Interdisciplinary, participatory and multi-stakeholder research methods to study ecosystems and their benefits
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.25.35.1.0.2439Keywords:
interdisciplinarity, participation, multi-stakeholders, knowledge co-production, transformative changeAbstract
The paper presents an interdisciplinary, participatory, and multi-actor research methodology that fosters knowledge co-production and discusses it in relation to the concept of ‘transformative change’. It was developed over nearly two decades in territories of high socioeconomic and productive heterogeneity (i.e., the west of the province of Córdoba, Argentina). It consists of six stages: a) social-actors mapping; b) in-depth interviews; c) single-actor focus groups; d) results dissemination; e) multi-actor focus group, and f) knowledge co-production of new research questions. These stages are presented in conceptual terms and analysed through empirical situations related to our research. The methodology follows a trajectory of increasing participation, social interaction and complexity, culminating in the formulation of new research questions coproduced by social actors and researchers. The article suggests that research processes promoting democratic participation and seeking transformative change require shifting from transfer perspectives to approaches that prioritize social exchange, cooperation and collective creation. When well-planned and implemented, interdisciplinary, participatory and multi-stakeholder research methodologies that promote knowledge coproduction enable researchers to gain perspectives on the research problem that are not easily attainable through other approaches.
References
Álvarez, S., and K. Castillo. 2020. Estrategias colaborativas para el abordaje de conflictos: espacios de diálogo en México, Perú, Colombia y Guatemala. RIMISP. Santiago de Chile, Chile. Disponible en: URL: tinyurl.com/3x2fujrp.
Auer, A., J. Von Below, L. Nahuelhual, M. Mastrangelo, A. González, M. Gluch, M. Vallejos, L. Staiano, P. Laterra, and J. Paruelo. 2020. The role of social capital and collective actions in natural capital conservation and management. Environmental Science and Policy 107:168-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.02.024.
Backes, D. S., J. S. Colomé, R. H. Erdamann, and V. L. Lunardi. 2011. Grupo focal como técnica de coleta e análise de dados em pesquisas qualitativas. O Mundo da Saúde 35(4):438-442. https://doi.org/10.15343/0104-7809.2011354438442.
Blackstock K. L., G. J. Kelly, and B. L. Horsey. 2007. Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability, Ecological Economics 60(4):726-742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.05.014.
Balvanera, P., N. Pérez Harguindeguy, M. Perevochtchikova, P. Laterra, D. M. Cáceres, and A. Langle Flores. 2020. Ecosystem services research in Latin America 2.0: expanding collaboration across countries, disciplines, and sectors. Ecosystem Services 42:101086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101086.
Cabido, M., A. Manzur, L. Carranza, and C. González Albarracín. 1994. La vegetación y el medio físico del Chaco Árido en la provincia de Córdoba, Argentina Central. Phytocoenologia 24:423-460. https://doi.org/10.1127/phyto/24/1994/423.
Cabrera, A. 1976. Regiones Fitogeográficas Argentinas. Enciclopedia Argentina de Agricultura y Jardinería (2º edición). Tomo II. ACME. Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Cabrol D., and D. M. Cáceres. 2017. Las disputas por los bienes comunes y su impacto en la apropiación de servicios ecosistémicos. La Ley de Protección de Bosques Nativos, en la Provincia de Córdoba, Argentina. Ecología Austral 27(1):134-145. https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.17.27.1.1.273.
Cáceres, D. M., and E. Tapella. 2022. Ecosistemas y beneficios ecosistémicos. ¿Qué valoran y qué estrategias de apropiación utilizan los productores agropecuarios? Ecología Austral 32(2):378-394. https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.22.32.2.0.1764.
Cáceres, D. M., E. Tapella, F. Quétier, and S. Díaz. 2015. The social value of biodiversity and ecosystem services from the perspectives of different social actors. Ecology and Society 20(1):62-81. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07297-200162.
Cáceres, D. M., E. Tapella, D. A. Cabrol, and L. Estigarribia. 2020. Land use change and commodity frontiers perceptions, values, and conflicts over the appropriation of nature. Case Studies in the Environment 4(1):1-15. https://doi.org/10.1525/cse.2020.1223610.
