Various tools and methods are used in participatory modelling, at different stages of the process and for different purposes. The diversity of tools and methods can create challenges for stakeholders and modelers when selecting the ones most appropriate for their projects. We offer a systematic overview, assessment, and categorization of methods to assist modelers and stakeholders with their choices and decisions. Most available literature provides little justification or information on the reasons for the use of particular methods or tools in a given study. In most of the cases, it seems that the prior experience and skills of the modelers had a dominant effect on the selection of the methods used. While we have not found any real evidence of this approach being wrong, we do think that putting more thought into the method selection process and choosing the most appropriate method for the project can produce better results. Based on expert opinion and a survey of modelers engaged in participatory processes, we offer practical guidelines to improve decisions about method selection at different stages of the participatory modeling process.

Participatory modeling engages the implicit and explicit knowledge of stakeholders to create formalized and shared representations of reality and has evolved into a field of study as well as a practice. Participatory modeling researchers and practitioners who focus specifically on environmental resources met at the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC) in Annapolis, Maryland, over the course of 2 years to discuss the state of the field and future directions for participatory modeling. What follows is a description of 12 overarching groups of questions that could guide future inquiry.Participatory approaches to resource management must involve those who are affected by the decisions that stem from environmental management decisions (Reed et al., 2009). Environmental resource management often requires a combination of descriptive and normative knowledges as well as local capacity for action (and inaction). Because resource users have such knowledge and capacity, local engagement is crucial in PM. However, there are imbricated layers of power between researchers and locals-often with researchers holding the balance of power due to their increased access to social goods such as money, formal education,

Abstract. Including stakeholders in environmental model building and analysis is an increasingly popular approach to understanding ecological change. This is because stakeholders often hold valuable knowledge about socio-environmental dynamics and collaborative forms of modeling produce important boundary objects used to collectively reason about environmental problems. Although the number of participatory modeling (PM) case studies and the number of researchers adopting these approaches has grown in recent years, the lack of standardized reporting and limited reproducibility have prevented PM's establishment and advancement as a cohesive field of study. We suggest a four-dimensional framework (4P) that includes reporting on dimensions of (1) the Purpose for selecting a PM approach (the why); (2) the Process by which the public was involved in model building or evaluation (the how); (3) the Partnerships formed (the who); and (4) the Products that resulted from these efforts (the what). We highlight four case studies that use common PM software-based approaches (fuzzy cognitive mapping, agent-based modeling, system dynamics, and participatory geospatial modeling) to understand human-environment interactions and the consequences of ecological changes, including bushmeat hunting in Tanzania and Cameroon, agricultural production and deforestation in Zambia, and groundwater management in India. We demonstrate how standardizing communication about PM case studies can lead to innovation and new insights about model-based reasoning in support of ecological policy development. We suggest that our 4P framework and reporting approach provides a way for new hypotheses to be identified and tested in the growing field of PM.

The popularity of both citizen science and participatory modelling has given way to a growing number of case studies that all outline the benefits of more inclusive forms of conservation planning. Citizen science offers volunteers the opportunity to engage in environmental research while participatory modelling engages individuals in community-level environmental decisionmaking. Although both of these public-science collaborations are often said to lead to improved environmental decision-making, evidence for these outcomes in the peer reviewed literature remains sparse. We suggest that combining these fields has promise for developing communitysupported research leading to conservation action. To demonstrate this approach, we present the infrastructure and use of a participatory modelling software called Mental Modeler (http://www.mentalmodeler.org/), used with a citizen science web portal (www.citsci.org) that allows citizen scientists, scientists, and managers to: (1) collaboratively define local conservation issues of shared concern; (2) model and represent assumptions, evidence, and existing information about these issues; (3) run scenarios to discuss potential research or management options; and ultimately (4) co-develop citizen scientific research and conservation plans. Using case study data from two community groups working on locally-defined issues related to land management practices in the US, we demonstrate how coordinated learning through modelling practices can lead to the development of self-organized and co-created conservation action. We conclude that the development of online modelling tools holds strong promise for the fields of both citizen science and conservation biology.

No abstract