Free Access
Issue
Nat. Sci. Soc.
Volume 21, Number 1, janvier-mars 2013
Page(s) 24 - 34
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/nss/2013062
Published online 28 June 2013
  • Arghiros, D., 2001. Democracy, Development and Decentralization in Provincial Thailand, Richmond (Surrey), Curzon & Nordic Institute of Asian Studies. [Google Scholar]
  • Argyris, C., 1995. Savoir pour agir : surmonter les obstacles à l’apprentissage organisationnel, Paris, InterÉditions. [Google Scholar]
  • Avenier, M.-J., Schmitt, C. (Eds), 2007. La Construction de savoirs pour l’action, Savoir & Action, Rencontres, Paris, L’Harmattan. [Google Scholar]
  • Barbier, R., 2005. Quand le public prend ses distances avec la participation : topiques de l’ironie ordinaire, Natures Sciences Sociétés, 13, 258-265. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Barnaud, C., D’Aquino, P., Daré, W., Fourage, C., Mathevet, R., Trébuil, G., 2010a. Les asymétries de pouvoir dans les processus d’accompagnement, in Étienne, M. (Ed.), La Modélisation d’accompagnement : une démarche participative en appui au développement durable, Paris, Quae, 125-152. [Google Scholar]
  • Barnaud, C., Page, C. L., Dumrongrojwatthana, P., Trébuil, G., 2013. Spatial representations are not neutral: Lessons from a participatory agent-based modelling process in a land-use conflict, Environmental Modelling & Software, 45, 150-159. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Barnaud, C., Promburom, T., Trébuil, G., Bousquet, F., 2007. An evolving simulation and gaming process to facilitate adaptive watershed management in mountainous Northern Thailand, Simulation and Gaming, 38, 398-420. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Barnaud, C., Trébuil, G., Dumrongrojwatthana, P., Marie, J., 2008a. Area study prior to companion modelling to integrate multiple interests in upper watershed management of Northern Thailand, Southeast Asian Studies, 45, 4, 559-585. [Google Scholar]
  • Barnaud, C., Trébuil, G., Promburom, P., Bousquet, F., 2008b. La modélisation d’accompagnement pour une gestion concertée des ressources renouvelables en Thaïlande, Économie Rurale, 303/304/305, 39-59. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Barnaud, C., Van Paassen, A., Trébuil, G., Promburom, T., Bousquet, F., 2010b. Dealing with power games in a companion modelling process: Lessons from community water management in Thailand highlands, Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education, 16, 1, 55-74. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Barreteau, O., Bousquet, F., Attonaty, J., 2001. Role-playing games for opening the black box of multi-agent systems: Method and lessons of its application to Senegal River valley irrigated systems, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 4, 2 (online: http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/4/2/5.html). [Google Scholar]
  • Becu, N., Neef, A., Schreinemachers, P., Sangkapitux, C., 2008. Participatory modeling to support collective decision-making: Potential and limits of stakeholder involvement, Journal of Land Use Policy, 25, 498-509, doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2007.11.002. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Boltanski, L., Thévenot, L., 1991. De la justification : les économies de la grandeur, Paris, Gallimard. [Google Scholar]
  • Borrini-Feyerabend, G., Pimbert, M., Farvar, M.T., Kothari, A., Renard, Y., 2004. Sharing Power: Learning by Dowing in Co-management of Natural Resources Throughout the World, Cenesta, Tehran, IIED, IUCN/CEESP/CMWG. [Google Scholar]
  • Boulding, K.E., 1989. Three Faces of Power, Newbury Park (CA), Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
  • Bousquet, F., Barreteau, O., d’Aquino, P., Etienne, M., Boissau, S., Aubert, S., Le Page, C., Babin, D., Castella, J.C., 2002. Multi-agent systems and role games: Collective learning processes for ecosystem management, in Janssen, M. (Ed.), Complexity and Ecosystem Management: The Theory and Practice of Multi-agent Approaches, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishers, 248-284. [Google Scholar]
  • Bousquet, F., Barreteau, O., Mullon, C., Weber, J., 1996. Modélisation d’accompagnement : systèmes multi-agents et gestion des ressources renouvelables. Communication au colloque Quel environnement au XXIe siècle ? Environnement, maîtrise du long terme et démocratie, Abbaye de Frontevraud, 8-11 septembre. [Google Scholar]