Cáceres, D. M., F. Silvetti, and S. Díaz. 2016. The rocky path from policy-relevant science to policy implementation – a case study from the South American Chaco. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 19:57-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.12.003.
Cairns, G., P. Goodwin, and G. Wright. 2016. A decision-analysis based framework for analysing stakeholder behaviour in scenario planning. European Journal of Operational Research 249(3):1050-1062. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.07.033.
Calliera, M., and E. Capri. 2022. Multi-actor approaches and engagement strategies to promote the adoption of best groundwater management practices. Current Opinion in Environmental Science Health 27:100351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coesh.2022.100351.
Carranza, C., and M. Ledesma. 2005. Sistemas silvopastoriles en el Chaco Árido. Revista IDIA 21(6):230-236.
Chinyio, E., and P. Olomolaiye. 2010. Construction Stakeholder Management. Wiley-Blackwell. London, Inglaterra. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444315349.
Conservation International. 2014. Stakeholder Mapping Guide. For Conservation International Country Programs and Partners.
Conti, G., and S. Díaz. 2013. Plant functional diversity and carbon storage — an empirical test in semi-arid forest ecosystems. Journal of Ecology 101:18-28. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12012.
Cunningham, A. B. 2001. Applied Ethnobotany. People, Wild Plan Use and Conservation. Earthscan Publications Ltd. Londres, Inglaterra.
Díaz, S., F. Quétier, D. M. Cáceres, S. F. Trainor, N. Pérez Harguindeguy, M. Bret Harte, B. Finegan, M. Peña Claros, and L. Porter. 2011. Linking functional diversity and social actor strategies in a framework for interdisciplinary analysis of nature’s benefits to society. PNAS - Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108(2):895-902. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1017993108.
Díaz, S., J. Settele, E. Brondizio, H. T. Ngo, J. Agard, A. Arneth, P. Balvanera, K. Brauman, et al. 2019. Pervasive human-driven decline of life on earth points to the need for transformative change. Science 366(6471):453-458. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax3100.
Díaz, S., S. Lavorel, F. De Bello, F. Quétier, K. Grigulis, and M. T. Robson. 2007. Incorporating plant functional diversity effects in ecosystem service assessments. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 104(52):20684-20689. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0704716104.
Eigenbrode, S. D., M. O'rourke, J. D. Wulfhorst, D. M. Althoff, C. S. Goldberg, K. Merrill, et al. 2007. Employing philosophical dialogue in collaborative science. BioScience 57(1):55-64. https://doi.org/10.1641/B570109.
Escobar, J., and F. I. Bonilla Jiménez. 2009. Grupos focales: una guía conceptual y metodológica. Cuadernos Hispanoamericanos de Psicología 9(1):51-67.
Estigarribia, L., D. M. Cáceres, N. Pastor, and S. Díaz. 2023. What makes a good fire? Local actor- and science-based knowledge of fuel-related functional traits of Chaco plants. Ecología Austral 33(2):395-410. https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.23.33.2.0.2115.
Fazei, I., P. Moug, S. Allen, K. Beckmann, D. Blackwood, M. Bonaventura, K. Burnett, M. Danson, et al. 2017. Transformation in a changing climate: a research agenda. Climate and Development 10(3):197-217. https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2017.1301864.
Foster, J. B. 1999. Marx’s theory of metabolic rift: classical foundations for an environmental sociology. American Journal of Sociology 105:366-405. https://doi.org/10.1086/210315.
Glaser, B. G., and A. L. Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine Publishing Company. Chicago, Estados Unidos.
Gondim, S. M. G. 2002. Grupos focais como técnica de investigação qualitativa: desafios metodológicos. Paidéia (Ribeirão Preto) 12(24):149-161. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-863X2002000300004.
Gorgas, J., and J. Tassile. 2003. Recursos naturales de la provincia de Córdoba - los suelos 1:500.000. INTA EEA. Córdoba, Argentina.
