IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i13p5380-d379825.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving Representation of Decision Rules in LUCC-ABM: An Example with an Elicitation of Farmers’ Decision Making for Landscape Restoration in Central Malawi

Author

Listed:
  • Ida Nadia S. Djenontin

    (Department of Geography, Environment and Spatial Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
    Environmental Science and Policy Program, Michigan State University, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA)

  • Leo C. Zulu

    (Department of Geography, Environment and Spatial Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA)

  • Arika Ligmann-Zielinska

    (Department of Geography, Environment and Spatial Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA)

Abstract

Restoring interlocking forest-agricultural landscapes— forest-agricscapes —to sustainably supply ecosystem services for socio-ecological well-being is one of Malawi’s priorities. Engaging local farmers is crucial in implementing restoration schemes. While farmers’ land-use decisions shape land-use/cover and changes (LUCC) and ecological conditions, why and how they decide to embrace restoration activities is poorly understood and neglected in forest-agricscape restoration. We analyze the nature of farmers’ restoration decisions, both individually and collectively, in Central Malawi using a mixed-method analysis. We characterize, qualitatively and quantitatively, the underlying contextual rationales, motives, benefits, and incentives. Identified decision-making rules reflect diverse and nuanced goal frames of relative importance that are featured in various combinations. We categorize the decision-making rules as: problem-solving oriented, resource/material-constrained, benefits-oriented, incentive-based, peers/leaders-influenced, knowledge/skill-dependent, altruistic-oriented, rules/norms-constrained, economic capacity-dependent, awareness-dependent, and risk averse-oriented. We link them with the corresponding vegetation- and non-vegetation-based restoration practices to depict the overall decision-making processes. Findings advance the representation of farmers’ decision rules and behavioral responses in computational agent-based modeling (ABM), through the decomposition of empirical data. The approach used can inform other modeling works attempting to better capture social actors’ decision rules. Such LUCC-ABMs are valuable for exploring spatially explicit outcomes of restoration investments by modeling such decision-making processes and policy scenarios.

