Behaviour in Standard Economic Games," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(11), pages 1-6, November.
    16. Handberg, Øyvind Nystad & Angelsen, Arild, 2015. "Experimental tests of tropical forest conservation measures," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 346-359.
    17. Julissa Alexandra Galarza-Villamar & Mariette McCampbell & Cees Leeuwis & Francesco Cecchi, 2021. "Adding Emergence and Spatiality to a Public Bad Game for Studying Dynamics in Socio-Ecological Systems (Part I): The Design of Musa-Game for Integrative Analysis of Collective Action in Banana Disease," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-21, August.
    18. Cavalcanti, Carina & Schläpfer, Felix & Schmid, Bernhard, 2010. "Public participation and willingness to cooperate in common-pool resource management: A field experiment with fishing communities in Brazil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 613-622, January.
    19. Wegmann, Johannes & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2019. "Groundwater management institutions in the face of rapid urbanization – Results of a framed field experiment in Bengaluru, India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.
    20. Eugen Dimant & Tobias Gesche, 2021. "Nudging Enforcers: How Norm Perceptions and Motives for Lying Shape Sanctions," CESifo Working Paper Series 9385, CESifo.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:126:y:2014:i:c:p:62-75. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.