Gudynas, E. 2017. Neo-extractivismo y crisis civilizatoria. En América Latina: avanzando hacia la construcción de alternativas. BASE-IS/FRL. Asunción, Paraguay.
IPBES. 2019. Global assessment report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. URL: zenodo.org/record/6417333#.ZDF073bMLIU.
Izcara, S. P., and K. L. Andrade Rubio. 2003. La entrevista en profundidad: teoría y práctica. Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas. Tamaulipas, México.
Kelemen, E., S. M. Subramanian, A. D. Vos, S. Amaruzaman, L. Porter-Bolland, M. Islar, M. Kosmus, et al. 2023. Signposts on the road toward transformative governance: how a stronger focus on diverse values can enhance environmental policies. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 64:101351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2023.101351.
Klitkou, A., S. Bolwig, A. Huber, L. Ingeborgrud, P. Plucinski, H. Rohracher, D. Schartinger, M. Thiene, and P. Żuk. 2022. The interconnected dynamics of social practices and their implications for transformative change: A review. Sustainable Production and Consumption 31:603-614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2022.03.027.
Laursen, B. K., N. Motzer, and K. J. Anderson. 2022. Pathways for assessing interdisciplinarity: A systematic review. Research Evaluation 31(3):326-343. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvac013.
Lee, C. W., M. McQuarrie, and E. T. Walker. 2015. Democratizing Inequalities: Dilemmas of the New Public Participation. University Press. New York, Estados Unidos. https://doi.org/10.18574/nyu/9781479880607.001.0001.
Lienhoop, N., and A. Fischer. 2009. Can you be bothered? The role of participant motivation in the valuation of species conservation measures. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 52(4):519-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640560902868405.
López, D. R., L. Cavallero, M. H. Easdale, C. Carranza, M. Ledesma, and P. L. Peri. 2017. Resilience management at the landscape level: An approach to tackling social-ecological vulnerability of agroforestry systems. En Integrating landscapes: Agroforestry for biodiversity conservation and food sovereignty. Springer. Estados Unidos. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69371-2_5.
Lynam, T., W. De Jong, D. Sheil, T. Kusumanto, and K. Evans. 2007. A review of tools for incorporating community knowledge, preferences, and values into decision making in natural resources management, Ecology and Society 12(1):5-32. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-01987-120105.
Mehrizi, M. H. R., F. Ghasemzadeh, and J. Mollas Gallart. 2009. Stakeholder mapping as an assessment framework for policy implementation. Evaluation 15:427-444. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389009341731.
Merçon, J. 2022. Investigación transdisciplinaria e investigación-acción participativa en clave decolonial. Utopía y Praxis Latinoamericana 27(98). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6614174.
Moore, J. W. 2017. The Capitalocene, Part I: On the nature and origins of our ecological crisis. The Journal of Peasant Studies 44(3):594-630. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2016.1235036.
Moore, J. W. 2010. The End of the Road? Agricultural Revolutions in the Capitalist World-Ecology, 1450-2010. Journal of Agrarian Change 10(3):389-413. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0366.2010.00276.x.
Morales, M. P. E. 2016. Participatory Action Research (PAR) cum Action Research (AR) in teacher professional development: A literature review. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES) 2(1):156-165. https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.01395.
Norström, A. V., C. Cvitanovic, M. F. Löf, S. West, C. Wyborn, P. Balvanera, A. T. Bednarek, E. M. Bennett, et al. 2020. Principles for knowledge co-production in sustainability research. Nature Sustainability 3:182-190. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0448-2.
Ortega Bastidas, J. 2020. ¿Cómo saturamos los datos? Una propuesta analítica “desde” y “para” la investigación cualitativa. Interciencia 45(6):293-299.
Ortez, E. Z. 2016. La entrevista en profundidad en los procesos de investigación social. La Universidad 2(8):75-95.
Palomo, I., B. Locatelli, I. Otero, M. Colloff, E. Crouzat, A. Cuni Sánchez, E. Gómez Baggethun, et al. 2021. Assessing nature-based solutions for transformative change. One Earth 4:730-741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2021.04.013.
