Contribution of simulation and gaming to natural resource management issues: An introduction

Simulation and Gaming

Volumn 38, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 185-194

  Barreteau, Olivier ^a   Le Page, Christophe ^b,c   Perez, Pascal ^a,d  

^a UMR G EAU   (France)

^b CIRAD   (France)

^c CHULALONGKORN UNIVERSITY   (Thailand)

^d AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Benefits; Collective policy design; Context; Decision making; Ethical issues; Implementation; Natural resource management (NRM); Simulation games; Social empowerment; Social relationships; Socioecological systems; Stakeholders

Indexed keywords

EID: 34548126133     PISSN: 10468781     EISSN: 1552826X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1046878107300660     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. Agrawal, A. (2003). Sustainable governance of common-pool resources: Context, methods, and politics. Annual Review of Anthropology, 32, 243-262.
2. Dewulf, A., Bouwen, R., & Taillieu, T. (2006, June). The multi-actor simulation "Podocarpus National Park" as a tool for teaching and researching issue framing. Paper presented at the 19th annual Conference of the International Association for Conflict Management, Montreal, Canada.
3. Driessen, P.P.J., Glasbergen, P., & Verdaas, C. (2001). Interactive policy making - A model of management for public works. European Journal of Operational Research, 128, 322-337.
4. Duke, R., Geurts, J.L.A. (2004). Policy games for strategic management. Amsterdam: Dutch University Press.
5. Huizinga, J. (1951). Homo Ludens. Paris: Gallimard.
6. Holling, C.S. (2001). Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems. Ecosystems, 4, 390-405.
7. Lansing, J.S., & Kremer, J.N. (1994). Emergent properties of Balinese water temple networks: Coadaptation on a rugged landscape. In C. Langton (Ed.), Artificial life III (pp. 201-223). Santa Fe, NM: Addison-Wesley.
8. Lederman, L.C. (1992). Debriefing: Toward a systematic assessment of theory and practice. Simulation & Gaming, 23(2), 145-160.
9. Meadows, D.L. (2001). Tools for understandings the limits to growth: Comparing a simulation and a game. Simulation & Gaming, 32(4), 522-536.
10. Mermet, L. (1992). Stratégies pour la gestion de l'environnement, la nature comme jeu de société? Paris: L'Harmattan.
11. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolutions of institutions for collective action. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
12. Peck, S.L. (2004). Simulation as experiment: A philosophical reassessment for biological modeling. TRENDS in Ecology and Evolution, 19(10), 530-534.
13. Ryan, T. (2000). The role of simulation gaming in policy making. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 17, 359-364.
14. Schelling, T.C. (1961). Experimental games and bargaining theory. World Politics, 14(1), 47-68.
15. Simonovic, S.P., & Fahmy, H. (1999). A new modeling approach for water resources policy analysis. Water Resources Research, 35(1), 295-304.
16. Star, S.L., & Griesemer, J.R. (1989). Institutional ecology, "translations" and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berleley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 19, 387-420.
17. Steinberg, P.E., & Clark, G.E. (1999). Troubled water? Acquiescence, conflict and the politics of place in watershed management. Political Geography, 18, 477-508.
18. Steins, N.A., & Edwards, M.A. (1999). Platform for collective action in multiple-use common-pool resources. Agriculture and Human Values, 16, 241-255.
19. Stepp, J.R., Jones, E.C., Pavao-Zuckerman, M., Casagrande, D., & Zarger, R.K. (2003). Remarkable properties of human ecosystems. Conservation Ecology, 7(3), 11. Retrieved from http://www.consecol.org/ v017/iss3/art11
20. Walker, B., Carpenter, S., Anderies, J., Abel, N., Cumming, G., Janssen, M., et al. (2002). Resilience management in social-ecological systems: A working hypothesis for a participatory approach. Conservation Ecology, 6(1), 14. Retrieved from http://www.consecol.org/v016/iss1/art14