Using Participatory Modeling to Enable Local Innovation Through Complexity Governance

  • Joshua UebelherrEmail author
  • David M. Hondula
  • Erik W. Johnston
Part of the Economic Complexity and Evolution book series (ECAE)


Societies are addressing increasingly complex governance challenges that necessitate collaboration between many organizations. Harnessing the emergent abilities of these collective efforts requires new administrative strategies and techniques, but if done well also provides promise for addressing important social challenges. In Maricopa County Arizona the Department of Public Health reports 632 confirmed heat-associated deaths from 2006 to 2013. In response, public health and other organizations coordinate across the County with a collection of public and private organizations and non-profit groups to provide services for heat relief as cooling centers during the summer. Here we show how participatory modeling can be used as a tool to enable this ad-hoc collaborative network to self-organize to provide more efficient service. The voluntary nature of the network imposes a structure on cooling service provision as the locations and open hours of centers are largely based on other ongoing operations. There are consequently both gaps and redundancies in spatial and temporal cooling center availability that exist when the network is examined from a system perspective. Over the last year, we engaged members of the heat relief community in central Arizona in a participatory modeling effort to help improve a simple prototype agent-based model that visualizes relevant components of the regional Heat Relief Network’s function. Through this process, the members developed systemic awareness of both the challenges and opportunities of coordination across the network. This effort helped network members begin to see cooling centers from a systems perspective, leverage their ability to see dynamic cooling center availability spatially and temporally and thus increase opportunities to align services along both dimensions. Our collaboration with the Heat Relief Network in central Arizona highlights participatory modeling as an innovative means for translating evidence to practice and facilitating knowledge dissemination, two important elements for successful applications on complexity governance.


Extreme Heat Complex Adaptive System Heat Index Participatory Modeling Cooling Center 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Almeida JE, Kokkinogenis Z, Rossetti RJF (2012) NetLogo implementation of an evacuation scenario. In: 7th Iberian conference on information systems and technologies (CISTI), pp 1–4. Retrieved from
  2. Argüeso D, Evans JP, Fita L, Bormann KJ (2013) Temperature response to future urbanization and climate change. Clim Dynam 42(7–8):2183–2199. doi: 10.1007/s00382-013-1789-6 Google Scholar
  3. Arthur WB (1999) Complexity and the economy. Science 284(5411):107–109. doi: 10.1126/science.284.5411.107 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bäckstrand K (2003) Civic science for sustainability: reframing the role of experts, policy-makers and citizens in environmental governance. Global Environ Polit 3(4):24–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berisha V, Hondula DM, Roach M, White JR, McKinney B, Bentz D, Ahmed M, Uebelherr J, Goodin K (n.d.) Assessing adaptation strategies for extreme heat: a public health evaluation of cooling centers in Maricopa County, Arizona. Weather, Climate, and SocietyGoogle Scholar
  6. Berko J, Ingram DD, Saha S, Parker J (2014) Deaths attributed to heat, cold, and other weather events in the United States, 2006–2010. Natl Health Stat Rep 76:1–15Google Scholar
  7. Booher DE, Innes JE (2010) Governance for resilience: CALFED as a complex adaptive network for resource management. Ecol Soc 15(3):1–23Google Scholar
  8. Borden KA, Cutter SL (2008) Spatial patterns of natural hazards mortality in the United States. Int J Health Geogr 7(1):64. doi: 10.1186/1476-072X-7-64 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cash D, Moser SC (2000) Linking global and local scales: designing dynamic assessment and management processes. Global Environ Change 10(2):109–120. doi: 10.1016/S0959-3780(00)00017-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Castells M (2000) Materials for an exploratory theory of the network society. Br J Sociol 51:5–24. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-4446.2000.00005.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chuang W-C, Gober P, Chow WTL, Golden J (2013) Sensitivity to heat: a comparative study of Phoenix, Arizona and Chicago, Illinois (2003–2006). Urban Clim 5:1–18. doi: 10.1016/j.uclim.2013.07.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cinderby S, Forrester J (2005) Facilitating the local governance of air pollution using GIS for participation. Appl Geogr 25(2):143–158. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2005.03.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cleveland H (1985) The twilight of hierarchy: speculations on the global information society. Publ Admin Rev 45(1):185–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Colyvas JA, Maroulis S (2014) Moving from an exception to a rule: analyzing mechanisms in emergence-based institutionalization. SSRN Electron J. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2426347 Google Scholar
