Although the scientists did not address every

single issue that the stakeholders brought up, the discussions were open and flexible. Torin 1 solubility dmso The scientists enriched their expertise with additional, new and innovative research questions. The Nephrops and Baltic cases represent situations, where standard modelling approaches are not suited, requiring new, non-standard approaches; both cases focused on comprehensive and time-consuming model development. In the Nephrops case study, the scientists focused on developing an innovative model that fits the specifics of Nephrops biology, population and fleet dynamics, but the model has not been useful so far in the participatory process with the involved stakeholders. In the Baltic case study, the participatory model development had been the explicit objective. Ultimately, such an innovative, integrative model could be used for operational management advice. Despite direct stakeholder participation in model construction, here, science partly pre-framed

the problem by pre-defining a core-model structure (around herring growth). In all four case studies, scientists had invited stakeholders to participate in framing the research questions. An open invitation to participate and communicate with each other seems to be essential for jointly framing the problem and the research question. This should involve the willingness of all participants to reframe the issue at stake dependent on the inputs of other participants. Structural issues around model MK-2206 in vitro complexity can confine participatory modelling to stick to rather standard modelling Ribociclib mw approaches. A participatory approach

inspired by post-normal science is not about answering to all (unanswerable) questions. The key is to jointly reflect on and identify knowledge gaps that matter in the real world, taking into account an achievable, realistic time frame. Participatory modelling is sometimes expected to “integrate all types of knowledge (empirical, technical and scientific) from a variety of disciplines and sources” [22]. The incorporation of experiential, local, indigenous, and folklore knowledge and the accumulated expertise of practitioners is considered necessary to take account of the specific features around a particular problem, in particular in “post-normal” situations [27] and [76]. However, practical implementation is difficult. The Investinfish South West project [34] faced methodological difficulties when trying to integrate stakeholders’ non-scientific knowledge into a bioeconomic model at the model development stage [78]. The Baltic case study pushed forward this exercise of knowledge integration successfully, developing formalized approaches (mental modelling and conditioning of stakeholder-models on various sources of available data [50]). The approach could theoretically be applied to any other situations.