  • Carnevale, J.P., 2006. Creativity in the outcomes of conflict, in Deutsch, M., Coleman, P.T., Marcus, E.C, Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice, 2nd edition, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, 414-435. [Google Scholar]
  • Casabianca, F., Albaladejo, C., 1997. Des multiples légitimités de la recherche-action, in Albaladejo, C., Casabianca, F., La Recherche-action : ambitions, pratiques, débats,Versailles, Inra éditions. [Google Scholar]
  • Chambers, R., Pacey, A., Thrupp, L.A., 1989. Farmer First: Farmer Innovation and Agricultural Research, London, Intermediate Technology Publications. [Google Scholar]
  • Chanal, V., Lesca, H., Martinet, A.-C., 1997. Recherche ingénierique et connaissances procédurales en sciences de gestion : réflexions épistémologiques et méthodologiques, Revue Française de Gestion, 116, 41-51. [Google Scholar]
  • Checkland, P., 1981. Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, Chichester, John Wiley and Sons. [Google Scholar]
  • ComMod (collectif), 2005. La modélisation comme outil d’accompagnement, Natures Sciences Sociétés, 13, 165-168. [Google Scholar]
  • Cooke, B., Kothari, U. (Eds), 2001. Participation: The New Tyranny?, London, New York, Zed Books. [Google Scholar]
  • D’Aquino, P., 2009. La participation comme élément d’une stratégie globale d’intervention : l’approche « gestion autonome progressive », Cahiers Agricultures, 18, 5, 433-440. [Google Scholar]
  • Daré, W., Aubert, S., Bah, A., Botta, A., Diop Gaye, I., Fourage, C., Lajoie, G., Leclerc, G., 2008. Difficultés de la participation en recherche-action : retour d’expériences de modélisation d’accompagnement en appui à l’aménagement du territoire, VertigO, 8, 1, 22. [Google Scholar]
  • Daré, W., Fourage, C., Gaye, I.D., 2007. Positionnement des sociologues dans la démarche de modélisation Domino, Nouvelles Perspectives en Sciences Sociales, 2, 2, 103-127. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Edmunds, D., Wollenberg, E., 2001. A strategic approach to multistakeholder negociations, Development and Change, 32, 231-253. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Eversol, R., 2003. Managing the pitfalls of participatory development: Some insight from Australia, World Development, 31, 5, 781-795. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Faysse, N., 2006. Troubles on the way: An analysis of the challenges faced by multistakeholder platforms, Natural Resources Forum, 30, 219-229. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Freire, P., 1983. Pédagogie des opprimés, suivi de Conscientisation et révolution, Paris, Maspero. [Google Scholar]
  • Funtowicz, S.O., Ravetz, J.R., 1994. The worth of a songbird: Ecological economics as a post-normal science, Ecological Economics, 10, 3, 197-207. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Giddens, A., 1984. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration, Cambridge (UK), Polity Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Guijt, I., Shah, M., 1998. Waking up to power, conflict and process, in Guijt, I., Shah, M., The Myth of Community: Gender Issues in Participatory Development, London, Intermediate Technology Publications. [Google Scholar]
  • Habermas, J., 1987. Théorie de l’agir communicationnel, Paris, Fayard. [Google Scholar]
  • Innes, J.E., 2004. Consensus building: Clarifications for the critics, Planning Theory, 3, 1, 5-20. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Jackson, M.C., 2000. Systems Approaches to Management, New York, Kluwer Academic, Plenum Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  • Johnson, N., Lilja, N., Ashby, J. A., Garcia, J. A., 2004. The practice of participatory research and gender analysis in natural resource management, Natural Resources Forum, 28, 3, 189-200. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Kahn, F., Lecourt, D., Moulin, A.-M. (Eds), 2007. Y a-t-il une éthique propre à la recherche pour le développement ?, Paris, IRD. [Google Scholar]
  • Lavigne-Delville, P., Selamna, N. E., Mathieu, M. (Eds), 2000. Les Enquêtes participatives en débat : ambition, pratiques et enjeux, Paris, Karthala, Icra, Gret. [Google Scholar]
  • Leeuwis, C., 2000. Reconceptualizing participation for sustainable rural development: Towards a negotiation approach, Development and Change, 31, 931-959. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lewin, K., 1951. Field Theory in Social Science: Selected Theoretical Papers, New York, Harper and Row. [Google Scholar]
