Training for Development

Sport, participatory science and project-based learning: an ecology of autonomy, commitment and self-transcendence

Admin — 2026-06-14T10:05:54Z

Following the facilitation of the module "Sports and Science in Support of a Participatory Research Project" by Stephanie Mériaux-Scoffier and Philippe Wiscart-Goetz, as part of the Hackathon "Participatory Science for the Ocean" organized in connection with the 3rd United Nations Ocean Conference in June 2025 in Nice, this article proposes a conceptual model of the contributions of sports practice, whether individual or collective, to project-based learning and participatory science projects. It argues that sport should not be regarded as a peripheral, recreational or merely health-related activity, but as a complete ecology for developing autonomy, commitment, responsibility, resilience, robustness and self-transcendence.

Drawing on the intersection of sport psychology, project-based learning, participatory science, participatory research, field practices and outdoor sports activities, particularly kayaking, the article shows that sport can play a structuring role in training research participants. It engages the body, emotions, cognition, the relationship to the collective, the perception of the environment and the ability to act under uncertainty. It can thus help transform participants into actors capable of observing, deciding, cooperating, documenting, learning, transmitting and contributing to the production of knowledge.

In this perspective, sport can be considered a true school of research. The athlete's journey, especially when it reaches a high level of demand, presents strong analogies with that of the researcher: long-term learning, managing uncertainty, confronting failure, setting goals, concentration, emotional regulation, cooperation, productive solitude and the need to transform experience into progress. A broader question then arises: what would happen if researchers were trained more like high-level athletes, and athletes like researchers? Such an approach would make it possible to connect performance with reflexivity, effort with the production of knowledge, and research with broader societal challenges: public health, equal access, well-being at work, social climate, team cohesion and the collective capacity to act in complex environments.

The article proposes an eight-dimensional model: bodily activation, situated experience, observation, formalization, cooperation, empowerment, restitution and transfer. This model makes it possible to integrate sports practice into participatory science systems without instrumentalizing it, while respecting cultures, bodies, levels, ages, vulnerabilities and territorial contexts.

Authors

Stephanie Mériaux-Scoffier, Associate Professor (HDR), LAMHESS, Université Côte d'Azur

Philippe Wiscart-Goetz, company director, Cap Kayak, Nice Kayak Club, graduate of the UFR STAPS in Nice

Thomas EGLI, founder of the NGO Objectif Sciences International, specialist in project-based learning and high-river kayaking practitioner

To read all the content, log in for free to the website.

Keywords

Introduction: why introduce sport into Participatory Science?

Participatory Science is often described as an approach enabling citizens, students, residents, associations, families or non-specialist audiences to contribute to the production of scientific knowledge. This definition is accurate, but it remains incomplete if it reduces participation to data collection, occasional observation or assistance provided to research already entirely designed by specialists.

From a more ambitious perspective, Participatory Science can become a space for capacity-building. It enables people who do not come from the academic world to understand the issues involved in research, discuss its objectives, learn protocols, contribute to the interpretation of results, propose improvements, and even gradually become co-authors of a project. The question is therefore not only how to enable participation. It is how to foster the emergence of capable participants.

Project-based learning provides a decisive framework here. It does not simply consist of having a group work on a concrete activity. It organizes a pathway in which learners gradually become responsible for a real objective, a process, a production and a restitution. It transforms learning into a situated, collective, progressive experience oriented toward a useful result.

In this perspective, sport appears as a lever that is still under-modelled. It is not merely a question of saying that sport is good for health, that it reduces stress or that it promotes cohesion. It is a matter of understanding how sporting experience can prepare, strengthen and structure the skills necessary for project-based learning and Participatory Science.

In sport, the body learns before discourse. The practitioner must act in a real environment, sometimes uncertain, sometimes changing, sometimes demanding. They must perceive, decide, adjust, start again, cooperate, manage their emotions, accept fatigue, recognize their limits, build confidence and develop a finer relationship with their environment. These dimensions are also at the heart of Participatory Science projects.

The central hypothesis of this article is therefore the following: when integrated intentionally, progressively, safely and in a culturally adapted way, sporting practice acts as a bodily laboratory for the skills necessary for Participatory Science. It prepares participants for autonomy, responsibility, initiative-taking, emotional robustness, attention to the environment, cooperation and the transformation of experience into shareable knowledge.

1. Three traditions to connect: sport, project-based learning and Participatory Science

1.1. Project-based learning: learning by producing

Project-based learning is based on a simple but demanding idea: people learn better when learning is oriented toward a real production, a concrete problem, an identifiable audience and a shared responsibility. The project is not a pretext. It is the medium of learning, but also its revealer.

In a project, participants must understand the context, clarify the objective, identify constraints, distribute roles, produce solutions, test, fail, adjust and present the results. They therefore learn knowledge, methods, attitudes, social skills and organizational skills at the same time.

Project-based learning does not aim only to transmit content. It aims to build a capacity to act.

1.2. Participatory Science: producing knowledge with society

Participatory Science can take several forms. Some approaches mobilize citizens as observers or data collectors. Others involve them in analysis, the formulation of questions, the design of protocols or the governance of the project.

The typology proposed by Haklay distinguishes several levels of participation, from simple contribution to more advanced forms of citizen science in which participants take part in defining problems, methods and uses of the results. This distinction is essential, because it makes it possible not to confuse contribution with autonomy.

In the most transformative projects, Participatory Science does not only seek to obtain more data. It seeks to produce knowledge that is more situated, more open, more democratic and more capable of acting on territories, behaviours, public policies or social practices.

1.3. Sport psychology: mental, psychosomatic and cognitive skills

Sport psychology has long identified mental skills that are decisive in performance and learning. The model by Durand-Bush, Salmela and Green-Demers distinguishes in particular basic skills such as confidence, commitment and goal setting; psychosomatic skills such as stress management, fear control and regulation of the activation level; and cognitive skills such as concentration, distraction control, mental imagery and planning.

These skills are not specific to sport. They are also necessary in research, project management, cooperation, education, impact entrepreneurship and Participatory Science. A participant in a scientific project must also maintain an objective, manage uncertainty, remain focused, learn from failure, regulate their emotions, cooperate with others and act within a constrained framework.

Sport can therefore be understood as a space for intensive training in transferable skills.

2. Sport as a gentle limit-situation

Sporting practice places the participant in a particular situation: they are confronted with a real but generally framed challenge; with a difficulty, but a progressive one; with a risk, but a regulated one; with uncertainty, but accompanied uncertainty. This is what can be called a gentle limit-situation.

In a hard limit-situation, the individual is exposed to a constraint that is too strong and may disorganize, injure or exclude. In a gentle limit-situation, by contrast, the constraint is strong enough to produce learning, but safe enough to allow progression.

