Experimental process methodology

All rankings can be modified until the campaing end.

All the examples on this page have been positioned randomly, please disregard them for your rankings.

Introduction

The experiment is divided into 5 steps. The first three steps are ordered and can only be started once the previous step has been completed. The next two steps are additional. They are not decisive in establishing the reference ranking, but they allow an integration of biodiversity gains into their reality, and to make the practices interdependent and integrated into an environment.

The first three stages are mandatory to take a participation into account. They allow us to build, step by step, a participant's ranking. A socio-ecosystem reference ranking is calculated by the robustness of the consensus between the individual rankings.

The two additional steps allow to relax the independence hypotheses of inbetween practices' gains and sites environments conditions with the practices. In one, we categorize the relationships between practices (two by two) from highly synergistic to highly redundant (5 categories). In the other, we ask to categorize the effect of a gradient (humidity / acidity / landscape openness) on the realization of the practice's gain, from highly amplified to highly reduced (5 categories).

The additional steps, although not mandatory, have a strong added value, as they enable the practice to be inscribed in the reality of its realization. Furthermore, those assessments are impossible to carry out in-vivo, and can only be approximated in this exercise type (expert opinion / semi-quantitative).

  

Evaluated items :

For a given socio-ecosystem, in a given climate, for a given biome and for a given use

• a list of 15 to 20 practices
• 3 at 6 levels (cumulative) per practice
• 3 site conditions
• + the various combinations of these elements

Sequence :

Mandatory pathway :

Presentation

   

Exercise 1 : Classification inside a practice

Practice by practice, participants explore the different levels and rank them according to the expected gain for the ecosystem service under study.

Each level must be positioned on a gain scale, where the difference between levels reflects the relative difference in these gains.

Exercise screen display

On the left is the list of practices. On the right, the content of the alternatives for the practice currently being evaluated is displayed, with the title shown at the top of the window. In the center is the gain scale on which the positioning should be performed.

The full content of the practice taxonomy is available in the PDF document, downloadable from the program page.

In this first exercise, the practices are presented successively, with their alternatives placed on a scale from minimal gain to maximal gain. Starting with this individual work on the content of the practices allows participants to become familiar with the specifics of the items that will be evaluated throughout the experimental process.

Participants must reposition the levels so that the gaps reflect the relative differences in expected service gains. The requirements described in the levels are not proportional: a uniform gain gap between levels would not necessarily be coherent.

Once the evaluation of a practice is completed, the expert indicates their level of confidence in the positioning. These confidence levels help account for intra-evaluator variance and encourage risk-taking, particularly for practices that are less well-known.

 

Exercise 2 : Classification between practices

In this step, each practice is considered at its maximum level. Participants must rank all the practices according to the expected gain for the ecosystem service under study.

They place one or more practices at the endpoints of the gain scale, then space the others so that the gaps reflect their relative differences in effectiveness.

Exercise screen display

On the left, the practices menu indicates their status (evaluated / removed from the set of items). When a practice is selected, it is possible to modify the values entered in Step 1. On the right, the list of excluded practices is displayed, while the positioning scale is shown in the center.  

The procedure for this second exercise is similar to the first. The main difference is that the comparison is now made between practices (inter-practice) rather than between levels of the same practice (intra-practice).

Participants reposition the practices so that the gaps represent the relative differences in expected gains for the ecosystem service under study.

At the end of the evaluation, the expert indicates their level of confidence in the ranking established, which allows for the measurement of intra-evaluator variability.

    

Exercise 3 : Adjust the overview

In this step, participants are provided with a summary view of their previous evaluations. The exercise consists of adjusting the relative position of the least effective practice compared to the most effective one on the gain scale for the ecosystem service under study.  

Exercise screen display

The cursor is initially placed so that the least effective practice is positioned at 50% of the height of the most effective practice. When it is moved, all intermediate positions (levels and practices) are recalculated automatically to maintain consistency with the gaps recorded during previous exercises.

On the left, the practices menu allows navigation between those already evaluated or modification of the values from Step 1. In the center, previous evaluations are displayed in relation to each other; when a level is hovered over, its detailed content appears near the cursor. On the right is the adjustment cursor, which allows positioning the height of the least effective practice.

 

Detailed display of exercise 3

The cursor must be positioned relative to the entire display. Minor adjustments are not possible, although the values from Exercise 1 can be readjusted by clicking on the practice in the menu.  

With the exercise 1 and 2 results

Once satisfied with the result, the participant clicks “Finish” at the bottom of the screen to submit their evaluation. This action does not prevent returning to modify the responses until the end of the campaign.  

Indicate that you have finished

A dialog box then opens, allowing the participant to consent to being acknowledged by name in the publication of the results. The acknowledgments will appear as a list of names, completely dissociated from individual contributions.  

Consent to be named in the results

   

Additional pathways

The additional pathways are optional, but they provide significant added value. They allow the exploration of combinations of practices and environmental contexts that would be too complex to measure experimentally in vivo, particularly due to the contingencies inherent in measuring ecosystem services in the field.  

Presentation

These pathways are only accessible after completing the three mandatory steps (1, 2, and 3). They are not sequential: participants can start with the pathway of their choice and complete them in any order they wish.

  

Additional exercise: Interactions between practices

When a practice is implemented, its expected gain can be amplified or reduced by the presence of another practice.

The exercise consists of placing movable blocks representing other practices near the practice under study, in order to categorize the effect of the latter on the gain of the practice being considered.

Display of the exercise: Interactions between practices

On the left, the practices menu allows navigation between the items to be completed. At the top of the window is the practice under study, considered present in the environment. The other practices appear as movable blocks to be placed in the boxes corresponding to the relationship categories. Practices considered outside the evaluator’s field of expertise, as well as those whose influence has been assessed as null, are excluded.  

Final categorization possible with P1 (window title, not shown here)

To facilitate the task, symmetry relationships are suggested: for example, if the pair P1 → P2 is marked as “very synergistic”, then P2 → P1 will automatically be proposed as such, while remaining editable. Blocks that are not moved correspond to unqualified relationships.

This exercise allows adjustment of the expected ecosystem service gains in a complete maintenance policy, takes existing interactions into account, and encourages beneficial combinations of practices.

Additional exercise: Effect of the environmental context

This exercise aims to categorize the effects of environmental context characteristics on the expected gain for each practice.

Display of the exercise

When a practice is selected, the task is to assess the effect of three gradients—climatic, landscape, and anthropogenic (traffic)—on the achievement of the gain. We are aware that these criteria do not exhaustively describe an environment, but they allow testing of the collection method and its influence on the gain calculation.

The gradient should be interpreted at the scale of all roadsides considered. For example, “the wettest roadsides” refers to the wettest sites among those located in the temperate climate of Western Europe.

Final categorization possible

It is not necessary to complete all combinations for a participation to be considered. This exercise allows adjustment of gain estimates based on the ecological context, encourages projects that benefit from local conditions, and prompts reconsideration of those whose practices may be less suited to their environment.