Parra Cuestas, I. 2021. La construcción social del territorio: un pretexto para la planificación comunitaria desde la experiencia medioambiental. Polisemia 17(31):117-132. https://doi.org/10.26620/uniminuto.polisemia.17.31.2021.117-132.
Pereira, L., N. Sitas, F. Ravera, A. Jimenez Aceituno, and A. Merrie. 2019. Building capacities for transformative change towards sustainability: Imagination in intergovernmental science-policy scenario processes. Elementa Science of the Anthropocene 7(35):1-19. https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.374.
Pérez-Hämmerle, K. V., K. Moon, and H. P. Possingham. 2024. Unearthing assumptions and power: A framework for research, policy, and practice. One Earth 7(2):199-210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2024.01.003.
Rap, E., F. Molle, D. Ezzat El Agha, and W. Abou E Hassan. 2019. The limits to participation: Branch-canal water user associations in the Egyptian Delta. Water International 44(1):31-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2018.1554766.
Reyers, B., J. L. Nel, P. J. O’Farell, N. Sitas, and D. C. Nel. 2015. Navigating complexity through knowledge coproduction: Mainstreaming ecosystem services into disaster risk reduction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112:7362-7368. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1414374112.
Ritchie, J. 2003. The application of qualitative methods to social research. Pp. 24-46 en J. Ritchie and J. Lewis (eds.). Qualitative research practice – a guide for social science students and researchers. Sage Publications, London, England.
Robles, B. 2011. La entrevista en profundidad: una técnica útil dentro del campo antropofísico. Cuicuilco 18(52):39-49.
Rodríguez, I., M. Inturias, V. Frank, J. Robledo, C. Sarti, and R. Borel. 2019. Conflictividad socioambiental en Latinoamérica. Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. Ciudad de México, México.
Romano, M. 2009. Falta de Regularización Dominial y Avance de la Frontera Agropecuaria. Vulnerabilidad de Derechos. XXVII Congreso de la Asociación Latinoamericana de Sociología. VIII Jornadas de Sociología de la Universidad de Buenos Aires. Asociación Latinoamericana de Sociología, Buenos Aires.
Rosso, M., M. Bottero, S. Pomarico, S. La Ferlita, and E. Comino. 2014. Integrating multicriteria evaluation and stakeholders analysis for assessing hydropower projects. Energy Policy 67:870-881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.12.007.
Rowlands, T., N. Waddell, and B. Mckenna. 2016. Are we there yet? A Technique to determine theoretical saturation. Journal of Computer Information Systems 56(1):40-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2015.11645799.
Ruiz Mallén, I., P. Domínguez, L. Calvet Mir, M. Orta Martínez, and V. Reyes García. 2012. Investigación aplicada en etnoecología: experiencias de campo. Revista de Antropología Iberoamericana 7(1):9-32. https://doi.org/10.11156/11.
Saffer, A., A. Yang, and M. Taylor. 2018. Reconsidering power in multistakeholder relationship management. Management Communication Quarterly 32(1):121-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318917700510.
Schneider, F., A. Kläy, A. B. Zimmermann, T. Buser, M. Ingalls, and P. Messerli. 2019. How can science support the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development? Four tasks to tackle the normative dimension of sustainability. Sustainability Science 14:1593-1604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-019-00675-y.
Silva Jaramillo, S. 2017. Identificando a los protagonistas: el mapeo de actores como herramienta para el diseño y análisis de políticas públicas. The Journal of Latin American Public Policy and Governance 1(1):64-83. https://doi.org/10.22191/gobernar/vol1/iss1/4.
Silvetti, F. 2020. Representaciones campesinas sobre los servicios forrajeros del Chaco Seco en Córdoba, Argentina. Revista FAVE-Ciencias Agrarias 19(1):81-95. https://doi.org/10.14409/fa.v19i1.9455.
Silvetti, F. 2012. Trayectoria histórica de la territorialidad ganadera campesina en el oeste de la Provincia de Córdoba (Argentina). Agricultura, Sociedad y Desarrollo 9(3):333-67.
Staiano L., F. Gallego, A. Altesor, and J. M. Paruelo. 2022. Where and why to conserve grasslands socio-ecosystems? A spatially explicit participative approach. Front Environ Sci 10:820449. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.820449.
