Supporting Interdisciplinary Research with Cards-based Workshops - A Case Study on Participatory Planning for Mountain Pastoralism
Authors: 
Thibault Raffaillac, 
Nadia Boukhelifa, Emilie Crouzat, Fabien Stark, Jean-Pierre Müller, Jacques LasseurAuthors Info & Claims
Article No.: 531, Pages 1 - 8
Abstract
Profound transformations are currently impacting the intricate relationships between human pastoral activities and Alpine mountain ecosystems. In this context, we were invited as human-computer interaction practitioners to join an interdisciplinary team, to reinforce the use of computer simulations in meetings with local stakeholders. However, due to the diverse nature of stakeholders involved and their interactions, the specific format of these meetings and the utilization of model simulations remained unclear. To clarify these uncertainties, we designed a cards-based ideation method to collectively plan participatory workshops and envisage if and how information technology tools could be integrated. In this paper, we present the design of our ideation method Cards4Concertation and two workshops that implemented it. We then reflect on our findings with lessons learnt both for designing cards-based activities for ideation within interdisciplinary teams, as well as visualizations for participatory planning and decision-making.
Supplemental Material
PDF File - Workshop 1 Slides
Introductory slides (translated) presented to participants of workshop 1
- Download
- 28.27 KB
PDF File - Workshop 2 Slides
Introductory slides (translated) presented to participants of workshop 2
- Download
- 1.34 MB
- Download
- 71.15 MB
- Transcript
XLSX File - Workshop 2 Analysis
Raw analysis file (in French) that we used to extract the results of the second workshop and code them, sheets are prefixed with a letter indicating which of the two first authors did the codes
- Download
- 63.10 KB
PDF File - Workshop 1 Cards
(in French) - cards that were printed for workshop 1
- Download
- 2.53 MB
PDF File - Workshop 2 Cards
(in French) - cards that were printed for workshop 2
- Download
- 10.95 MB
PDF File - Workshop 1 Synthesis
Summary (translated) of both proposals from the first workshop that was sent back to the research team afterwards
- Download
- 38.80 KB
PDF File - Workshop 2 Questionnaire
Questionnaire sheet (translated) that was given to participants at the end of the second workshop
- Download
- 37.80 KB
References
[1]
Géraldine Abrami, William’s Daré, Raphaëlle Ducrot, Nicolas Salliou, and Pierre Bommel. 2021. Participatory Modelling. In The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods for Social-Ecological Systems. Routledge, London.
[2]
Marine Agogué, Kevin Levillain, and Sophie Hooge. 2015. Gamification of creativity: exploring the usefulness of serious games for ideation. Creativity and innovation management 24, 3 (2015), 415–429.
[3]
Sherry R Arnstein. 1969. A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of planners 35, 4 (1969), 216–224.
[4]
Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2021. Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide (1er édition ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd, Los Angeles London New Delhi Singapore Washington DC Melbourne.
[5]
Matthew Brehmer and Tamara Munzner. 2013. A Multi-Level Typology of Abstract Visualization Tasks. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 19, 12 (Dec. 2013), 2376–2385. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2013.124
[6]
Megan M. Callahan, Alejandra Echeverri, David Ng, Jiaying Zhao, and Terre Satterfield. 2019. Using the Phylo Card Game to Advance Biodiversity Conservation in an Era of Pokémon. Palgrave Communications 5, 1 (July 2019), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0287-9
[7]
Dawn Chatty, Stephan Baas, and Anja Fleig. 2003. Participatory Processes towards Co-Management of Natural Resources in Pastoral Areas of the Middle East. FAO, Rome.
[8]
Herbert H. Clark and Susan E. Brennan. 1991. Grounding in Communication. In Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, US, 127–149. https://doi.org/10.1037/10096-006
[9]
Andrew Crooks, Christian Castle, and Michael Batty. 2008. Key Challenges in Agent-Based Modelling for Geo-Spatial Simulation. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 32, 6 (Nov. 2008), 417–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2008.09.004
[10]
Edward de Bono. 1999. Six Thinking Hats. Back Bay Books, New York.
[11]
Mathieu Dionnet, Amar Imache, Elsa Leteurtre, Jean-Emmanuel Rougier, and Aleksandra Dolinska. 2019. Guide to public participation and facilitation.
[12]
Bruce Edmonds, Christophe Le Page, Mike Bithell, Edmund Chattoe-Brown, Volker Grimm, Ruth Meyer, Cristina Montañola-Sales, Paul Ormerod, Hilton Root, and Flaminio Squazzoni. 2019. Different Modelling Purposes. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 22, 3 (2019), 6.
[13]
Michel Étienne (Ed.). 2014. Companion Modelling: A Participatory Approach to Support Sustainable Development. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8557-0
[14]
Ulrike Felt, Simone Schumann, Claudia G Schwarz, and Michael Strassnig. 2014. Technology of Imagination: A Card-Based Public Engagement Method for Debating Emerging Technologies. Qualitative Research 14, 2 (April 2014), 233–251. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468468
[15]
John Forester. 1999. The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes. Mit Pr, Cambridge, Mass.