This logic is central to sport. Effort, fatigue, balance, speed, coordination, the relationship to the environment, competition or cooperation force the practitioner to move out of a passive position. But supervision, rules, equipment, progressivity and the collective make this movement possible.

Project-based learning functions in a similar way. A good project must be demanding enough to set participants in motion, but not to the point of overwhelming them. It must create a fruitful tension between what one already knows how to do and what one must learn to do.

Participatory Science needs this tension. If the project is too simple, it does not transform. If it is too complex, it discourages. Sport helps participants bodily experience this point of balance.

3. Typology of sporting forms that can be mobilized in participatory projects

3.1. Individual sports

Individual sports, such as running, swimming, climbing, kayaking, cycling, hiking or martial arts, strongly develop the relationship to oneself. They confront the practitioner with their real level, pace, limits, progress and emotions.

They are particularly useful for working on:

self-confidence;
effort management;
autonomy;
perseverance;
personal responsibility;
the ability to set goals;
acceptance of failure and starting again.

In a Participatory Science project, these skills are decisive for participants who must learn to observe, measure, document or contribute regularly, sometimes without immediate gratification.

3.2. Team sports

Team sports, such as football, rugby, basketball, volleyball or relay races, develop cooperation, communication, mutual trust and understanding of roles.

They are particularly useful for working on:

mutual support;
distributed leadership;
rapid decision-making;
coordination;
responsibility toward the group;
listening;
conflict management;
the ability to accept a collective strategy.

In Participatory Science, participants often have to act in networks, share protocols, produce comparable data and accept that their individual contribution only makes sense within a collective dynamic.

3.3. Outdoor sports

Outdoor sports occupy a special place. Kayaking, sailing, hiking, canyoning, diving, orienteering, surfing, skiing, mountain walking or navigation put the participant in direct contact with an environment.

They develop:

attention to environmental conditions;
reading the terrain;
risk awareness;
observation;
humility in relation to the environment;
adaptation;
the ability to act with nature rather than against it.

These dimensions are central in environmental Participatory Science. The participant is not merely in a learning space. They are in a living, moving, complex environment that responds to their gestures.

3.4. Endurance sports

Endurance sports make it possible to work on the long term. They teach that action is not limited to initial intensity. One must endure, manage resources, know oneself, anticipate fatigue and accept fluctuations in motivation.

They are particularly relevant for participatory research projects, which are often long, repetitive, demanding and sometimes invisible in their immediate results.

3.5. Technical sports

Technical sports, such as kayaking, climbing, archery, sailing, diving or certain martial arts, develop a precise relationship between gesture, safety, protocol and repetition.

They make it possible to work on:

rigour;
progressive learning;
precision;
attention to instructions;
safety;
acceptance of correction;
understanding the consequences of a poorly executed gesture.

These forms of learning are directly transferable to participatory scientific protocols.

4. Socio-anthropological modelling: sport as a producer of collective life

Sport is a social fact. It does not only produce individual effects. It organizes relationships, belongings, rites, rules, roles and forms of recognition.

In many cultures, bodily practices play a role in social integration, education, transmission, entry into adulthood, the symbolic resolution of tensions or the construction of a collective identity. Even when practised in a modern framework, sport retains this capacity to create bonds.

In Participatory Science projects, this dimension is valuable. Many audiences may feel distant from science because they do not recognize themselves in its codes, places, languages or institutions. Sport can act as a mediator. It creates a shared space of action in which social statuses are temporarily redistributed.

A researcher, an adolescent, an educator, a parent, a resident, a migrant, an athlete, a technician or an elected representative may find themselves in the same bodily activity. They do not bring the same knowledge to it, but they share an experience there. This experience can become the starting point for a more balanced relationship.

Sport can thus help transform a beneficiary audience into a learning collective.

It also makes it possible to open scientific projects to audiences that would not spontaneously come to a conference, a laboratory or an abstract protocol. Children, families, people with disabilities, disadvantaged groups or audiences distant from science can enter into a research process through an accessible, joyful, useful and situated sporting experience.

Sport does not replace scientific mediation. It can become one of its pathways.

5. Psychological modelling: confidence, commitment, resilience

5.1. Self-confidence

Sport develops confidence because it gives the participant concrete evidence of progress. What was impossible becomes difficult, then possible, then manageable. This progression is visible in the body.

In a participatory scientific project, this confidence is essential. Many participants initially think that science is not for them. They doubt their ability to observe properly, understand a protocol, handle tools, produce reliable data or speak up.

Sporting practice makes this progression tangible: learning means beginning awkwardly, starting again, receiving feedback, adjusting and realizing that one is becoming capable.

5.2. Commitment

Sporting commitment is supported by several dimensions: pleasure, challenge, the group, the objective, progress, identification with the role and recognition. These same levers are necessary in Participatory Science.

A participant does not commit sustainably only because they are told that the project is important. They commit because they understand their place, feel their usefulness, see their progress and experience a bond with others.

Sport offers a concrete model of embodied commitment.

5.3. Resilience

Resilience is not only the ability to endure a difficulty. It is the ability to reorganize after a difficulty, learn from an error, transform a failure into information and continue without being reduced to the difficulty encountered.

In sport, error is permanent: poor gesture, wrong trajectory, fatigue, fall, defeat, fear, hesitation, imbalance. But if the framework is good, error becomes material for learning.

In Participatory Science, this culture of error is indispensable. Participants must be able to understand that imperfect data, a poorly applied protocol or an invalidated hypothesis are not humiliating failures, but stages of clarification.

5.4. Robustness

Robustness here refers to the ability to hold up in an imperfect environment. A participatory project never takes place under ideal conditions. There are delays, absences, unforeseen events, misunderstandings, material constraints, group tensions and missing data.

Sport trains precisely for this reality. It teaches people to act with wind, fatigue, weather, terrain, the opponent, equipment, fear and uncertainty. It makes the idea that real action always takes place in an incomplete world more acceptable.

6. Neurocognitive and behavioural modelling

Sporting practice mobilizes complex cognitive processes. It engages attention, inhibition, working memory, cognitive flexibility, anticipation, planning and decision-making.

In many sports, the practitioner must process several pieces of information simultaneously: their body, others, space, rules, time, the objective, danger, rhythm and weak signals. This cognitive activity is not abstract. It is embodied in action.

This embodied cognition is particularly interesting for Participatory Science. Field projects require perceiving, selecting, comparing, interpreting and documenting situated information. The participant must learn to see what matters.

Sport also develops regulation of the activation level. Too little activation produces inattention or passivity. Too much activation produces panic or haste. The athlete gradually learns to find an effective zone of engagement.

In a participatory scientific project, this regulation is also necessary: staying focused during an observation, not becoming discouraged by a repetitive task, not panicking when faced with a technical difficulty, not becoming scattered in a collective project.