  15. Cook FL, Tyler TR, Goetz EG, Gordon MT, Protess D, Leff DR, Molotch HL (1983) Media and agenda setting: effects on the public, interest group leaders, policy makers, and policy. Publ Opin Q 47(1):16–35, retrieved from CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Coumou D, Robinson A, Rahmstorf S (2013) Global increase in record-breaking monthly-mean temperatures. Climatic Change 118(3–4):771–782. doi: 10.1007/s10584-012-0668-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. D’Amato G, Baena-Cagnani CE, Cecchi L, Annesi-Maesano I, Nunes C, Ansotegui I, D’Amato M, Liccardi G, Sofia M, Canonica WG (2013) Climate change, air pollution and extreme events leading to increasing prevalence of allergic respiratory diseases. Multidiscip Respir Med 8(2):1. doi: 10.1186/2049-6958-8-12 Google Scholar
  18. Derman BB (2014) Climate governance, justice, and transnational civil society. Clim Policy 14(1):23–41. doi: 10.1080/14693062.2014.849492 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dietz T (2013) Bringing values and deliberation to science communication. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110(suppl 3):14081–14087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dow K, Haywood BK, Kettle NP, Lackstrom K (2013) The role of ad hoc networks in supporting climate change adaptation: a case study from the Southeastern United States. Reg Environ Change 13(6):1235–1244. doi: 10.1007/s10113-013-0440-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Duit A, Galaz V (2008) Governance and complexity—emerging issues for governance theory. Governance 21(3):311–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ebi KL (2011) Resilience to the health risks of extreme weather events in a changing climate in the United States. Int J Environ Res Publ Health 8(12):4582–4595. doi: 10.3390/ijerph8124582 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fung A (2006) Varieties of participation in complex governance. Publ Admin Rev 66(s1):66–75. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00667.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Furnas GW (2000) Future design mindful of the MoRAS. Hum Comput Interact 15:207–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Georgescu M, Moustaoui M, Mahalov A, Dudhia J (2011) An alternative explanation of the semiarid urban area “oasis effect”. J Geophys Res Atmos 116(D24):D24113. doi: 10.1029/2011JD016720 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Georgescu M, Morefield PE, Bierwagen BG, Weaver CP (2014) Urban adaptation can roll back warming of emerging megapolitan regions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111(8):2909–2914. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1322280111 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Haffeld J (2012) Facilitative governance: transforming global health through complexity theory. Global Publ Health 7(5):452–464. doi: 10.1080/17441692.2011.649486 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Harlan SL, Brazel AJ, Prashad L, Stefanov WL, Larsen L (2006) Neighborhood microclimates and vulnerability to heat stress. Soc Sci Med (1982) 63(11):2847–2863. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2006.07.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Harlan SL, Declet-Barreto JH, Stefanov WL, Petitti DB (2013) Neighborhood effects on heat deaths: social and environmental predictors of vulnerability in Maricopa County, Arizona. Environ Health Perspect 121(2):197–204. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1104625 Google Scholar
  30. Harlan SL, Chowell G, Yang S, Petitti DB, Morales Butler EJ, Ruddell BL, Ruddell DM (2014) Heat-related deaths in hot cities: estimates of human tolerance to high temperature thresholds. Int J Environ Res Publ Health 11(3):3304–3326. doi: 10.3390/ijerph110303304 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Harvey D (2005) A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford University Press, Oxford, retrieved from Google Scholar
  32. Hondula DM, Davis RE (2014) The predictability of high-risk zones for heat-related mortality in seven US cities. Nat Hazards 74(2):771–788. doi: 10.1007/s11069-014-1213-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hondula DM, Georgescu M, Balling RC (2014) Challenges associated with projecting urbanization-induced heat-related mortality. Sci Total Environ 490C:538–544. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.04.130 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Innes JE, Booher DE (2004) Reframing public participation: strategies for the 21st century. Plann Theor Pract 5(4):419–436. doi: 10.1080/1464935042000293170 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Johnston EW (2010) Governance infrastructures in 2020. Publ Admin Rev 70:s122–s128. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02254.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Johnston EW, Kim Y, Ayyangar M (2007) Intending the unintended: the act of building agent-based models as a regular source of knowledge generation. Interdiscip Description Complex Syst 5(2):81–91Google Scholar
