Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Discussing ecosystem services in management of agroecosystems: a role playing game in the eastern Brazilian Amazon

  • Published:
Agroforestry Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This research assessed how ecosystem services (ES) are taken into account in the decision-making process of stakeholders involved in the management of agroecosystems, in particular agroforestry systems, and how an Role-Playing Game (RPG) can serve as a tool to allow them to discuss the issues concerned. The study was conducted in two municipalities (Paragominas and Irituia) located in the Brazilian Amazon. The game was developed in 2018 using a co-construction process that mainly included farmers, students and researchers. Data was collected during two sessions of the game held in 2019, with participation by heterogeneous participants from different local institutions. Our results demonstrated that game sessions showed how the provision of ES, as well as other factors (e.g. values, availability of factors), is taken into account in planning the spatio-temporal configuration of the agroecosystem and associated agricultural practices. They also revealed some trade-offs involved in this decision-making process. We conclude that the RPG allowed stakeholders to synthesize and discuss different types of knowledge about this process. Bringing these elements to the discussion can contribute to an improved shared understanding of the challenges and possibilities of the ecological management of agroecosystems and can indicate solutions that are in line with local expectations.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Source: Perrier (2018)

Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

All the data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files. Technical information about the parameters of the model are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Notes

  1. “Refloramaz—Forest restoration by family farmers in the Eastern Amazon,” financed by Agropolis Fondation and EMBRAPA. This project had forest restoration as its central theme, with a strong emphasis on agroforestry systems.

  2. Intermediate ecosystem services that contribute to improved production of goods can be called input services (Tibi and Therond 2018).

References

  • Altieri MA, Nicholls CI (2005) Agroecology and the search for a truly sustainable agriculture. United Nations Environmental Programme, Environmental Training Network for …

  • Assefa S, Kessler A, Fleskens L (2021) Exploring decision-making in campaign-based watershed management by using a role-playing game in Boset District. Ethiopia Agric Syst 190:103124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnaud C, Corbera E, Muradian R, et al (2018) Ecosystem services, social interdependencies, and collective action. Ecol Soc 23

  • Börner J, Mendoza A, Vosti SA (2007) Ecosystem services, agriculture, and rural poverty in the Eastern Brazilian Amazon: Interrelationships and policy prescriptions. Ecol Econ 64:356–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bousquet F, Barreteau O, d’Aquino P, et al (2002) Multi-agent systems and role games: collective learning processes for ecosystem management. Complex Ecosyst Manag Theory Pract Multi-Agent Syst pp 248–285

  • Boyd J, Banzhaf S (2007) What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecol Econ 63:616–626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa FA (2008) Desenvolvimento sustentável na Amazônia: o papel estratégico do campesinato. O Desafio Sustentabilidade Um Debate Socioambiental No Bras São Paulo Fundação Perseu Abramo 289–313

  • Costanza R, Chichakly K, Dale V et al (2014) Simulation games that integrate research, entertainment, and learning around ecosystem services. Ecosyst Serv 10:195–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dendoncker N, Boeraeve F, Crouzat E, et al (2018) How can integrated valuation of ecosystem services help understanding and steering agroecological transitions? Ecol Soc 23

  • Duru M, Therond O, Martin G et al (2015) How to implement biodiversity-based agriculture to enhance ecosystem services: a review. Agron Sustain Dev 35:1259–1281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards P, Sharma-Wallace L, Wreford A et al (2019) Tools for adaptive governance for complex social-ecological systems: a review of role-playing-games as serious games at the community-policy interface. Environ Res Lett 14(11):113002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Étienne M (2014) Companion modelling: a participatory approach to support sustainable development. Springer Science & Business Media, Netherlands

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Geertsema W, Rossing WA, Landis DA et al (2016) Actionable knowledge for ecological intensification of agriculture. Front Ecol Environ 14:209–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giller KE, Witter E, Corbeels M, Tittonell P (2009) Conservation agriculture and smallholder farming in Africa: the heretics’ view. Field Crops Res 114:23–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffon M (2009) Qu’est-ce que l’agriculture écologiquement intensive et à haute valeur environnementale? Pour 117–123

  • Haines-Young R, Potschin M (2010) The links between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being. Ecosyst Ecol New Synth 1:110–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IBGE (2017) Censo Agropecuário

  • Jankowski F (2013) Les typologies traditionnelles sont-elles fonctionnelles? Rev Anthropol Connaiss 7:271–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Jose S (2009) Agroforestry for ecosystem services and environmental benefits: an overview. Agrofor Syst 76:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jouan J, De Graeuwe M, Carof M et al (2020) Learning Interdisciplinarity and systems approaches in agroecology: experience with the Serious Game SEGAE. Sustainability 12(11):4351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamarque P, Meyfroidt P, Nettier B, Lavorel S (2014) How ecosystem services knowledge and values influence farmers’ decision-making. PloS One 9:e107572