[16]
Darren Gergle, Robert E Kraut, and Susan R Fussell. 2013. Using visual information for grounding and awareness in collaborative tasks. Human–Computer Interaction 28, 1 (2013), 1–39.
[17]
Francisco Gutiérrez, Nyi Nyi Htun, Florian Schlenz, Aikaterini Kasimati, and Katrien Verbert. 2019. A Review of Visualisations in Agricultural Decision Support Systems: An HCI Perspective. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 163 (Aug. 2019), 104844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2019.05.053
[18]
Kim Halskov and Peter Dalsgård. 2006. Inspiration Card Workshops. In Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. ACM, University Park PA USA, 2–11. https://doi.org/10.1145/1142405.1142409
[19]
Ulrike Wissen Hayek. 2011. Which is the appropriate 3D visualization type for participatory landscape planning workshops? A portfolio of their effectiveness. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 38, 5 (2011), 921–939.
[20]
ISPM. 2018. Software & Tools.
[21]
Sam Kaner. 2014. Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory Decision-Making (3rd edition ed.). Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, Calif.
[22]
Sophie Labbouz, Bernard Roy, Youssef Diab, and Michel Christen. 2008. Implementing a public transport line: multi-criteria decision-making methods that facilitate concertation. Operational Research 8 (2008), 5–31.
[23]
Ju-Sung Lee, Tatiana Filatova, Arika Ligmann-Zielinska, Behrooz Hassani-Mahmooei, Forrest Stonedahl, Iris Lorscheid, Alexey Voinov, J. Gareth Polhill, Zhanli Sun, and Dawn C. Parker. 2015. The Complexities of Agent-Based Modeling Output Analysis. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 18, 4 (2015), 4. https://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.2897
[24]
John L Lewis and Stephen RJ Sheppard. 2006. Culture and communication: can landscape visualization improve forest management consultation with indigenous communities?Landscape and urban planning 77, 3 (2006), 291–313.
[25]
C M Macal. 2016. Everything You Need to Know about Agent-Based Modelling and Simulation. Journal of Simulation 10, 2 (May 2016), 144–156. https://doi.org/10.1057/jos.2016.7
[26]
Narges Mahyar, Weichen Liu, Sijia Xiao, Jacob Browne, Ming Yang, and Steven P. Dow. 2017. ConsesnsUs: Visualizing Points of Disagreement for Multi-Criteria Collaborative Decision Making. In Companion of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing(CSCW ’17 Companion). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 17–20. https://doi.org/10.1145/3022198.3023269
[27]
Madeleine Manyoky, Ulrike Wissen Hayek, Kurt Heutschi, Reto Pieren, and Adrienne Grêt-Regamey. 2014. Developing a GIS-Based Visual-Acoustic 3D Simulation for Wind Farm Assessment. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information 3, 1 (March 2014), 29–48. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi3010029
[28]
Olivier Mora, Chantal Le Mouël, Marie de Lattre-Gasquet, Catherine Donnars, Patrice Dumas, Olivier Réchauchère, Thierry Brunelle, Stéphane Manceron, Elodie Marajo-Petitzon, Clémence Moreau, Marc Barzman, Agneta Forslund, and Pauline Marty. 8 juil. 2020. Exploring the Future of Land Use and Food Security: A New Set of Global Scenarios. PLOS ONE 15, 7 (8 juil. 2020), e0235597. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0235597
[29]
Simone Mora, Francesco Gianni, and Monica Divitini. 2017. Tiles: A Card-based Ideation Toolkit for the Internet of Things. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. ACM, Edinburgh United Kingdom, 587–598. https://doi.org/10.1145/3064663.3064699
[30]
Ellie Nasr-Azadani, Denice H. Wardrop, and Robert P. Brooks. 2023. Pathways for the utilization of visualization techniques in designing participatory natural resource policy and management. Journal of Environmental Management 333 (May 2023), 117407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117407
[31]
OpenAI. 2023. Whisper. OpenAI.
[32]
OSF. 2022. Workshop Design Cards. https://openseriousgames.org/osg-606-workshop-design-cards/.
[33]
Dorian Peters, Lian Loke, and Naseem Ahmadpour. 2021. Toolkits, cards and games–a review of analogue tools for collaborative ideation. CoDesign 17, 4 (2021), 410–434.
[34]
Thibault Raffaillac, Nadia Boukhelifa, Emilie Crouzat, Fabien Stark, Jean-Pierre Müller, and Jacques Lasseur. 2023. Développement d’une Interface de Simulation Multi-Agents Pour La Gestion Concertée Des Territoires Pastoraux de Moyenne Montagne. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 34th Conference on l’Interaction Humain-Machine(IHM ’23 Adjunct). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3577590.3589606
[35]
Robin Roy and James Warren. 2018. Card-Based Tools for Creative and Systematic Design. In Design Research Society Conference 2018. Design Research Society, UK, 1075–1087. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2018.284
[36]
Puripant Ruchikachorn and Klaus Mueller. 2015. Learning visualizations by analogy: Promoting visual literacy through visualization morphing. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics 21, 9 (2015), 1028–1044.
