@article{fdi:010088084,
  title = {{P}articipatory landscape sustainability assessment : where do we stand ? : a systematic literature review},
  author = {{M}oreau, {C}l{\'e}mence and {B}lanco, {J}ulien and {R}andriamalala, {J}. and {L}aques, {A}nne-{E}lisabeth and {C}arri{\`e}re, {S}t{\'e}phanie {M}.},
  editor = {},
  language = {{ENG}},
  abstract = {{C}ontext {I}n line with inter- and transdisciplinary approaches promoted in {S}ustainability {S}cience, {P}articipatory {L}andscape {S}ustainability {A}ssessments ({PLSA}) are developing at a rapid pace. {PLSA} approaches share with other assessments the aim of standardizing observations, while sharing with participatory processes place-based and context-specific viewpoints from diverse stakeholders.{O}bjective {T}his literature review presents different {PLSA} approaches identified in studies, and argues that the lack of a coherent framework and poor substantive theorization can limit the development of {PLSA} research.{M}ethods {T}he study involved a systematic literature review on a corpus of 425 publications, combining bibliographic mapping on the full corpus and a content analysis of a sub-corpus of 138 full texts.{R}esults {T}he review of the literature showed that (i) {PLSA} studies lie at the intersection of ecology, landscape planning and sociocultural approaches, (ii) {PLSA} indicators evaluate on average 4.7 categories of sustainability, but most are applied at a local level and provide a snapshot of a situation, (iii) stakeholders tend not to be involved in the choice of indicators (only 28.9% of studies) and even more rarely in assessment design (7.2%). {W}hen stakeholders are included, they are usually only asked to populate preidentified indicators (63.9%). (iv) {D}iverse viewpoints are taken into consideration mainly by using indicators (67.3%) rather than by promoting discussion (39.8%). {T}hree types of {PLSA} study can be differentiated: the participation-oriented approach, the contributive approach (rooted in positivism) and the collaborative approach (rooted in constructivism).{C}onclusion {W}e advocate that future {PLSA} studies pay more attention to consistency between their objectives, the methods they employ, and the theoretical grounding they enlist. {T}his might help to avoid confusion about different participatory approaches and to understand their respective contributions to {L}andscape {S}ustainability {S}cience.},
  keywords = {{A}ssessment ; {I}ndicators ; {L}andscape sustainability ; {P}articipation ; {S}ustainability science},
  booktitle = {},
  journal = {{L}andscape {E}cology},
  volume = {38},
  numero = {},
  pages = {1903--1918},
  ISSN = {0921-2973},
  year = {2023},
  DOI = {10.1007/s10980-023-01695-x},
  URL = {https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010088084},
}