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Lele S, Springate-Baginski O, Lakerveld R et al (2013) Ecosystem services: origins, contributions, pitfalls, and alternatives. Conserv Soc 11:343–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewan L, Söderqvist T (2002) Knowledge and recognition of ecosystem services among the general public in a drainage basin in Scania, Southern Sweden. Ecol Econ 42:459–467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin G (2015) A conceptual framework to support adaptation of farming systems–development and application with Forage Rummy. Agric Syst 132:52–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattos L (2010) Decisões sobre usos da terra e dos recursos naturais na agricultura familiar amzônica: o caso do proambiente. Universidade Estadual de Campinas

  • MEA (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being. Island press Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Meijer SS, Catacutan D, Ajayi OC et al (2015) The role of knowledge, attitudes and perceptions in the uptake of agricultural and agroforestry innovations among smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. Int J Agric Sustain 13:40–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreau C, Barnaud C, Mathevet R (2019) Conciliate agriculture with landscape and biodiversity conservation: a role-playing game to explore trade-offs among ecosystem services through social learning. Sustainability 11:310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muhamad D, Okubo S, Harashina K et al (2014) Living close to forests enhances people's perception of ecosystem services in a forest–agricultural landscape of West Java, Indonesia. Ecosyst Serv 8:197–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muro M, Jeffrey P (2008) A critical review of the theory and application of social learning in participatory natural resource management processes. J Environ Plan Manag 51:325–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliveira JSR, Kato OR (2009) Agricultores inovadores, SAFS, sustentabilidade e educação básica: pontos e contrapontos. In: Embrapa Amazônia Oriental-Artigo em anais de congresso (ALICE). In: ENCONTRO NACIONAL DE GEOGRAFIA AGRÁRIA, 19., São Paulo, 2009. Formação e …

  • Palomo I, Felipe-Lucia MR, Bennett EM, et al (2016) Disentangling the pathways and effects of ecosystem service co-production. In: Advances in ecological research. Elsevier, pp 245–283

  • Perrier E (2018) Que peut apporter la co-construction d’un jeu dans le cadre d’un projet de recherche interdisciplinaire? Suivi d’un processus de modélisation d’accompagnement sur les trajectoires de restauration forestière par les agriculteurs familiaux à Irituia en Amazonie orientale.

  • Piketty M-G, Poccard-Chapuis R, Drigo I et al (2015) Multi-level governance of land use changes in the Brazilian Amazon: Lessons from Paragominas, State of Pará. Forests 6:1516–1536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pokorny B, de Jong W, Godar J et al (2013) From large to small: Reorienting rural development policies in response to climate change, food security and poverty. For Policy Econ 36:52–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed MS, Evely AC, Cundill G et al (2010) What is social learning? Ecol Soc 15:r1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resque AGL, Piketty M-G, Sá T et al (2019) Agrobiodiversity and public food procurement programs in Brazil: influence of local stakeholders in configuring green mediated markets. Sustainability 11:1425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resque AGL, Piketty M-G, Coudel E et al (2021) Co-production of ecosystem services through agricultural practices: perception of stakeholders supporting smallholders in the Brazilian Amazon. Cahiers Agric 30:20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rives F, Antona M, Aubert S (2012) Social-ecological functions and vulnerability framework to analyze forest policy reforms. Ecol Soc 17:21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rives F, Pesche D, Méral P, Carrière SM (2016) Les services écosystémiques: une notion discutée en écologie. In: Les services écosystémiques. Repenser les relations nature et société. Éditions Quæ, Versailles, pp 53–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Tibi A, Therond O (2018) Services écosystémiques fournis par les espaces agricoles, 1st edn. Quae, Paris

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Verutes GM, Rosenthal A (2014) Using simulation games to teach ecosystem service synergies and trade-offs. Environ Pract 16:194–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viana C, Coudel E, Barlow J et al (2016) How does hybrid governance emerge? Role of the elite in building a green municipality in the Eastern Brazilian Amazon. Environ Policy Gov 26:337–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villamor GB, Palomo I, Santiago CAL et al (2014) Assessing stakeholders’ perceptions and values towards social-ecological systems using participatory methods. Ecol Process 3:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank all local actors involved in the research and the financial support given by the research project “STRADIV—System approach for the TRAnsition to bio-DIVersified agroecosystems”, financed by Agropolis Fondation under the reference 1504-003; by the research project “Refloramaz—Forest restoration by family farmers in the Eastern Amazon”, financed by Agropolis Fondation under the reference ID 1503-011 through the « Investissements d’avenir » programme (Labex Agro:ANR-10-LABX-0001-01).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antonio Gabriel Lima Resque.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Code availability

The code of the software developed with the Cormas agent-based simulation platform is available on request.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Resque, A.G.L., Perrier, E., Coudel, E. et al. Discussing ecosystem services in management of agroecosystems: a role playing game in the eastern Brazilian Amazon. Agroforest Syst 97, 447–461 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-021-00633-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-021-00633-7

Keywords

Navigation