Page 278 -

12 Participatory Approaches 277

Fig. 12.3 Heterogenous
group involvement
A1

A2

A3

A4
M
A5

A6

A7

12.4.4 Which Configurations Can Meet the Expectations
of the First Section?

In this subsection we revisit the expectations towards the joint use of participatory
approaches and social simulation presented in the first section, through the categori-
sations above. This is a tentative mapping of participatory approach categorisation
with model expectations. Table 12.2 below synthesises this mapping.
The two expectations dealing with increasing a model’s quality often actually use
participants as (sometimes cheap) resources in the simulation modelling process.
The most important stage is simulation, because participants are supposed to
bring missing information to the simulation, as well as the missing complexity.
The minimum level of empowerment is rather low. These processes are hardly
participatory in that sense, because participants are not supposed to benefit from the
process, except a potential payment. A higher level of empowerment might increase
the quality of participants’ involvement in the process through a deeper concern in
the outcome of the simulation. Finally, the heterogeneous group level is obviously
to be respected because it can instil a deep connection between stakeholders and the
model still and concurrently profit from their interactions with each other.
To make simulation models match their intended use, the key stage is the
design process. Stakeholders are supposed to aid the building of an appropriate
model. The main difference between targets of simulation model’s use is in the
necessity to give control over the process to stakeholders in case of policymaking.
New knowledge is of individual benefit to all participants, and the emergence of
fruitful interactions can also become an individual benefit. There are few direct
consequences of this new knowledge. Therefore, control over the process in this