  37. Johnston EW, Hicks D, Nan N, Auer JC (2010) Managing the inclusion process in collaborative governance. J Publ Admin Res Theor 21(4):699–721. doi: 10.1093/jopart/muq045 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kalkstein LS, Davis RE (1989) Weather and human mortality: an evaluation of demographic and interregional responses in the United States. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 79(1):44–64. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8306.1989.tb00249.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kim Y, Johnston EW, Kang HS (2011) A computational approach to managing performance dynamics in networked governance systems. Publ Perform Manag Rev 34(4):580–597. doi: 10.2753/PMR1530-9576340407 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. King CS, Feltey KM, Susel BO (1998) The question of participation: toward authentic public participation in public administration. Publ Admin Rev 58(4):317–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Koffijberg J, De Bruijn H, Priemus H (2012) Combining hierarchical and network strategies: successful changes in Dutch social housing. Publ Admin 90(1):262–275. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.01974.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kooiman J, Jentoft S (2009) Meta-governance: values, norms and principles, and the making of hard choices. Publ Admin 87:818–836. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2009.01780.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Koppell JG (2010) Administration without Borders Part I 2020: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Publ Admin Rev (December):s546–s555Google Scholar
  44. Kuras ER, Hondula DM, Brown-Saracino J (2015) Heterogeneity in individually experienced temperatures (IETs) within an urban neighborhood: insights from a new approach to measuring heat exposure. Int J Biometeorol. doi: 10.1007/s00484-014-0946-x Google Scholar
  45. Learmonth GP, Smith DE, Sherman WH, White MA, Plank J (2011) A practical approach to the complex problem of environmental sustainability: the UVa Bay Game. Innovat J 16(1):1–8Google Scholar
  46. Leong KM, Decker DJ, Lauber TB, Raik DB, Siemer WF (2009) Overcoming jurisdictional boundaries through stakeholder engagement and collaborative governance: lessons learned from white-tailed deer management in the U.S. In: Andersson K, Lehtola M, Eklund E, Salmi P (eds) Beyond the rural-urban divide: cross-continental perspectives on the differentiated, 1st edn. Emerald, Bingley, England, retrieved from Google Scholar
  47. Leong KM, Emmerson DP, Byron R (Rudi) (2011) The new governance era: implications for collaborative conservation and adaptive management in department of the interior agencies. Hum Dimens Wildl 16:236–243. doi: 10.1080/10871209.2011.585436
  48. Liesbet H, Gary M (2003) Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi-level governance. Am Polit Sci Rev 97(02):233–243. doi: 10.1017/S0003055403000649 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lynn LE Jr (2001) The myth of the bureaucratic paradigm: what traditional public administration really stood for. Publ Admin Rev 61(2):144–160. doi: 10.1111/0033-3352.00016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Maricopa Association of Governments (2015) Heat Relief Regional Network. Retrieved 3 July 2015
  51. Marks PK, Gerrits LM (2013) Approaching public administration from a complexity perspective. Publ Admin Rev 73(6):898–903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. McDaniel RR Jr, Lanham HJ, Anderson RA (2009) Implications of complex adaptive research on health care organizations. Health Care Manag Rev 34(2):191–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. MCDPH (2014) Maricopa County Department of Public Health: heat-associated deaths in Maricopa County, AZ Final Report* for 2013Google Scholar
  54. McGinnis MD (2011) An introduction to IAD and the language of the Ostrom workshop: a simple guide to a complex framework. Pol Stud J 39(1):169–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Meuleman L (2008a) Public management and the metagovernance of hierarchies, networks and markets: the feasibility of designing and managing governance style combinations. Springer Science & Business Media, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  56. Meuleman L (2008b) Reflections on meta governance and community policing: the Utrecht case in the Netherlands and questions about the cultural transferability of governance approaches and meta governance. Govern Inst Reeng 34:150–183, CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Meuleman L (2009) The cultural dimension of metagovernance: why governance doctrines may fail. Publ Organ Rev 10(1):49–70. doi: 10.1007/s11115-009-0088-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Meuleman L (2011) Metagoverning governance styles—broadening the public manager’s action perspective. In: Torfing J, Triantafillou P (eds) Interactive policy making, metagovernance and democracy. ECPR, Colchester, pp 95–110, retrieved from Google Scholar
  59. Miller JH, Page SE (2009) Complex adaptive systems: an introduction to computational models of social life: an introduction to computational models of social life (Google eBook), vol 2009. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, retrieved from
  60. Morgan J, Waskow D (2013) A new look at climate equity in the UNFCCC. Clim Pol 14(1):17–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Moser SC (2010) Communicating climate change: history, challenges, process and future directions. Clim Change 1:31–53. doi: 10.1002/wcc.011 Google Scholar
  62. Ngwadla X (2013) An operational framework for equity in the 2015 Agreement. Clim Pol 14(1):8–16. doi: 10.1080/14693062.2014.857199 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Ojha AK (2014) Public private partnerships: analysing the network form of organization. In: Ramesh G, Nagadevara V, Naik G, Suraj A (eds) Public–private partnerships. Routledge, New Delhi, pp 1–19, retrieved from Google Scholar