Suggested Citation

  • Ida Nadia S. Djenontin & Leo C. Zulu & Arika Ligmann-Zielinska, 2020. "Improving Representation of Decision Rules in LUCC-ABM: An Example with an Elicitation of Farmers’ Decision Making for Landscape Restoration in Central Malawi," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-35, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:13:p:5380-:d:379825
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/13/5380/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/13/5380/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. An, Li, 2012. "Modeling human decisions in coupled human and natural systems: Review of agent-based models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 229(C), pages 25-36.
    3. Leo Zulu, 2013. "Bringing People Back into Protected Forests in Developing Countries: Insights from Co-Management in Malawi," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(5), pages 1-27, May.
    4. Kremmydas, Dimitris & Athanasiadis, Ioannis N. & Rozakis, Stelios, 2018. "A review of Agent Based Modeling for agricultural policy evaluation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 95-106.
    5. Wilson, Sarah Jane & Cagalanan, Dominique, 2016. "Governing restoration: Strategies, adaptations and innovations for tomorrow’s forest landscapes," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 11-15.
    6. John H. Miller & Scott E. Page, 2007. "Social Science in Between, from Complex Adaptive Systems: An Introduction to Computational Models of Social Life," Introductory Chapters, in: Complex Adaptive Systems: An Introduction to Computational Models of Social Life, Princeton University Press.
    7. John H. Miller & Scott E. Page, 2007. "Complexity in Social Worlds, from Complex Adaptive Systems: An Introduction to Computational Models of Social Life," Introductory Chapters, in: Complex Adaptive Systems: An Introduction to Computational Models of Social Life, Princeton University Press.
    8. Ida Nadia S. Djenontin & Samson Foli & Leo C. Zulu, 2018. "Revisiting the Factors Shaping Outcomes for Forest and Landscape Restoration in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Way Forward for Policy, Practice and Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-34, March.
    9. Tina Balke & Nigel Gilbert, 2014. "How Do Agents Make Decisions? A Survey," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 17(4), pages 1-13.
    10. Dimitris Kremmydas, 2012. "Agent based modeling for agricultural policy evaluation: A review," Working Papers 2012-3, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    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. Egger, Claudine & Plutzar, Christoph & Mayer, Andreas & Dullinger, Iwona & Dullinger, Stefan & Essl, Franz & Gattringer, Andreas & Bohner, Andreas & Haberl, Helmut & Gaube, Veronika, 2022. "Using the SECLAND model to project future land-use until 2050 under climate and socioeconomic change in the LTSER region Eisenwurzen (Austria)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    2. Meine van Noordwijk & Vincent Gitz & Peter A. Minang & Sonya Dewi & Beria Leimona & Lalisa Duguma & Nathanaël Pingault & Alexandre Meybeck, 2020. "People-Centric Nature-Based Land Restoration through Agroforestry: A Typology," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-29, July.
    3. Rebekah G. K. Hinton & Christopher J. A. Macleod & Mads Troldborg & Gift Wanangwa & Modesta Kanjaye & Emma Mbalame & Prince Mleta & Kettie Harawa & Steve Kumwenda & Robert M. Kalin, 2021. "Factors Influencing the Awareness and Adoption of Borehole-Garden Permaculture in Malawi: Lessons for the Promotion of Sustainable Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-25, November.
    4. Djenontin, Ida N.S. & Ligmann-Zielinska, Arika & Zulu, Leo C., 2022. "Landscape-scale effects of farmers’ restoration decision making and investments in central Malawi: an agent-based modeling approach," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115672, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Djenontin, Ida Nadia S. & Zulu, Leo C. & Richardson, Robert B., 2022. "Smallholder farmers and forest landscape restoration in sub-Saharan Africa: Evidence from Central Malawi," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    6. Djenontin, Ida N.S. & Zulu, Leo C., 2021. "The quest for context-relevant governance of agro-forest landscape restoration in Central Malawi: Insights from local processes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(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. Huber, Robert & Bakker, Martha & Balmann, Alfons & Berger, Thomas & Bithell, Mike & Brown, Calum & Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne & Xiong, Hang & Le, Quang Bao & Mack, Gabriele & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Millingt, 2018. "Representation of decision-making in European agricultural agent-based models," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 143-160.
    2. Robert Huber & Hang Xiong & Kevin Keller & Robert Finger, 2022. "Bridging behavioural factors and standard bio‐economic modelling in an agent‐based modelling framework," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(1), pages 35-63, February.
    3. Juana Castro & Stefan Drews & Filippos Exadaktylos & Joël Foramitti & Franziska Klein & Théo Konc & Ivan Savin & Jeroen van den Bergh, 2020. "A review of agent‐based modeling of climate‐energy policy," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), July.
    4. Djenontin, Ida N.S. & Zulu, Leo C., 2021. "The quest for context-relevant governance of agro-forest landscape restoration in Central Malawi: Insights from local processes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    5. Williams, T.G. & Guikema, S.D. & Brown, D.G. & Agrawal, A., 2020. "Resilience and equity: Quantifying the distributional effects of resilience-enhancing strategies in a smallholder agricultural system," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    6. Bier, Vicki & Gutfraind, Alexander, 2019. "Risk analysis beyond vulnerability and resilience – characterizing the defensibility of critical systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(2), pages 626-636.
    7. Citera, Emanuele & Sau, Lino, 2019. "Complexity, Conventions and Instability: the role of monetary policy," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201924, University of Turin.
    8. Theodosio, Bruno Miller & Weber, Jan, 2023. "Back to the classics: R-evolution towards statistical equilibria," ifso working paper series 28, University of Duisburg-Essen, Institute for Socioeconomics (ifso).
    9. Jeffery S. McMullen & Dimo Dimov, 2013. "Time and the Entrepreneurial Journey: The Problems and Promise of Studying Entrepreneurship as a Process," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(8), pages 1481-1512, December.
    10. Andrew W. Bausch, 2014. "Evolving intergroup cooperation," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 369-393, December.
    11. Levent Yilmaz, 2011. "Toward Multi-Level, Multi-Theoretical Model Portfolios for Scientific Enterprise Workforce Dynamics," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 14(4), pages 1-2.
    12. Mark Lubell & Adam Douglas Henry & Mike McCoy, 2010. "Collaborative Institutions in an Ecology of Games," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(2), pages 287-300, April.
    13. Gräbner, Claudius, 2016. "From realism to instrumentalism - and back? Methodological implications of changes in the epistemology of economics," MPRA Paper 71933, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Michael Rothgang & Jochen Dehio & Bernhard Lageman, 2019. "Analysing the effects of cluster policy: What can we learn from the German leading-edge cluster competition?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1673-1697, December.
    15. Christopher J. Burman & Marota Aphane, 2017. "Complex HIV/AIDS Landscapes: Reflections on How ‘Path Creation’ Influenced an Action-Oriented Intervention," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 45-66, February.
    16. Niceto S. Poblador, 2011. "The Strategy Dilemma : Why Big Business Moves Seldom Pan Out as Planned," UP School of Economics Discussion Papers 201105, University of the Philippines School of Economics.
    17. Martha G. Alatriste-Contreras & Martín Puchet Anyul, 2021. "The Spreading of Shocks in the North America Production Network and Its Relation to the Properties of the Network," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(21), pages 1-19, November.
    18. Coronese, Matteo & Occelli, Martina & Lamperti, Francesco & Roventini, Andrea, 2023. "AgriLOVE: Agriculture, land-use and technical change in an evolutionary, agent-based model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    19. repec:lib:000cis:v:5:y:2017:i:1:p:26-34 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Flaminio Squazzoni, 2010. "The impact of agent-based models in the social sciences after 15 years of incursions," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 18(2), pages 197-234.
    21. Anshuka Anshuka & Floris F. Ogtrop & David Sanderson & Simone Z. Leao, 2022. "A systematic review of agent-based model for flood risk management and assessment using the ODD protocol," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 112(3), pages 2739-2771, July.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:13:p:5380-:d:379825. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.