Page 275 -

274 O. Barreteau et al.

of such a model are joint activities between the researchers and stakeholders. Co-
design workshops or joint application development falls into this category, provided
that there is genuinely no translation of stakeholders’ inputs by the researchers.
Techniques originating from artificial intelligence and knowledge engineering, as
presented above, aim to reach this level, either through the implementation of virtual
agents extending stakeholders or through constraining the interactions between
actors through a computer network. This involvement increases the fidelity of the
model to match stakeholders’ viewpoints and behavioural patterns. However, at the
end of the process, the created model can still be used by members of P without any
control or any road map set by other members of A.

12.4.2.6 Co-building of a Model and Control

A R

P M

This category is the same as the previous one, but actors now have control over
use and dissemination of models which may be produced through the process. This
leads to possible stakeholder appropriation of the models, raising the same issues as
in Sect. 12.4.2.4.

12.4.3 Heterogeneity of Actors

Eversole points out the need for participatory processes to take into account the
complexity of the society involved including power relations, institutions and the
diversity of viewpoints (Eversole 2003). This is all the more true when applied to
the participatory process of social simulation modelling. Most settings presented
in Sect. 12.2 have a limited capacity to involve a large numbers of people in
interactions with a given version of a model. When interactions convey viewpoints
or behavioural patterns, heterogeneity may not appear if no attention is paid to it.
Due to limits in terms of number of participants, participatory approaches that deal
with social simulation modelling involve usually representatives or spokespeople.
The issue of their statistical representativeness is left aside here, as the aim is to
comprehend the diversity of possible viewpoints and behavioural patterns. There
is still an issue of their representativeness through their legitimacy to speak for
the group they represent, as well as their competency to do so. The feedback
of these spokespersons to their group should also be questioned. When issues of