Svampa, M. 2013. Resource Extractivism and Alternatives: Latin American Perspectives on Development. Pp. 117-144 en M. Lang and D. Mokrani (eds.). Beyond development. Alternative visions from Latin America Transnational Institute- Rosa Luxembourg Foundation. Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Tamburini, D., and D. M Cáceres. 2017. Estrategias de Uso de la Fauna Silvestre por las Comunidades Campesinas de Argentina Central. Etnobiología 15(3):5-23.
Tapella, E. 2007. El Mapeo de Actores Claves. Córdoba: Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI).
Tapella, E. 2012. Heterogeneidad social y valoración diferencial de servicios ecosistémicos. Un abordaje multiactoral en el Oeste de Córdoba (Argentina). Tesis de Doctorado, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Córdoba, Argentina.
Tapella, E. 2023. El mapeo de actores claves: una herramienta al servicio de la evaluación participativa. Programa de Estudios del Trabajo, el Ambiente y la Sociedad (PETAS), San Juan, Argentina.
Taylor, S. J, and R. Bogdan. 1986. Introducción a los métodos cualitativos de investigación: La búsqueda de significados. Paidós. Ciudad de México, México.
Tengö, M., R. Hill, P. Malmer, C. M. Raymond, M. Spierenburg, F. Danielsen, T. Elmqvist, and C. Folke. 2017. Weaving knowledge systems in IPBES, CBD and beyond—lessons learned for sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 26:17-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2016.12.005.
Trad, L. B. 2009. Grupos Focais: conceitos, procedimentos e reflexões baseadas em experiências com o uso da técnica em pesquisa de saúde. Physis 19(3):777-796. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-73312009000300013.
Turner, B. L. II, K. J. Esler, P. Bridgewater, J. Tewksbury, N. Sitas, B. Abrahams, F. S. Chapin III, et al. 2016. Socio-Environmental Systems (SES) Research: what have we learned and how can we use this information in future research programs. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 19:160-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2016.04.001.
Utting, P. 2002. Regulating business via multistakeholder initiatives: A preliminary assessment. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. Ginebra, Suiza.
van Bruggen, A., I. Nikolic, and J. Kwakkel. 2019. Modelling with stakeholders for transformative change. Sustainability 11:1-21. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030825.
von Below, J., L. Nahuelhual, A. A. Eleuterio, and P. Laterra. 2020. Can participatory action research foster social learning in communities struggling for land tenure? Land Use Policy 101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105192.
Waddock, S., and S. Waddell. 2021. Transformation catalysts: Weaving transformational change for a flourishing world for all. Cadmus 4(4):165-182.
Walker, D. H. T., L. M. Bourne, and A. Shwlley. 2008. Influence, stakeholder mapping and visualization. Construction Management and Economics 26:645-658. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190701882390.
Wanner, T. 2015. The new ‘Passive Revolution’ of the green economy and growth discourse: maintaining the ‘Sustainable Development’ of neoliberal capitalism. New Political Economy 20(1):21-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2013.866081.
Weyland, F., M. E. Mastrangelo, A. D. Auer, M. P. Barral, L. Nahuelhual, A. Larrazábal, et al. 2019. Ecosystem services approach in Latin America: from theoretical promises to real applications. Ecosystem Services 35:280-293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.11.010.
Wyborn, C., A. Datta, J. Montana, M. Ryan, P. Leith, B. Chaffin, C. Miller, and L. Ven Kerkhoff. 2019. Co-producing sustainability: reordering the governance of science, policy, and practice. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 44:319–346. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-101718-033103.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Daniel M. Cáceres, Esteban Tapella, Diego A. Cabrol

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain their rights as follows: 1) by granting the journal the right to its first publication, and 2) by registering the published article with a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which allows authors and third parties to view and use it as long as they clearly mention its origin (citation or reference, including authorship and first publication in this journal). Authors can make other non-exclusive distribution agreements as long as they clearly indicate their origin and are encouraged to widely share and disseminate the published version of their work.