[37]
Julie Ryschawy, Justine Faure, Fernanda G. Moojen, and Vincent Thenard. 2021. Serious Game: A Cutting-Edge Tool for Stakeholders to Redesign Livestock Systems towards Agroecology. In 72. Annual Meeting of the European Federation of Animal Science (EAAP), Vol. 27. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, 464.
[38]
Eliane Schreuder, Jan van Erp, Alexander Toet, and Victor L. Kallen. 2016. Emotional Responses to Multisensory Environmental Stimuli: A Conceptual Framework and Literature Review. SAGE Open 6, 1 (Jan. 2016), 2158244016630591. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016630591
[39]
Olaf Schroth, Ulrike Wissen Hayek, Eckart Lange, Stephen RJ Sheppard, and Willy A Schmid. 2011. Multiple-case study of landscape visualizations as a tool in transdisciplinary planning workshops. Landscape Journal 30, 1 (2011), 53–71.
[40]
B. Shneiderman. 1996. The Eyes Have It: A Task by Data Type Taxonomy for Information Visualizations. In Proceedings 1996 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages. IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 336–343. https://doi.org/10.1109/VL.1996.545307
[41]
Frank Siedlok and Paul Hibbert. 2014. The Organization of Interdisciplinary Research: Modes, Drivers and Barriers. International Journal of Management Reviews 16, 2 (2014), 194–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12016
[42]
Roderick I. Swaab, Tom Postmes, Peter Neijens, Marius H. Kiers, and Adrie C.M. Dumay. 2002. Multiparty Negotiation Support: The Role of Visualization’s Influence on the Development of Shared Mental Models. Journal of Management Information Systems 19, 1 (July 2002), 129–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2002.11045708
[43]
Silvia Tobias, Tobias Buser, and Matthias Buchecker. 2016. Does Real-Time Visualization Support Local Stakeholders in Developing Landscape Visions?Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 43, 1 (Jan. 2016), 184–197. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265813515603866
[44]
Paul Tol. 2021. Qualitative Color Schemes. https://personal.sron.nl/~pault/.
[45]
Bärbel Tress and Gunther Tress. 2003. Scenario Visualisation for Participatory Landscape Planning—a Study from Denmark. Landscape and Urban Planning 64, 3 (July 2003), 161–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00219-0
[46]
Alexey Voinov, Karen Jenni, Steven Gray, Nagesh Kolagani, Pierre D. Glynn, Pierre Bommel, Christina Prell, Moira Zellner, Michael Paolisso, Rebecca Jordan, Eleanor Sterling, Laura Schmitt Olabisi, Philippe J. Giabbanelli, Zhanli Sun, Christophe Le Page, Sondoss Elsawah, Todd K. BenDor, Klaus Hubacek, Bethany K. Laursen, Antonie Jetter, Laura Basco-Carrera, Alison Singer, Laura Young, Jessica Brunacini, and Alex Smajgl. 2018. Tools and Methods in Participatory Modeling: Selecting the Right Tool for the Job. Environmental Modelling & Software 109 (Nov. 2018), 232–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.08.028
[47]
Christiane Wölfel and Timothy Merritt. 2013. Method Card Design Dimensions: A Survey of Card-Based Design Tools. In Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2013(Lecture Notes in Computer Science), Paula Kotzé, Gary Marsden, Gitte Lindgaard, Janet Wesson, and Marco Winckler (Eds.). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 479–486. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40483-2_34
Index Terms
- Supporting Interdisciplinary Research with Cards-based Workshops - A Case Study on Participatory Planning for Mountain Pastoralism
Recommendations
Can persona facilitate ideation? a comparative study on effects of personas in brainstorming
INTERACT'11: Proceedings of the 13th IFIP TC 13 international conference on Human-computer interaction - Volume Part IVPersonas are results from user studies and viewed as a design and a communication tool in user-centered design processes. There were many studies addressing how to create good personas but what types of personas and how personas could help in ideation ...
2000 Copper Mountain Conference
* Special Issue 2000 Copper Mountain ConferenceThe Copper Mountain Conferences, organized annually by the University of Colorado in cooperation with SIAM, focus alternately on multigrid methods and iterative methods. The conferences have built a reputation for the relaxed atmosphere that makes it ...
WikiSym 2011 in Mountain View, California
This report presents a summary of WikiSym 2011, the 7th International Symposium on Wikis and Open Collaboration that was held in Mount View (CA, USA) on October 3-5, 2011. The symposium was hosted by Microsoft Research at their Silicon Valley Campus. ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
May 2024
4761 pages
ISBN:9798400703317
DOI:10.1145/3613905
Copyright © 2024 Owner/Author.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 11 May 2024
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Extended-abstract
- Research
- Refereed limited
Conference
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 6,164 of 23,696 submissions, 26%
Upcoming Conference
CHI 2025
- Sponsor:
- sigchi
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 164Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)164
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)12
Reflects downloads up to 09 Jan 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign inFull Access
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderFull Text
View this article in Full Text.
Full TextHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML Format