Sport can therefore be seen as neurocognitive training for situated action.

7. Sport and project-based learning: from sporting challenge to scientific challenge

Sport and project-based learning share the same deep structure.

In both cases, there are:

an objective;
constraints;
rules;
a collective or a framework for action;
progression;
feedback;
errors;
adjustments;
an observable production;
a transformation of the participant.

Sport can thus serve as a warm-up to the project posture. It brings participants into a dynamic of action even before the project is intellectually formulated. It sets them in motion, both literally and figuratively.

In a hackathon, a training course, a scientific stay, a discovery class or a field operation, a well-chosen sporting practice can prepare participants for cooperation, listening, controlled risk, role-taking, confidence and commitment.

But this integration must be intentional. It is not enough to add a sporting activity to the programme. The pedagogical link between the bodily activity and the project must be organized.

After the activity, it must be possible to ask:

What did we learn about ourselves?
What did we learn about the group?
What roles emerged?
How did we manage fear or uncertainty?
How did we make decisions?
What errors helped us progress?
What skills are transferable to the scientific project?
How can this experience be transformed into a method?

It is this reflective passage that transforms sport into a tool for project-based learning.

8. Sport and Participatory Science: from practitioner to co-investigator

Sport can become a direct support for Participatory Science when it makes it possible to observe, measure, document or access environments.

A kayaking outing can become an operation for observing the coastline. A hike can become biodiversity monitoring. An orienteering race can become participatory mapping. A dive can become a species survey. A bicycle outing can become an air-quality measurement. A collective walk can become an investigation into urban accessibility. A nautical activity can become a citizen observatory of floating waste, birds, water temperature or coastal uses.

In this perspective, the athlete is not only a practitioner. They become a co-investigator.

This transformation requires several conditions:

simple protocols;
progressive training;
clear safety;
useful data;
visible restitution;
recognition of contributions;
articulation with researchers or institutions;
an understanding of the meaning of observation.

Sport then makes it possible to connect sensory experience and knowledge production. It links gesture, environment and data.

9. Kayaking as an integrative model

Kayaking is a particularly rich case for thinking about this articulation.

It is both an individual sport and a collective activity. Each practitioner is alone in their craft, but depends on the group for safety, orientation, rhythm and decision-making. It engages autonomy and interdependence.

It is practised in a moving natural environment: sea, river, lake, current, wind, wave, depth, weather, temperature. The kayaker must learn to read the environment. They cannot impose their will on the water. They must compose with it.

It develops technical skills: getting into the kayak, paddling, steering, balancing, recovering, securing oneself, getting back into the kayak, helping another practitioner. These skills build self-confidence because they transform an initial fear into a real capacity.

It also develops mental skills: staying calm in waves, accepting being tossed around, relaxing, anticipating, deciding, not tensing up, assessing risk, giving up if necessary.

Finally, it provides access to observation areas that are sometimes difficult to reach from land. Kayaking can therefore become a research tool: wildlife observation, photographic surveys, waste monitoring, access to coves, non-motorized approach, coastal awareness, collection of environmental information.

As a metaphor, kayaking says something profound about Participatory Science: moving forward in a living environment, reading signals, correcting one's trajectory, cooperating, holding one's course, accepting uncertainty and learning from the field.

10. Application to researchers, doctoral students and scientific teams

The value of sport does not only concern non-scientific audiences. It also concerns researchers, doctoral students and scientific teams.

Research life is often marked by sedentary behaviour, isolation, pressure, uncertainty, cognitive fatigue, symbolic competition, difficulty completing work and sometimes abandonment. In some doctoral pathways, a lack of well-being, loss of meaning or difficulty organizing time can become dropout factors.

Integrating sporting practice into research environments can therefore have several effects:

improve stress regulation;
strengthen well-being;
create team cohesion;
give bodily rhythms to long intellectual activities;
reduce isolation;
support concentration;
restore a sense of daily accomplishment;
develop resilience in the face of scientific setbacks.

This proposal may seem counter-intuitive. Adding sport to an already busy schedule may appear to be a waste of time. Yet if sporting practice improves quality of presence, mental clarity, psychological health and productivity, it does not necessarily reduce work. On the contrary, it can make work more sustainable.

This nevertheless requires a change of paradigm. Sport should not be considered a personal luxury to be practised once the “real work” is finished. It can be recognized as a component of the ecology of scientific work.

11. Intercultural dimension: not exporting a single sporting model

The integration of sport into Participatory Science must remain culturally situated.

Not all cultures value the same bodily practices, the same relationships to effort, the same forms of competition, the same uses of the body, the same gender rules, the same conceptions of the collective or the same ways of surpassing oneself.

It would therefore be problematic to export a Western, competitive, individualistic or standardized sporting model into all contexts. In some territories, walking, dance, rowing, wrestling, navigation, collective games, martial arts, agricultural practices, fishing, traditional hunting, subsistence activities or daily travel may play a more relevant role than institutionalized sports.

The issue is not to make all audiences fit into a narrow definition of sport. It is to recognize the bodily practices that, in each culture, develop attention, autonomy, responsibility, cooperation, courage, self-control and the relationship to the environment.

Inequalities of access must also be taken into account: gender, age, disability, social class, health, safety, equipment, availability, cultural norms and possible trauma. Sport must not become a new tool of exclusion.

It must be designed as a gateway to the capacity to act.

12. Proposed model: the Sport-Project-Science cycle

Based on the preceding elements, it is possible to propose an eight-phase model.

Phase 1 — Bodily activation

Sport sets participants in motion. It moves the group out of a seated, passive or strictly discursive posture. It creates a different form of availability.

Phase 2 — Situated experience

Participants experience a real situation, in an environment, with constraints, emotions, interactions and unforeseen events.

Phase 3 — Observation

The experience is transformed into an object of observation: what happened? What did we see, feel, measure, understand? What signals did we perceive?

Phase 4 — Formalization

The group links the observations to concepts, hypotheses, data, maps, narratives, protocols or research questions.

Phase 5 — Cooperation

Participants organize roles, responsibilities, complementarities and decision-making modes.

Phase 6 — Empowerment

Each person understands their contribution. The project becomes partly their own. Participation ceases to be merely presence.

Phase 7 — Restitution

The group produces a shareable result: data, poster, map, narrative, prototype, protocol, presentation, educational tool or project proposal.

Phase 8 — Transfer

The skills acquired are transferred to other contexts: school, laboratory, association, territory, impact enterprise, research programme, public policy or personal project.

13. Limits, risks and points of vigilance

Integrating sport into Participatory Science entails several risks.

The first is instrumentalization. Sport may be used as simple entertainment, with no real link to learning, research or the project. In this case, it entertains, but does not structure.

The second is the excessive valorization of high-performing profiles. If the system admires only the fastest, strongest or bravest, it reproduces hierarchies and may exclude less athletic people.

