Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Analytical Framework of Social Learning Facilitated by Participatory Methods

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Systemic Practice and Action Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Social learning among different stakeholders is often a goal in problem solving contexts such as environmental management. Participatory methods (e.g., group model-building and role playing games) are frequently assumed to stimulate social learning. Yet understanding if and why this assumption is justified is quite limited. Difficulties arise from the complexity and context-dependence of processes influencing social learning. Furthermore, continuing discussion of the exact meaning and theoretical basis of social learning result in a limited capacity to assess and evaluate whether social learning has occurred. In this paper we introduce an analytical framework to develop an in depth understanding of essential processes underlying social learning facilitated by participatory methods. Concepts from different fields of science are discussed and integrated, including resource management, small group research and learning research. The individual and group perspectives are brought together via mental models and emergent roles. We added the direction of learning, being either convergent or divergent, to be able to explore if and when personal views on a problem converge into a shared understanding of a problem. The analysis of convergence and divergence of learning is facilitated through the use of the mental model concept. Methods for measurement of proposed indicators for social learning are also discussed. The framework developed provides a conceptual basis for the analysis of social learning facilitated by participatory methods and an operationalization for application in empirical research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. There is an ongoing discussion about the effects of participation, including its effects on social learning (Cooke and Kothari 2001; Kesby 2005; Reed 2008).

  2. A framework of organizational learning considering these influences as dynamic processes is presented by Crossan et al. (1999).

  3. The term action situation was coined by Ostrom (2009) in her Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework. Pahl-Wostl et al. (2010) took up this concept in their MTF.

  4. Here we refer to this as shared understanding, being aware that there are a lot of different terms for partly overlapping concepts (Akkerman et al. 2007; Kim 2009).

References

  • Akkerman S, Van den Bossche P, Admiraal W, Gijselaers W, Segers M, Simons RJ, Kirschner P (2007) Reconsidering group cognition: from conceptual confusion to a boundary area between cognitive and socio-cultural perspectives? Educ Res Rev 2(1):39–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Argyris C, Schön D (1978) Organizational learning: a theory of action perspective. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura A (1977) Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke B, Kothari U (eds) (2001) Participation: the new tyranny?. Zed Books, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Craik KJW (1943) The nature of explanation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Crossan MM, Lane HW, White RE (1999) An organizational learning framework: from intuition to institution. Acad Manag Rev 24(3):522–537

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewulf A, Gray B, Putnam L, Lewicki R, Aarts N, Bouwen R, van Woerkum C (2009) Disentangling approaches to framing in conflict and negotiation research: a meta-paradigmatic perspective. Hum Relat 62(2):155–193. doi:10.1177/0018726708100356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden C, Vangen S (1995) An analysis of shared meaning in collaboration. Paper presented at the second international workshop on multi-organisational partnerships: working together across organisational boundaries. University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, 1995

  • Eden C, Ackermann F, Cropper S (1992) The analysis of cause maps. J Manag Stud 29(3):309–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etienne M, Du Toit DR, Pollard S (2011) ARDI: a co-construction method for participatory modeling in natural resources management. Ecol Soc 16(1):44

    Google Scholar 

  • Flood RL, Romm NR (1996) Diversity management: triple loop learning. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Folke C, Hahn T, Olsson P, Norberg J (2005) Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Annu Rev Environ Resour 30:441–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert NG, Troitzsch K (1999) Simulation for the social scientist. Open University Press, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Haug C, Huitemaa D, Wenzler I (2011) Learning through games? Evaluating the learning effect of a policy exercise on European climate policy. Technol Forecast Soc Change 78(6):968–981

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ison R, Roling N, Watson D (2007) Challenges to science and society in the sustainable management and use of water: investigating the role of social learning. Environ Sci Policy 10(6):499–511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird PN (1983) Mental models. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones NA, Ross H, Lynam T, Perez P, Leitch A (2011) Mental models: an interdisciplinary synthesis of theory and methods. Ecol Soc 16(1):46

    Google Scholar 

  • Kesby M (2005) Retheorizing empowerment-through-participation as a performance in space: beyond tyranny to transformation. Signs 30(4):2037–2065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim H (2009) In search of a mental model-like concept for group-level modeling. Syst Dyn Rev 25:207–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolkman MJ (2005) Controversies in water management: frames and mental models. Dissertation, University of Twente

  • Kolkman MJ, Kok M, Van der Veen A (2005) Mental model mapping as a new tool to analyse the use of information in decision-making in integrated water management. Phys Chem Earth 30:317–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lave J, Wenger E (1991) Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge university press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Levine JM, Moreland RL (1990) Progress in small group research. Annu Rev Psychol 41:585–634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynam T, Brown K (2011) Mental models in human-environment interactions: theory, policy implications, and methodological explorations. Ecol Soc 17(3):24

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynam T, Mathevet R, Etienne M, Stone-Jovicich S, Leitch A, Jones N, Ross H, Du Toit D, Pollard S, Biggs H, Perez P (2012) Waypoints on a journey of discovery: mental models in human-environment interactions. Ecol Soc 17(3):23

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathevet R, Etienne M, Lynam T, Calvet C (2011) Water management in the Camargue Biosphere Reserve: insights from comparative mental models analysis. Ecol Soc 16(1):43