  64. O’Neill MS, Jackman DK, Wyman M, Manarolla X, Gronlund CJ, Brown DG, Brines SJ, Schwartz J, Diez-Roux AV (2010) US local action on heat and health: are we prepared for climate change? Int J Publ Health 55(2):105–112. doi: 10.1007/s00038-009-0071-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Ostrom E (2011) Background on the institutional analysis and development framework. Pol Stud J 39(1):7–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Pahl-Wostl C (2002) Participative and stakeholder-based policy design, evaluation and modeling processes. Integr Assess 3(1):3–14. doi: 10.1076/iaij. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Park CH, Johnston EW (n.d.) An event-driven lens for bridging formal organizations and informal online participation: how policy informatics enables just-in-time responses to crises. In: Policy analytics, modelling, and informatics: innovative tools for solving complex social problemsGoogle Scholar
  68. Petitti DB, Harlan SL, Chowell-Puente G, Ruddell D (2013) Occupation and environmental heat-associated deaths in Maricopa county, Arizona: a case-control study. PLoS One 8(5):e62596. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0062596 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Petitti DB, Hondula DM, Yang S, Harlan SL, Chowell G (2015) Multiple trigger points for quantifying heat-health impacts: new evidence from a hot climate. Environ Health Perspect. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1409119 Google Scholar
  70. Plsek PE, Greenhalgh T (2001) Complexity science: the challenge of complexity in health care. BMJ (Clin Res Ed) 323:625–628, retrieved from CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Plsek PE, Wilson T (2001) Complexity, leadership, and management in healthcare organisations. BMJ 323:746–749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Podolny JM, Page KL (1998) Network forms of organization. Annu Rev Sociol 24:57–76. doi: 10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.57 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Sole R, Goodwin B (2002) Signs of life how complexity pervades biology. Basic, New York, pp 277–303Google Scholar
  74. Sørensen E (2006) Processes of democratic governance. Am Rev Publ Admin 36(1):98–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Sørensen E, Torfing J (2005) The democratic anchorage of governance networks. Scand Polit Stud 28(3):195–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Thacker MTF, Lee R, Sabogal RI, Henderson A (2008) Overview of deaths associated with natural events, United States, 1979-2004. Disasters 32(2):303–315. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7717.2008.01041.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Thompson KM (2015) Making a difference. In: Johnston E (ed) Governance in the information era: theory and practice of policy informatics. Routledge, London, pp 174–186Google Scholar
  78. Tisue S, Wilensky U (2004) Netlogo: a simple environment for modeling complexity. In: Proceedings of the international conference on complex systems, pp 1–10. doi: 10.1109/ICVD.2004.1261037
  79. Turner BL, Matson PA, McCarthy JJ, Corell RW, Christensen L, Eckley N, Hovelsrud-Broda GK, Kasperson JX, Kasperson RE, Luers A, Martello ML, Mathiesen S, Naylor R, Polsky C, Pulsipher A, Schiller A, Selin H, Tyler N (2003) Illustrating the coupled human-environment system for vulnerability analysis: three case studies. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100(14):8080–8085. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1231334100 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Uebelherr JM, Hondula DM, Johnston EW (2015) Innovative participatory agent based modeling using a complexity governance perspective. In: Proceedings of the 16th annual international conference on digital government research, Phoenix, AZ, USA. ACM, New York, pp 307–308. doi: 10.1145/2757401.2757447
  81. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs Population Division (2013) World population ageing 2013. ST/ESA/SER.A/348Google Scholar
  82. Voinov A, Bousquet F (2010) Modelling with stakeholders. Environ Model Software 25(11):1268–1281. doi: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2010.03.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Wyborn C, Bixler RP (2013) Collaboration and nested environmental governance: scale dependency, scale framing, and cross-scale interactions in collaborative conservation. J Environ Manag 123:58–67. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.03.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Yearley S, Cinderby S, Forrester J, Bailey P, Rosen P (2003) Participatory modelling and the local governance of the politics of UK air pollution: a three-city case study. Environ Val 12:247–262, retrieved from CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Young OR (2010) Institutional dynamics: resilience, vulnerability and adaptation in environmental and resource regimes. Global Environ Change 20(3):378–385. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.10.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joshua Uebelherr
    • 1
    Email author
  • David M. Hondula
    • 1
  • Erik W. Johnston
    • 1
  1. 1.Arizona State University Center for Policy InformaticsPhoenixUSA

Personalised recommendations