The third is confusion between self-transcendence and exceeding safety limits. Self-transcendence has pedagogical value only if it remains chosen, progressive, accompanied and respectful of people's integrity.

The fourth is cultural risk. A sporting activity may be experienced as unsuitable, embarrassing, socially inappropriate or inaccessible depending on the context.

The fifth is a lack of evaluation. It is not enough to assert that sport produces autonomy or resilience. Effects must be documented, experiences collected, systems compared, limits analysed and knowledge produced.

An ethical framework is therefore necessary. It must include:

consent;
safety;
inclusion;
accessibility;
progressivity;
diversity of bodies;
diversity of cultures;
the possibility of not taking part in a physical activity;
recognition of non-competitive learning.

14. Discussion: toward a bodily ecology of Participatory Science

Science is often thought of as an activity of the mind. Participatory Science reminds us that it is also a social activity. The integration of sport makes it possible to add a third dimension: science is also a bodily, situated, emotional and relational activity.

Observing an environment, following a protocol, walking for a long time, paddling, waiting, measuring, concentrating, cooperating, carrying equipment, facing discomfort, revisiting one's errors, recounting what one has seen: all of this engages the body.

It is therefore possible to speak of a bodily ecology of Participatory Science. This ecology does not separate knowledge, action, emotion, the collective and the environment. It thinks them together.

In this perspective, sport becomes a bridge. It connects:

field and knowledge;
effort and attention;
emotion and method;
autonomy and safety;
pleasure and rigour;
self-transcendence and respect for limits;
individual experience and collective production.

This is not a matter of sportivizing all scientific projects. It is a matter of recognizing that certain sporting practices, when well chosen and well integrated, can train participants who are more capable, more committed, more robust and more responsible.

Conclusion

Sporting practice can play a structuring role in project-based learning and Participatory Science. It must not be reduced to an activity of relaxation, health or cohesion. It can become a method for training autonomy, commitment, responsibility, resilience, robustness and self-transcendence.

Sport engages participants in a real experience. It teaches them to act under uncertainty, manage their emotions, cooperate, read an environment, respect rules, take initiatives, start again after failure and gradually transform their capacities.

Participatory Science needs these skills. It cannot be limited to asking citizens to collect data. It must train people capable of understanding, contributing, questioning, documenting, transmitting and sometimes becoming co-authors of projects.

Project-based learning provides the framework for this transformation. Sport can be one of its bodily and social accelerators.

The challenge is therefore not to juxtapose sport and science, but to build hybrid systems in which the sporting gesture becomes a learning gesture, the observation gesture becomes a scientific gesture, and the participant gradually becomes an actor capable of acting on themselves, with others and in the world.

To read all the content,
log in or create a user account for free.

Create a user account for free :

Registering with the site Personal identifiers

Enter your name and email address here. You will receive your personal identifier shortly by email.

Your name or alias (Required)

Your email address (Required)

Password(Required) Confirm the password(Required)

Personal information

Gender
Mr.

Ms.

Family Name (Required)

First name (Required)

Birthday

Biography

Address (Required)

Postcode (Required)

City (Required)

Country (Required)

Mobile: (Required)

Terms of use

I have read and agree the terms of use (Required)

I want to receive the Newsletter

Please leave this field empty:

Bibliography

Europe

Baize, D., d'Arripe-Longueville, F., Piponnier, E., & Scoffier-Meriaux, S. (2024). Psychological risk factors for a first hamstring strain injury in soccer: A qualitative study. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, 6, Article 1377045. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2024.1377045

Moreno-Murcia, J. A., & Huéscar Hernández, E. (2013). The importance of supporting adolescents' autonomy in promoting physical-sport exercise. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 16, Article e81. https://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2013.81

Allan, J. F., & McKenna, J. (2019). Outdoor adventure builds resilient learners for higher education: A quantitative analysis of the active components of positive change. Sports, 7(5), Article 122. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports7050122

North America

Durand-Bush, N., Salmela, J. H., & Green-Demers, I. (2001). The Ottawa Mental Skills Assessment Tool (OMSAT-3). The Sport Psychologist, 15(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.15.1.1

Pedersen, M., Wood, G. E. R., Fernes, P. K., Rosas, L. G., Banchoff, A., & King, A. C. (2022). The “Our Voice” method: Participatory action citizen science research to advance behavioral health and health equity outcomes. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(22), Article 14773. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192214773

South America / Latin America

Arango, C. M., Páez, D. C., Reis, R. S., Brownson, R. C., & Parra, D. C. (2013). Association between the perceived environment and physical activity among adults in Latin America: A systematic review. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 10, Article 122. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-10-122

Blanco-Ramírez, S., Bañales-Seguel, C., Guardado-Torrez, C., Seibert, J., & van Meerveld, I. (2025). Implementation of a global citizen science app in community-based water monitoring: Lessons learned from the CrowdWater experiences in Latin America. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 10(1), Article 10. https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.749

Africa

Burnett, C. (2009). Sport-for-development approaches in the South African context: A case study analysis. South African Journal for Research in Sport, Physical Education and Recreation, 31(1), 29–42.

Malete, L., McCole, D., Tshube, T., Mphela, T., Maro, C., Adamba, C., Machuve, J., & Ocansey, R. (2022). Effects of a sport-based positive youth development program on youth life skills and entrepreneurial mindsets. PLOS ONE, 17(2), Article e0261809. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261809

Asia

Liang, X., Li, R., Wong, S. H. S., Sum, R. K. W., & Sit, C. H. P. (2021). The impact of exercise interventions concerning executive functions of children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactive disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 18, Article 68. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-021-01135-6

Samsudin, S., Kamalden, T. F. T., Aziz, A., Ismail, M. H., Yaakob, S. S. N., & Farizan, N. H. (2021). The impact of outdoor education camp program in building resilience among university students. Asian Journal of University Education, 17(4), 71–83.

Oceania

Rachele, J. N., Jaakkola, T., Washington, T. L., Cuddihy, T. F., & McPhail, S. M. (2015). Adolescent self-reported physical activity and autonomy: A case for constrained and structured environments? Journal of Sports Science & Medicine, 14(3), 568–573.