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohammed S, Klimoski R, Rentsch JR (2000) The measurement of team mental models: we have no shared schema. Organ Res Methods 3:123–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morine-Dershimer G (1992) Tracing conceptual change in preservice teachers. Teach Teach Educ 9(1):15–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newig J, Glaube V, Berkhoff K, Kaldrack K, Kastens B, Lutz J, Schlussmeier B, Adensam H, Haberl H, Pahl-Wostl C, Colard A, Aigner B, Maier R, Prunz W (2007) Partizipative Modellbildung, Akteurs- und Ökosystemanalyse in Agrarintensivregionen. Schlussbericht des deutsch-österreichischen Verbundprojekts. In: Matthies M (ed) Beiträge des Instituts für Umweltsystemforschung der Universität Osnabrück, Osnabrück

  • Newig J, Haberl H, Pahl-Wostl C, Rothman DS (2008) Formalised and non-formalised methods in resource management—knowledge and social learning in participatory processes: an Introduction. Syst Pract Action Res 21:381–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newig J, Günther D, Pahl-Wostl C (2010) Synapses in the network: learning in governance networks in the context of environmental management. Ecol Soc 15(4):24

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman DA (1983) Some observations on mental models. In: Gentner D, Stevens A (eds) Mental models. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 7–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak JD, Gowin DB (1984) Learning how to learn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (2009) Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wostl C (2009) A conceptual framework for analysing adaptive capacity and multi-level learning processes in resource governance regimes. Glob Environ Change 19:354–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wostl C, Hare M (2004) Processes of social learning in integrated resources management. J Commun Appl Soc Psychol 14:193–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wostl C, Mostert E, Tàbara D (2008a) The growing importance of social learning in water resources management and sustainability science. Ecol Soc 13(1):24

    Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wostl C, Tàbara D, Bouwen R, Craps M, Dewulf A, Mostert E, Ridder D (2008b) The importance of social learning and culture for sustainable water management. Ecol Econ 64(3):484–495. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.08.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wostl C, Holtz G, Kastens B, Knieper C (2010) Analyzing complex water governance regimes: the management and transition framework. Environ Sci Policy 13(7):571–581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wostl C, Becker G, Sendzimir J, Knieper C (in press) How multi-level societal learning processes facilitate transformative change: a comparative case study analysis on flood management. Ecol Soc

  • Posner GJ, Strike KA, Hewson PW, Gertzog WA (1982) Accomodation of a scientific conception: towards a theory of conceptual change. Sci Educ 66(2):211–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raadgever GT (2009) Does collaboration enhance learning? The challenge of learning from collaborative water management research. Dissertation, Technische Universiteit Delft

  • Reed MS (2008) Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biol Conserv 141(10):2417–2431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed MS, Evely AC, Cundill G, Fazey I, Glass J, Laing A, Newig J, Parrish B, Prell C, Raymond C, Stringer LC (2010) What is social learning? Ecol Soc 15(4):r1

    Google Scholar 

  • Richter D (2008) Teach and diagnose political knowledge: primary school students working with concept maps. Citizsh Teach Learn 5(1):60–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Romney AK, Weller SC, Batchelder WH (1986) Culture as consensus: a theory of culture and informant accuracy. Am Anthropol 88(2):313–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roschelle J (1992) Learning by collaborating: convergent conceptual change. J Learn Sci 2(3):235–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholz G, Austermann M, Kaldrack K, Pahl-Wostl C (under review) A method to analyse social learning and evaluate group model building sessions by comparing individual mental models and group models

  • Sendzimir J, Flachner Z, Pahl-Wostl C, Knieper C (2010) Stalled regime transition in the upper Tisza river basin: the dynamics of linked action situations. Environ Sci. Policy 13:604–619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senge PM (1997) The fifth discipline. Meas Bus Excel 1(3):46–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siebenhüner B (2004) Social learning and sustainability science: which role can stakeholder participation play? Int J Sustain Dev 7(2):146–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stringer LC, Dougill AJ, Fraser E, Hubacek K, Prell C, Reed MS (2006) Unpacking “participation” in the adaptive management of social–ecological systems: a critical review. Ecol Soc 11(2):39

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bossche P, Gijselaers WH, Segers M, Kirschner PA (2006) Social and cognitive factors driving teamwork in collaborative learning environments: team learning beliefs and behaviors. Small Group Res 37(5):490–521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Mierlo B, Leeuwis C, Smits R, Klein Woolthuis R (2010) Learning towards system innovation: evaluating a systemic instrument. Technol Forecast Soc Change 77:318–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vennix J (1996) Group model building: facilitating team learning using system dynamics. Wiley & Sons, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The first author would like to thank Georg Holtz, Nadine Methner, Kathrin Knüppe and Johannes Halbe for critical comments and discussions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Environmental Systems Research, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany

    Geeske Scholz & Claudia Pahl-Wostl

  2. Public Administration and Policy Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands

    Art Dewulf

Authors
  1. Geeske Scholz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Art Dewulf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Claudia Pahl-Wostl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Geeske Scholz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Scholz, G., Dewulf, A. & Pahl-Wostl, C. An Analytical Framework of Social Learning Facilitated by Participatory Methods. Syst Pract Action Res 27, 575–591 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-013-9310-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-013-9310-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation