4.7 Article

Combining participatory approaches and an agent-based model for better planning shrimp aquaculture

期刊

AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS
卷 141, 期 -, 页码 149-159

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2015.10.006

关键词

Agent-based model; Participatory modeling; Farmer decision-making; Role playing game; Vietnam; Shrimp farming

资金

  1. Wageningen University [14/WI0005]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the Mekong Delta coastal zone, decision makers must weigh trade-offs between sustaining the shrimp sector and thus ensuring economic development, while also promoting sustainable, environmentally friendly practices and planning for climate change adaptation. This study investigates future scenarios for development of shrimp aquaculture using a spatially explicit, agent-based model (ABM) simulating farmers' production system choices. A role playing game (RPG) with farmers was used to calibrate and validate the model. Four scenarios, representing different visions of aquaculture in the next 15 years, were elaborated with decision makers before discussing the different outputs of the model. Iterative consultation with farmers helped to fine-tune the model and identify key parameters and drivers in farmers' decision-making. The recursive process allowed us to construct a model that validly represents reality. Participants stated that use of the RPG improved their insight for planning. Results of the scenarios indicate that (i) intensification of production is unsustainable, (ii) market-based incentives are too limited to stimulate development of an integrated mangrove-shrimp production system and (iii) climate change will cause rapid decline of production in the absence of adaptation measures. RPG appeared to be a valuable method for formalizing local farmers' knowledge and integrating it into the planning approaches used by decision makers. The ABM, thus, can also be considered a medium or communication tool facilitating knowledge-sharing between farmers and decision makers. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据