Hinckson, E., Schneider, M., Winter, S. J., Stone, E., Puhan, M., Stathi, A., Porter, M. M., Gardiner, P. A., Dos Santos, D. L., Wolff, A., & King, A. C. (2017). Citizen science applied to building healthier community environments: Advancing the field through shared construct and measurement development. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 14, Article 133. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-017-0588-6

Antarctica / Polar Environments

Palinkas, L. A., & Suedfeld, P. (2008). Psychological effects of polar expeditions. The Lancet, 371(9607), 153–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61056-3

Smith, N., Kinnafick, F., & Saunders, B. (2017). Coping strategies used during an extreme Antarctic expedition. Journal of Human Performance in Extreme Environments, 13(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.7771/2327-2937.1078

Cross-Cutting Sources

Haklay, M. (2013). Citizen science and volunteered geographic information: Overview and typology of participation. In D. Z. Sui, S. Elwood, & M. F. Goodchild (Eds.), Crowdsourcing geographic knowledge: Volunteered geographic information (VGI) in theory and practice (pp. 105–122). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4587-2_7

Egenrieder, J. A. (2010). Facilitating student autonomy in project-based learning to foster interest and resilience in STEM education and STEM careers. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, 96(4), 35–45.

St1 - Preparation

Admin — 2026-03-05T12:49:57Z

To read all the content, log in for free to the website.

To read all the content,
log in or create a user account for free.

Create a user account for free :

Registering with the site Personal identifiers

Enter your name and email address here. You will receive your personal identifier shortly by email.

Your name or alias (Required)

Please leave this field empty:

Your email address (Required)

Password(Required) Confirm the password(Required)

Personal information

Gender
Mr.

Ms.

Family Name (Required)

First name (Required)

Birthday

Biography

Address (Required)

Postcode (Required)

City (Required)

Country (Required)

Mobile: (Required)

Terms of use

I have read and agree the terms of use (Required)

I want to receive the Newsletter

Please leave this field empty:

Transdisciplinarity and assertiveness: acting within planetary boundaries – Ocean, climate, justice, and economy put to the test of reality

Admin — 2025-11-09T07:36:28Z

Lecture scientifique et opérationnelle de la table ronde d'ouverture consacrée à la capacité d'« agir à l'intérieur des limites imposées par nos écosystèmes et la planète » en ouverture du Hackathon Sciences Participatives Step One dans le cadre de la 3ème Conférence de l'ONU pour l'Océan à Nice, en juin 2025.

Table-Ronde interactive d'ouverture officielle
« Transdisciplinarité et assertivité – Quelles solutions pour agir dans les limites imposées par nos écosystèmes et la planète ? »

Intervenants :
Mme Nathalie HILMI, Chargée de Recherche et Directrice de la section Economie Environnementale au Centre Scientifique de Monaco (CSM) et membre du Haut conseil pour le climat de la Métropole Nice-Côte d'Azur
et
M. Robin DEGRON, Docteur avec habilitation à diriger des recherches en Géographie, Droit et Finances, Directeur de Plan Bleu UNEP Méditerranée,

Président de séance et animateur :
M. Thomas EGLI, Fondateur de l'ONG Objectif Sciences International, animateur principal du Hackathon
|en]
Scientific and operational analysis of the opening roundtable dedicated to the ability to “act within the boundaries imposed by our ecosystems and the planet,” launching the Participatory Science Hackathon Step One as part of the 3rd UN Ocean Conference in Nice, June 2025.

Interactive official opening roundtable
“Transdisciplinarity and assertiveness – What solutions to act within the boundaries imposed by our ecosystems and the planet ?”

Speakers :
Ms. Nathalie HILMI, Researcher and Manager of the Departement Environmental Economics at the Scientific Center of Monaco (CSM) and member of the High Council for Climate of the Nice-Côte d'Azur Metropolis
and
Mr. Robin DEGRON, Doctor with habilitation to supervise research in Geography, Law, and Finance, Director of Plan Bleu UNEP Mediterranean,

Chair and moderator :
Mr. Thomas EGLI, Founder of the NGO Objectif Sciences International, lead facilitator of the Hackathon

To read all the content, log in for free to the website.

Planetary boundaries / equatorial belt & vulnerabilities / marine heatwaves / sea level rise / ocean acidification / mitigation vs adaptation / climate justice / North–South equity / climate migration / blue carbon (mangroves, salt marshes, Posidonia seagrass meadows) / ecological restoration (grafting/genotype banks) / dynamic conservation (ecotypes/assisted migration) / MCDR (Marine Carbon Dioxide Removal) / ocean alkalinity (uncertain impacts) / GMOs/NBTs (varietal selection under water/temperature stress) / coral resilience (mutation/selection) / emission sources: transport (urban vs rural), buildings (thermal renovation), agriculture (N₂O, CH₄), industry (steel, cement), energy (France/EU specificities) / ecosystem services / carbon markets & biodiversity credits / debt-for-nature swaps / double materiality / participatory science / co-production of public policies / regenerative economy / transdisciplinarity & multi-disciplinary training.

Based on the contributions of Nathalie HILMI (environmental economics, Scientific Center of Monaco), Robin DEGRON (Plan Bleu – UNEP Mediterranean) and the moderation of Thomas EGLI (Objectif Sciences International), this article links physical diagnostics (marine heatwaves, sea level rise, acidification), socio-economic challenges (transport, buildings, agriculture, industry, energy), and pathways for action combining nature-based solutions, cautious technological innovations, financial levers, and participatory science. The central focus is on “operational” transdisciplinarity and assertiveness in arbitration between mitigation and adaptation, with strong requirements for climate justice, North–South equity, and ecological integrity.

The content below aims to serve as a methodological resource for readers.

"Transdisciplinarity is not a slogan: it is a method to clarify trade-offs between mitigation and adaptation as close as possible to coastal and urban areas." – Nathalie HILMI

"In the Mediterranean basin, pressure is accelerating: marine heatwaves, sea level rise, ocean acidification, and biodiversity stress demand co-constructed and governed responses." – Robin DEGRO

"Participatory science shifts the scale of what's possible: it connects citizens, researchers, businesses, and public authorities to co-produce public policies and evidence of impact." – Thomas EGLI

1. Context, corpus, and objectives

The discussion takes place during the official opening of the #ParticipatoryScience Hackathon for the #Ocean, in an interactive and multilingual format, and draws on the recordings and transcriptions as its primary source material. The scientific objective of this article is twofold: i) to synthesize robust findings on ecosystem states and emission sources; ii) to formulate a methodical, measurable, and replicable roadmap linking biophysical evidence, economic feasibility, governance, and citizen engagement.

2. Theoretical framework and disciplinary scope

The stated approach is strictly transdisciplinary: it goes beyond disciplinary juxtaposition to integrate “value interfaces” across natural sciences, engineering, economics, law, public policy, and social sciences.

The scope encompasses oceanography, climatology and climate science; marine ecology and conservation biology; forestry and terrestrial ecology; urban planning and urban resilience (green islands); transport planning (tramways, urban/rural contrasts) and building thermal performance (thermal renovation); coastal engineering and ecological restoration (coral reefs, Posidonia); genetics and biotechnologies (NBTs, GMOs); materials engineering (alternatives to concrete) and industrial processes (steel, cement); energy (transport electrification, nuclear specificities in France/EU); agronomy, agroecology, permaculture, and food security; environmental economics, ecosystem service valuation, carbon markets and biodiversity credits, debt-for-nature swaps, finance/risk management (double materiality, European directive); climate/adaptation policy and international law; climate justice and North–South equity; sociology, anthropology (endangered cultures, migration), journalism/communication and participatory science as a bridge between stakeholders.

