IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v476y2023ics0304380022002903.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development of methods for the simplification of complex group built causal loop diagrams: A case study of the Rechna doab

Author

Listed:
  • Asif, Muhammad
  • Inam, Azhar
  • Adamowski, Jan
  • Shoaib, Muhammad
  • Tariq, Hisham
  • Ahmad, Shakil
  • Alizadeh, Mohammad Reza
  • Nazeer, Aftab

Abstract

Complex systems are generally challenging to model due to many variables whose relationships and dependencies are often difficult and time-consuming to comprehend. Simplifying complex systems can remove barriers to adaptation and application by marginalized stakeholders. The main aim of the proposed research is to compare two simplification methods, i.e., Endogenisation, Encapsulation and Order-Oriented Reduction (EEOR) and Thematic Maps Development (TMD), in terms of maintaining system integrity. A case study was conducted in the Rechna Doab region of Pakistan. This was a qualitative system dynamics model study, which included 79 variables, 32 duplicate or ghost variables and 15 loops. EEOR simplifies Causal Loop Diagrams (CLDs) by removing exogenous variables and adjusting loops in successive steps. In this study, EEOR eliminated 46 variables and 6 critical feedback loops during the simplification of the complex case study CLD and did not maintain the system's integrity. The main risk of this technique is eliminating variables without understanding their significance. Accordingly, despite the goal of a better understanding, EEOR led to a loss of 60% of the final merged CLD. TMD divided the final integrated case study CLD into four thematic sub-modules: agriculture, environmental, social and industrial, and government subsidies. Each variable and loop were placed in their respective thematic sub-modules. This separation enhanced the understanding and evaluation of individual thematic sub-modules. When recombined into a single diagram, these sub-modules were able to represent the entire system without losing any information. This research can help to simplify complex system models to help system understanding by novice stakeholders, while maintaining the integrity of the system. Consequently, this simplification approach can help further increase stakeholder engagement in participatory modelling exercises.

