Ten Steps Qualitative Modelling: Development and Validation of Conceptual Institutional-Social-Ecological Model of Public Open Space (POS) Governance and Quality

Abstract

Compared to the literature on quantitative and statistical modelling, there is a lack of research on qualitative environmental-related modelling, which focuses on a conceptual-theory-based model. Therefore, this paper attempts to formulate a qualitative institutional-social-ecological model, by showcasing how the 10 steps modelling is relevant and is applied to the institutional-property-rights model of neighbourhood residential commons. Using an instance from one case study (i.e., Sabah, Malaysia), a conceptual problem-solution model describing local property-rights system tragedies of public open space (POS) governance and quality, and the emergence of self-governing collective action was demonstrated. Methodologically, the modelling procedures were specified as a 10-step process, starting with setting the objectives of the model and concluding with the validation of suitability and usefulness of the model. The validation was conducted using the experts' opinion, via the semi-structured interviews with five public officials. With slight necessary amendments, the model was proven practical, useful, flexible, reliable and valid in serving its purposes in understanding and predicting the effects of local property-rights system tragedies on POS commons dilemmas, and the subsequent emergence and necessity of a self-governing solution. This local model provides policy insights to the local public officials, which facilitate their institutional-social-ecological decision-making process that helps improve local POS governance and quality.Resources 2018, 7, 62 2 of 23 framework for qualitative environmental-related modelling has been less paid attention to. Against this background, this study focuses more on qualitative social-ecological system modelling. That is this local model nested few supplemental quantitative/statistical approaches within it; thus, as a whole, the model design is still called qualitative (see Forbus [4] on the qualitative mathematics, which is considered as qualitative modelling). This paper employs notable Jakeman's et al. [3] model development and validation steps. This is because Jakeman et al. [3] outlined clear ten steps modelling to explain and support resource management and use system, which is deemed relevant to this study's social-ecological governance dimension. More essentially, although this 10-step modelling is originally and primarily crafted for quantitative modelling, it can also be sufficiently generic and inclusive for qualitative modelling [5,6] and is applicable in environmental and economic related fields. See Jorgensen and Bendoricchio's [7] and Wainwright and Mulligan's [8] ecological and environmental modelling, and Grafton et al. [9] for economic-environmental systems. Based on our literature search, the application of the ten steps in qualitative-designed modelling is indeed very limited; therefore, such attempt is worth to be explored in this study so that it may methodologically value-add to the 10-step modelling framework, regarding its application validity and flexi...

Interrelationships between Public Open Space, Common Pool Resources, Publicness Levels and Commons Dilemmas: A Different Perspective in Urban Planning

“…Their theory associates the small issues and dilemmas of a neighbourhood community/city with more serious cooccurring dilemmas. For instance, the shirking of POS management and maintenance that cause poor cleanliness, landscaping and total disuse and underuse (space abandonment) issues may lead to severe forms of overexploitation, such as free-riding, which then contributes to safety and security issues (criminal activities, e.g., loitering and panhandling issues) and private physical exclusion that cause de facto inaccessible private spaces (Ling and Leng, 2018;Ling et al, 2016). Whether it is self-interested or opportunism triggered CPR POS dilemmas, this does not entail that CPR (resource) is always a problem per se; instead, it is essential to identify the factors (e.g., institutional design or physical characteristics) that are possible to cause and aggravate the present commons issues (Ostrom, 2005;Webster, 2007).…”

“…There are many studies undertaken on the protection and preservation of POS quality and sustainability, encompassing perception and socioeconomic features: attitudes (preferences) of stakeholders towards POS protection (Broussard et al, 2008;Maruani and Amit-Cohen, 2011), public participation in planning policy (Steelman and Hess, 2009), spatial and architectural POS design and planning models (Maruani and Amit-Cohen, 2007;Colding et al, 2013), and "conventional" state planning policies with edict (Koomen et al, 2008) and critical planning policy implementation and enforcement (Bengston et al, 2004). However, the issues of notably stateowned POS quality with respect to over-exploitation, misuse, underinvestment, and mismanagement, including vandalism (broken POS facilities), graffiti, inaccessible spaces, exclusion, illegal land and space (POS) conversion (e.g., to commercial spaces), insecure and unsafe spaces, cleanliness, congestion, poor landscaping and squatters settlement encroachment issues, are growing and prevalent, especially in developing countries of Southeast Asia including Malaysia, thereby causing POS negative externalities and market failures (World Bank, 2015;Ling et al, 2016Foster and Laione, 2016;Ling and Leng, 2018). Thus, a question is posed, i.e., why are POS issues still rampant and occurring, despite the above research undertaken?…”

“…More precisely, the knowledge and application of the commons or CPR in the context POS planning and management (called new commons) are still limited (Colding et al, 2013;Nagendra and Ostrom, 2014;Brown, 2015;Foster and Laione, 2016;Ling et al, 2016;Ling and Leng, 2018). Although the literature on natural resources (old) commons and CPRs (e.g., agriculture and fishery) is copious, it remains a challenge to transpose CPR insights into the urban and neighbourhood-residential resources context in a way that captures the complexity of the urbanneighbourhood, the way that density of an land area, the proximity of its inhabitants, and the diversity of users interact with a host of tangible and intangible resources in neighbourhood-city areas (see Borch and Kornberger, 2015).…”