3. Warning signs and consolidated diagnostics

In the Mediterranean basin and beyond, the physical trajectory confirms that we have already crossed several planetary boundaries: intense and repeated marine heatwaves, sea level rise, and ocean acidification with impacts on coral reefs and Posidonia oceanica seagrass meadows (blue carbon). On land, forest mortality is increasing, raising the issue of species selection under future climate. In the equatorial belt & vulnerabilities, cumulative vulnerability combines climate, biodiversity, food security, and climate migration.

The main emission sources (France/EU case) stem from transport (significant urban/rural contrasts and purchasing power constraints), buildings (priority on renovation), and agriculture (N₂O from nitrogen inputs, CH₄ from livestock), with a more nuanced role for industry (steel, cement) and energy (energy mix and the role of nuclear). These dynamics must be interpreted through socio-spatial trajectories (urban tramways vs car dependence in low-density areas) and recent political lessons on acceptability (e.g., "carbon tax" shock).

4. From evidence to solutions: nature, technology, trade-offs

Nature-based solutions (NBS) emerge as a “baseline”: protecting/restoring blue carbon stocks (mangroves, salt marshes, Posidonia seagrass), ecological restoration of coral reefs, and dynamic conservation (use of ecotypes, assisted migration, grafting, genotype banks) along coastal regions. Governance must clarify scale and funding limits and integrate positive externalities (coastal protection, biodiversity, health, education).

On the technological side, MCDR (Marine Carbon Dioxide Removal) components and ocean alkalinity are under study but require robust ecological assessments and methodological caution due to uncertain impacts. Engineering points toward a “green-grey” coastal engineering and materials engineering favoring alternatives to concrete and efficiency in industrial processes. GMO/NBT trajectories are also examined through the lens of risk/benefit/acceptability, both for agriculture and coral resilience.

5. Economic levers, finance, and risk management

Translating ecological benefits into decision-making language requires ecosystem service valuation and well-governed financing mechanisms: carbon markets and biodiversity credits, debt-for-nature swaps, insurance instruments, and finance/risk management frameworks aligned with double materiality (as per the EU directive). These levers should support a regenerative economy where flows restore more than they degrade, not merely displace externalities.

6. Justice, equity, and climate geopolitics

Demanding North–South equity and climate justice means acknowledging differentiated responsibilities, financing adaptation where vulnerability is greatest, and avoiding neo-colonialism in technical, normative, or financial architectures. Addressing climate migration must inform planning, diplomacy, and cooperation — beyond just humanitarian responses.

7. Social mobilization, participatory science, and scaling

Participatory science is presented as a “scale accelerator” able to connect citizens, scientists, companies, and authorities, to co-produce public policies and evidence of impact, and to “pierce through” decision-makers' awareness via direct involvement. Education and journalism/communication are needed for accountability, while companies and local authorities are urged to act as co-actors rather than mere funders.

8. Operational transdisciplinarity and project governance

Making transdisciplinarity operational requires multi-disciplinary teams, role clarity, a defined acceptable complexity threshold, decision traceability, and shared impact metrics. Recommended tools include a mitigation vs adaptation trade-off canvas, ecosystem service valuation matrices, and double materiality guides for projects and portfolios.

9. Case studies and application scenarios

Posidonia, ecotypes, and dynamic conservation — Restoring Mediterranean seagrass meadows benefits from using ecotypes more tolerant to high temperatures (East→West transfers), anticipating thermal regime shifts: this illustrates conservation as a dynamic process, not mere preservation.

Corals and biotechnological trajectories — Recent work shows extinction risks can be reduced via combined strategies of selection, directed mutation, and in situ ecological engineering — provided that risk assessment and acceptability protocols are applied cautiously. This mirrors broader debates on GMOs/NBTs in agriculture.

Hot city, livable city — In Mediterranean cities, urban resilience planning (green islands, shade, water) and thermal renovation reduce exposure to extremes and energy use; conversely, low-density areas remain car-dependent, raising questions of spatial equity and carbon instrument acceptability.

Materials and processes — Reducing the footprint of the steel and cement sectors requires not only process innovation but also alternatives to concrete when safety and cost allow, along with finance/insurance mechanisms aligned with technological risks.

10. Discussion: assertiveness, timeframes, and funding allocation

Assertive climate policy requires clarity on timeframes: radiative stabilization occurs over decades, while adaptation — a “front-line” issue in the Mediterranean — offers immediate damage reduction leverage. Financial flow reallocation remains a bottleneck: today, most climate funding is focused on mitigation, even as vulnerable regions primarily need adaptation; rebalancing via ecosystem services, biodiversity credits, and debt-for-nature swaps, backed by double materiality, aligns with a regenerative economy.

11. Roadmap for the Hackathon and beyond: principles, milestones, deliverables

Four key action principles are proposed: i) “evidence→policy” (protocols and indicators aligned with ecosystem services); ii) “local→systemic” (from site to coastline, neighborhood to watershed); iii) “co-governance” (industries and policymakers as co-actors); iv) “integrity” (caution on MCDR/alkalinity; safeguards against misguided financialization of nature).

Immediate milestones include: NBS teams (Posidonia, corals), finance/partnership track (carbon, biodiversity, debt-for-nature swaps), engineering track (coastal, materials), territory track (urban resilience, mitigation/adaptation trade-offs by geography), and agro-bio track (NBTs/GMOs vs agroecology/permaculture).

Deliverables: end-to-end project sheets, ecosystem service valuation models, pre-financing agreements, participatory science protocol, and media plan.

Conclusion

“Acting within planetary boundaries” is no longer a distant goal but a methodological imperative: linking the power of climate and ocean science to understandable economic instruments, cautious engineering, and shared governance that tackles both mitigation and adaptation simultaneously. Transdisciplinarity becomes a design and arbitration practice; assertiveness becomes an ethical demand — to state where we're going, with whom, and how we measure what is truly restored. Participatory science, by broadening stakeholder involvement and data foundations, offers a chance to bridge the remaining scale gap between ambition and reality.

To read all the content,
log in or create a user account for free.

Create a user account for free :

Registering with the site Personal identifiers

Enter your name and email address here. You will receive your personal identifier shortly by email.

Your name or alias (Required)

Your email address (Required)

Password(Required) Confirm the password(Required)

Personal information

Please leave this field empty:
Gender
Mr.

Ms.