  • Liu, M., 1997. Fondements et pratiques de la recherche-action, Paris, L’Harmattan. [Google Scholar]
  • Mathevet, R., Antona, M., Barnaud, C., Fourage, C., Trébuil, G., Aubert, S., 2010. Contextes et dépendances des contextes d’accompagnement, in Etienne, M., La Modélisation d’accompagnement : une démarche participative en appui au développement durable, Paris, Quae, 103-123. [Google Scholar]
  • Mazoyer, M., Roudart, L., 1997. Histoire des agricultures du monde : du néolithique à la crise contemporaine, Paris, Seuil. [Google Scholar]
  • Mermet, L., Billé, R., Leroy, M., Narcy, J.-B., Poux, X., 2005. L’analyse stratégique de la gestion environnementale : un cadre théorique pour penser l’efficacité en matière d’environnement, Natures Sciences Sociétés, 13, 127-137. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Mormont, M., 2009. Le sociologue dans l’action collective face au risque, Développement Durable et Territoires (online: http://hdl.handle.net/2268/25238). [Google Scholar]
  • Munoz, I., Paredes, M., Thorp, R., 2007. Group inequalities and the nature and power of collective action: Case studies from Peru, World Development, 35, 11, 1929-1946. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Neef, A. (Ed.), 2005. Participatory Approaches for Sustainable Land Use in Southeast Asia, Bangkok, White Lotus. [Google Scholar]
  • Nelson, N., Wright, S., 1995. Participation and power, in Nelson, N., Wright, S., Power and Participatory Development: Theory and Practice, London, Intermediate Technology Publications, 1-18. [Google Scholar]
  • Ostrom, E., Gardner, R., Walker, J., 1994. Rules, games & common-pool resources, Michigan, University of Michigan Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Petit, S., Fleury, P., Michel, V., Mougenot, C., 2008. Raconter la recherche-intervention : retour sur trois opérations de gestion de la biodiversité, Natures Sciences Sociétés, 16, 326-336. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Pretty, J., 1998. Participatory learning for integrated farming, in Foo, E.-L., Senta, T.D. (Eds), Integrated Bio-Systems in Zero Emissions Applications: Proceedings of the Internet Conference on Integrated Bio-Systems. [Google Scholar]
  • Rawls, J., 1997. Théorie de la justice, Paris, Seuil. [Google Scholar]
  • Ribot, J.C., 2001. Integral local development: “accomodating multiple interests” through entrustment and accountable representation, International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, 1, 3/4, 327-350. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Röling, N., Wagemakers, M. A. (Eds), 1998. Facilitating Sustainable Agriculture: Participatory Learning and Adaptive Management in Times of Environmental Uncertainty, Cambridge (UK), Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Sato, J., 2003. Public land for the people: The institutional basis of community forestry in Thailand. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 34, 2, 329-346. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Soulard, C.-T., Compagnone, C., Lémery, B., 2007. La recherche en partenariat : entre fiction et friction, Natures Sciences Sociétés, 15, 1, 13-22. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Stassart, P.M., Mormont, M., Jamar, D., 2008. La recherche-intervention pour une transition vers le développement durable, Économie Rurale, 306, 8-22. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Trébuil, G., Shinawatra-Ekasingh, B., Bousquet, F., Thong-Ngam, C., 2002. Multi-agent systems companion modelling for integrated watershed management: A Northern Thailand experience, in Jianchu, X., Mikesell, S., Landscapes of Diversity:Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on Montane Mainland Southeast Asia (MMSEA 3), Lijiang, Yunnan, Yunnan Science and Technology Press, 25-28 August, 349-358. [Google Scholar]
  • Ulrich, W., 1983. Critical Heuristics of Social Planning: A New Approach to Practical Philosophy, Bern, Haupt. [Google Scholar]
  • Wollenberg, E., Anderson, J., Edmunds, D., 2001. Pluralism and the less powerful: Accommodating multiple interests in local forest management, International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, 1, 3/4, 199-222. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.