Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
These people facilitate dialogue processes that end up as generators of innovation
processes in the sense described by Villani and Serra [1]. For example, they endorse a
role in the networking between various stakeholders. This networking generates a
process of interaction and then novelty and thus innovation within the socio-
hydrosystem. Stringer and Dougill show that a range of participatory mechanisms can
be employed at different stages of the adaptive cycle, and can work together to create
conditions for social learning and favorable outcomes for diverse water users[2].
Since boundary workers are supposed to generate and increase level of participation,
they increase "social learning" which, in turn, generates new knowledge that is
considered of an innovation.
ABM is an appropriate technique to represent the dynamics of heterogeneous
entities, based on assumptions on how people can communicate with each other and
with their environment [3]. ABM has been increasingly used to simulate the dynamics
of water use and management
[4-7] [8-11] either to understand or to support these
collective action processes.
In order to better understand the dynamics of socio-hydrological systems featuring
involvement of dedicated boundary workers, we seek to analyze the impact of these
new people on the behavior of heterogeneous actors interacting in the same socio-
hydrosystem. On the follow up of previous modeling and simulation efforts to
represent the dynamics of socio-hydrological systems, we use agent based modeling
and simulation to investigate pathways taken by socio-hydrosystems according to
various scenarios of boundary work. This work is in progress. We are currently
testing the feasibility of designing a suitable ABM on the basis of empirical
knowledge, so that it encapsulates main drivers at hand for a river basin manager. In a
first stage we focus on water availability issues as they appear in basins with
irrigation as a major land and water use activity.
This paper is made of three parts. The first part presents the implementation of
participatory devices in water governance and more precisely the role and the actions
of boundary workers. A second part will present the outcomes of interviews with a set
of boundary workers and our articulation of qualitative data and ABM. And in the
third part we will detail the first modeling choice and a structure of the model.
2
Boundary Work as Participatory Interface
There is no agreed definition for “intermediary work”[12] while it has become
increasingly popular. In the follow up of this paper we will name “boundary worker”
the category of people endorsing activities considered as boundary or intermediate
work. It is necessary that it appears as a distinct class of people so that they are “not
captured by the all
‐
encompassing concept of stakeholder” [12]. The technocrats in
basin institutions for example belong to this class. These are between water users and
policy maker. They are environmental specialists and must possess important relational
capacity. They need to harness three types of competences: scientific/technical/ legal.
They are advisers on technical issues and as such participate in project
development. They have also to facilitate working groups in order to relay initiatives