Family Name (Required)

First name (Required)

Birthday

Biography

Address (Required)

Postcode (Required)

City (Required)

Country (Required)

Mobile: (Required)

Terms of use

I have read and agree the terms of use (Required)

I want to receive the Newsletter

Please leave this field empty:

Concept Note - Linking Participatory Sciences and migrations issues

Tiphaine Riaux — 2025-10-22T07:05:20Z

migrations/participatory science/participatory research/citizen participation/social innovation/scientific democracy/migration governance/inclusion/empowerment/human rights/public policies/community knowledge/social impact/intercultural solidarity/social cohesion/sustainable development

To read all the content, log in for free to the website.

THEORETICAL AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Introduction to Participatory Science

Participatory Science aims to integrate democratic practices and scientific rigor within research projects designed to be both innovative and impactful.

It is exemplified by research approaches that directly involve citizens in the production of knowledge. It is based on the idea that everyone, beyond the academic world, can contribute to observation, data collection, and the understanding of complex phenomena. This approach promotes both the enrichment of knowledge, awareness of major contemporary issues, and the connection between science and society.

In these approaches, the scientific method holds a special place in research and innovation, as it develops a critical and analytical mindset among those who practice it.

Introduction to the Challenges and Issues of Migration (Situation Analysis)

At a time when migration occupies an increasing place in public debate and is subject to misinformation, this approach through Participatory Science appears particularly relevant. It allows one to take a step back, analyze this phenomenon with rigor, and provide responses better suited to the many challenges it raises.

Migrations—whether internal, regional, or international—represent a complex phenomenon with economic, social, cultural, and environmental dimensions. While many academic and institutional studies document these dynamics, they often struggle to reflect the lived experiences of migrants and their communities of origin and reception.

Thus, Participatory Science operates on several dimensions. It contributes on the one hand to the production of knowledge about migration, and on the other hand to raising awareness among a wide range of stakeholders. By integrating civil society into research and project design processes, it also acts on a political level by promoting responses that are better adapted to the needs and challenges related to this phenomenon.

OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTED RESULTS

Learning and Awareness

When applied to migration issues, Participatory Science becomes a tool for learning and awareness, helping to better highlight the causes of migration, the lived experiences of migrants, and the challenges they face throughout their journey. It thus contributes to reducing prejudices and stereotypes that fuel tensions and polarization within society.

Empowerment and Responsibility

It also promotes the learning of community knowledge (often rendered invisible) and offers an opportunity for the communities most affected (migrants, host communities, communities impacted by forced migration) to take part in scientific research, data collection, and the sharing of their experiences. In this sense, it contributes to the empowerment of migrants by offering them spaces of responsibility and capacity-building, even in contexts where their room for action is limited.

Democratic Benefits and Better Adaptation of Solutions

Beyond its educational function, Participatory Science is based on the direct involvement of non-scientific citizens in research. Data collection, testimony sharing, and participation in result analysis enable not only a richer production of knowledge but also solutions better adapted to lived realities. This approach increases citizen self-determination and strengthens the legitimacy of results among the communities concerned.

Indirect Influence on Public Policies

Participatory Science also has a democratic dimension, in that it can indirectly influence public policies. By relying on a bottom-up approach, it promotes the active participation of citizens directly affected by a research project. This method, already applied in various fields such as biodiversity, food, or women's living conditions, can—when transposed to migration issues—encourage governments to redefine their priorities and develop policies more respectful of the dignity and human rights of migrants. Because citizens become both co-authors of decisions and better informed about the issues, policy implementation becomes not only easier but also more sustainable over time.

Complements to Scientific Research and Progress

Participatory Science represents a valuable complement to academic and institutional research on migration, as it integrates dimensions often neglected by traditional approaches. It enriches knowledge production by giving a central place to the stories, lived experiences, and community knowledge of directly affected individuals. It also promotes the collection of fine qualitative data—difficult to capture through traditional methods—while creating a relationship of trust with the studied communities. Finally, by bridging scientific expertise and experiential knowledge, it paves the way for new forms of social and methodological innovation.

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES

Spaces/disciplines of intervention of Participatory Science to address migration challenges
Migration issues often lie at the intersection of several themes/disciplines/subjects
Public Health: projects where migrants help identify their healthcare needs, linguistic or administrative barriers, in order to adapt services.

Labor and Exploitation: surveys conducted with migrant workers on working conditions to better document abuses.
Urban Planning and Housing: participatory mapping of neighborhoods where migrants live to understand infrastructure and cohabitation issues.
Education and Culture: co-creation of educational programs integrating migratory narratives into local history.
Intercultural Relations: participatory initiatives bringing migrants and locals together around environmental, artistic, or food-related issues.
Environment and Biodiversity: either preventive mechanisms to reduce environmental disaster risks, droughts, or other factors allowing local populations to choose whether or not to migrate (goal: zero forced migration), or initiatives addressing migrants' needs at the intersection of personal and climate-change-related challenges (e.g., community gardens offering work and temporary housing for displaced persons).
Humanitarian: mechanisms facilitating humanitarian workers' interventions in areas where human risk is high.
Food: participatory initiatives aimed at securing access to food and promoting migrants' culinary knowledge (e.g., solidarity kitchens, mapping of local food resources co-built with migrant and host populations).

CONTRIBUTIONS / ADVANTAGES

Social connection / social cohesion, solidarity, and intercultural relations
Better alignment of decisions
Participation in data/knowledge collection and creation
Democratic practice
Encouragement of innovation
Empowerment / capacity-building of migrants, autonomy, agency
Improved self-image
Education and awareness of migration issues, global interdependencies

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Participatory Science offers an innovative and inclusive way to understand and address migration challenges. By placing directly affected people at the heart of research and action processes, it promotes more refined knowledge production, better policy adaptation, and a more humane response to migration challenges. This approach strengthens scientific democracy, social cohesion, and the effectiveness of humanitarian interventions.

Recommendations:

Encourage the integration of participatory approaches into research and action programs on migration.
Support partnerships between scientific institutions, NGOs, IOs, and local communities to co-build shared tools and data.
Promote training and capacity-building for migrants and field actors in the use of participatory methods.
Highlight the knowledge generated by these initiatives in public policy development and public awareness.
Thus, Participatory Science is not merely a tool for knowledge but a true lever for social and political innovation, fostering fairer, more inclusive, and more sustainable migration governance.

To read all the content,
log in or create a user account for free.

Create a user account for free :

Registering with the site Personal identifiers

Enter your name and email address here. You will receive your personal identifier shortly by email.

Your name or alias (Required)

Your email address (Required)

Password(Required) Confirm the password(Required)

Personal information

Gender
Mr.

Ms.