Suggested Citation

  • Asif, Muhammad & Inam, Azhar & Adamowski, Jan & Shoaib, Muhammad & Tariq, Hisham & Ahmad, Shakil & Alizadeh, Mohammad Reza & Nazeer, Aftab, 2023. "Development of methods for the simplification of complex group built causal loop diagrams: A case study of the Rechna doab," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 476(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:476:y:2023:i:c:s0304380022002903
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2022.110192
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380022002903
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2022.110192?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Xiao, Yang-Hua & Wu, Wen-Tao & Wang, Hui & Xiong, Momiao & Wang, Wei, 2008. "Symmetry-based structure entropy of complex networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 387(11), pages 2611-2619.
    2. D F Andersen & J A M Vennix & G P Richardson & E A J A Rouwette, 2007. "Group model building: problem structuring, policy simulation and decision support," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(5), pages 691-694, May.
    3. Hugo Herrera & Birgit Kopainsky, 2020. "Using system dynamics to support a participatory assessment of resilience," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 342-355, September.
    4. Scott, Rodney J & Cavana, Robert Y & Cameron, Donald, 2016. "Recent evidence on the effectiveness of group model building," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 908-918.
    5. Rehman, G. & Jehangir, W. A. & Rehman, A. & Aslam, M. & Skogerboe, G. V., 1997. "Salinity management alternatives for the Rechna Doab, Punjab, Pakistan. Volume 1 - Principal findings and implications for sustainable irrigated agriculture," IWMI Research Reports H009234, International Water Management Institute.
    6. Agatino Rizzo & Abdolrasoul Habibipour & Anna Ståhlbröst, 2021. "Transformative thinking and urban living labs in planning practice: a critical review and ongoing case studies in Europe," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(10), pages 1739-1757, October.
    7. Lindsey Jones, 2019. "Resilience isn't the same for all: Comparing subjective and objective approaches to resilience measurement," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(1), January.
    8. Etienne Rouwette & Ingrid Bastings & Hans Blokker, 2011. "A Comparison of Group Model Building and Strategic Options Development and Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 781-803, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marleen McCardle-Keurentjes & Etiënne A. J. A. Rouwette, 2018. "Asking Questions: A Sine Qua Non of Facilitation in Decision Support?," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(5), pages 757-788, October.
    2. Lami, Isabella M. & Tavella, Elena, 2019. "On the usefulness of soft OR models in decision making: A comparison of Problem Structuring Methods supported and self-organized workshops," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(3), pages 1020-1036.
    3. Scott, Rodney J & Cavana, Robert Y & Cameron, Donald, 2016. "Recent evidence on the effectiveness of group model building," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 908-918.
    4. Marleen H. F. McCardle‐Keurentjes & Etiënne A. J. A. Rouwette & Jac A. M. Vennix & Eric Jacobs, 2018. "Potential benefits of model use in group model building: insights from an experimental investigation," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 34(1-2), pages 354-384, January.
    5. Nuno Videira & Rita Lopes & Paula Antunes & Rui Santos & José Luís Casanova, 2012. "Mapping Maritime Sustainability Issues with Stakeholder Groups," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 596-619, November.
    6. Nicholas Valcourt & Jeffrey Walters & Amy Javernick‐Will & Karl Linden, 2020. "Assessing the efficacy of group model building workshops in an applied setting through purposive text analysis," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 36(2), pages 135-157, April.
    7. Nina Tura & Lea Hannola & Mikko Pynnönen, 2017. "Agile Methods for Boosting the Commercialization Process of New Technology," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(03), pages 1-23, June.
    8. Jones, Lindsey & d'Errico, Marco, 2019. "Whose resilience matters? Like-for-like comparison of objective and subjective evaluations of resilience," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-1.
    9. Midgley, Gerald & Cavana, Robert Y. & Brocklesby, John & Foote, Jeff L. & Wood, David R.R. & Ahuriri-Driscoll, Annabel, 2013. "Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(1), pages 143-154.
    10. Hugo Herrera & Nuno Videira & Hubert P.L.M. Korzilius & Kathya Lorena Cordova‐Pozo & Marleen H.F. McCardle‐Keurentjes, 2022. "Reflecting on factors influencing long‐lasting organisational effects of group model‐building interventions," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 38(2), pages 190-209, April.
    11. Ali, Muhammad Fadzli & Akber, Md. Ali & Smith, Carl & Aziz, Ammar Abdul, 2021. "The dynamics of rubber production in Malaysia: Potential impacts, challenges and proposed interventions," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    12. Natalia Ciobanu & Ali Kerem Saysel, 2021. "Using social–ecological inventory and group model building for resilience assessment to climate change in a network governance setting: a case study from Ikel watershed in Moldova," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 1065-1085, January.
    13. David C. Lane & Özge Pala & Yaman Barlas & Lambertus P. J. Nistelrooij & Etiënne A.J.A. Rouwette & Ilse M. Verstijnen & Jac A.M. Vennix, 2015. "The Eye of the Beholder: A Case Example of Changing Clients' Perspectives Through Involvement in the Model Validation Process," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(4), pages 437-449, July.
    14. Rodney J. Scott & Robert Y. Cavana & Donald Cameron, 2016. "Client Perceptions of Reported Outcomes of Group Model Building in the New Zealand Public Sector," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 77-101, January.
    15. Bruno M. B. Pinto & Fernando A. F. Ferreira & Ronald W. Spahr & Mark A. Sunderman & Leandro F. Pereira, 2023. "Analyzing causes of urban blight using cognitive mapping and DEMATEL," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 1083-1110, June.
    16. Gürsan, C. & de Gooyert, V., 2021. "The systemic impact of a transition fuel: Does natural gas help or hinder the energy transition?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    17. Sarah Gerritsen & Sophia Harré & David Rees & Ana Renker-Darby & Ann E. Bartos & Wilma E. Waterlander & Boyd Swinburn, 2020. "Community Group Model Building as a Method for Engaging Participants and Mobilising Action in Public Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-12, May.
    18. Jagjit Singh Srai & Nitin Joglekar & Naoum Tsolakis & Sandeep Kapur, 2022. "Interplay between Competing and Coexisting Policy Regimens within Supply Chain Configurations," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(2), pages 457-477, February.
    19. Hugo Herrera & Birgit Kopainsky, 2020. "Using system dynamics to support a participatory assessment of resilience," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 342-355, September.
    20. Sanchez, Mari & Lamont, Michèle & Zilberstein, Shira, 2022. "How American college students understand social resilience and navigate towards the future during covid and the movement for racial justice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 301(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:476:y:2023:i:c:s0304380022002903. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.