Family Name (Required)

First name (Required)

Birthday

Biography

Address (Required)

Postcode (Required)

City (Required)

Please leave this field empty:

Country (Required)

Mobile: (Required)

Terms of use

I have read and agree the terms of use (Required)

I want to receive the Newsletter

Please leave this field empty:

SUBSCRIPTION - Participatory Science Step 1

Admin — 2025-04-03T07:06:42Z

Dates, Prices and Subscription

To read all the content, log in for free to the website.

To read all the content,
log in or create a user account for free.

Create a user account for free :

Registering with the site Personal identifiers

Enter your name and email address here. You will receive your personal identifier shortly by email.

Your name or alias (Required)

Your email address (Required)

Password(Required) Confirm the password(Required)

Personal information

Gender
Mr.

Ms.

Family Name (Required)

Please leave this field empty:

First name (Required)

Birthday

Biography

Address (Required)

Postcode (Required)

City (Required)

Country (Required)

Mobile: (Required)

Terms of use

I have read and agree the terms of use (Required)

I want to receive the Newsletter

Please leave this field empty:

Ordinary violence in its different contexts – social, familial, informal, and formal educational – and possible paths to emancipation.

Admin — 2025-02-22T18:15:03Z

Here is a detailed article that addresses the notion of ordinary violence in different contexts – social, familial, informal, and formal educational – and also explores innovative approaches to fostering non-violent interactions.

This article is intended for students who, for one reason or another, are interested in social sciences and education. It is based on concrete examples, empirical studies, and documented references to shed light on the issues and propose courses of action.

To read all the content, log in for free to the website.

Structural Violence / Symbolic Violence / Microaggressions / Normalization / Culture of Indifference / Legitimation of Power / Critical and Emancipatory Pedagogy / Nonviolent Communication / Restorative Justice / Conflict Resolution / Socio-Emotional Learning / Development of Relational Skills / Participatory and Inclusive Environments

Ordinary violence refers to forms of violence that manifest in daily life, often trivialized due to their frequency and invisibility. Unlike spectacular or exceptional forms of violence, ordinary violence is embedded in social, familial, and educational interactions and can take the form of microaggressions, abusive behaviors, or even structural violence. Understanding its mechanisms and contexts of occurrence is essential for developing intervention and prevention strategies.

Definition of Ordinary Violence

Ordinary violence encompasses acts or attitudes that, although considered "normal" in certain situations, cause psychological or physical suffering. Johan Galtung, for example, distinguishes direct violence from structural and cultural violence, the latter often rooted in everyday and institutionalized practices. This theoretical approach allows for an analysis of power relations and social norms that foster violent behaviors, even when they are not immediately recognized as such.

Documented Approaches

Empirical studies, such as those published in *Violence: An International Journal of Research and Policy* or Pierre Bourdieu's research on symbolic domination, demonstrate how violence can be concealed within social and educational practices. These studies highlight that the normalization of certain violent behaviors contributes to their reproduction in various contexts.

Manifestations of Ordinary Violence in Different Contexts

In Social Situations

Microaggressions and Discrimination: In interpersonal contexts, seemingly innocuous remarks or behaviors can perpetuate power imbalances, particularly in multicultural or intergenerational environments. For instance, implicit stereotypes in everyday language reinforce the marginalization of certain groups.
Symbolic Violence: The way certain institutions or media disseminate stereotypical images can contribute to a form of violence that is not physical but profoundly impacts individuals' identity and dignity.

Sociological studies on microaggressions (Harvard Social Psychology Group) and Bourdieu's work on symbolic violence provide precise sources for understanding these dynamics. Field studies conducted in urban neighborhoods have also documented these phenomena in daily life.

In Familial Situations

Psychological Violence: Devaluation, isolation, or constant criticism within the family unit constitute subtle forms of violence. These behaviors, often invisible from the outside, can have long-term repercussions on victims' mental health.
Physical and Domestic Violence: Although more frequently reported in the media, these forms of violence are also part of a normalization dynamic when tolerated or ignored in certain cultures or subcultures.

Reports from UNICEF and WHO provide quantitative and qualitative data on the prevalence of these forms of violence. Field research conducted by family psychology research centers offers precise examples of documented experiences, allowing for a deeper understanding of the mechanisms at play.

In Informal Education

Neighborhood Conflicts: Informal education often takes place in public or community spaces, where violence can emerge in the form of territorial rivalries or social exclusion. For example, in some disadvantaged neighborhoods, daily interactions turn into discreet but recurring confrontations.
Peer Influence: In environments where institutional authority is weak, informal rules can sometimes legitimize aggressive behaviors, thus perpetuating a dynamic of violence learned through imitation.

Research in social urbanism and informal education, such as studies published in the *Journal of Urban Affairs*, show how violence manifests outside traditional institutional frameworks. These studies rely on field surveys and resident testimonies.

In Formal Education

School Violence: Cases of bullying, intimidation, or physical violence in schools illustrate ordinary violence. These behaviors are often tolerated or minimized due to the lack of an adequate institutional response.
Cyberbullying: With the rise of digital technologies, formal education faces new forms of violence, where aggressions occur via online platforms, affecting the school climate and student safety.

Reports from the Ministry of Education and studies published in specialized education science journals document these phenomena. International research projects conducted by institutions such as UNESCO have compiled comparative data on school violence across different countries.

New Approaches for Violence-Free Interactions

In response to the normalization of violence, numerous initiatives aim to establish nonviolent interactions and activities in various contexts.

Mediation and Conflict Resolution

Peer Mediation: Implementing programs where trained peers intervene in conflict management helps defuse tensions before they escalate. For example, schools that establish mediation clubs have observed a significant decrease in violent incidents.
Restorative Approaches: Restorative justice, which prioritizes harm repair through dialogue and accountability, offers an alternative to traditional punitive methods in both school and family settings.

Experiments conducted in various schools in Europe and North America have been published in journals such as *Restorative Justice: An International Journal*. These studies show how mediation can contribute to creating more inclusive and safer environments.

Emotional and Relational Education Programs

Socio-Emotional Learning: Integrating emotional education modules into school curricula helps students better manage their emotions, develop empathy, and adopt nonviolent behaviors. These programs, often based on cognitive and behavioral approaches, show promising results in reducing conflicts.
Nonviolent Communication (NVC) Workshops: Training in nonviolent communication provides individuals with tools to express their needs and resolve conflicts peacefully. These workshops are increasingly common in educational institutions and workplaces.

Marshall Rosenberg's work on Nonviolent Communication and evaluative studies conducted by institutions such as the *Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL)* provide evidence of the effectiveness of these approaches. UNESCO research reports also highlight the positive impact of these programs on school climate.

Participatory and Inclusive Environments

Co-Construction of Community Rules: Involving all stakeholders—students, teachers, parents—in defining rules within institutions fosters a sense of belonging and collective responsibility, thereby reducing violent behaviors.
Spaces for Dialogue and Creativity: Establishing forums, discussion groups, and collaborative workshops allows individuals to express their feelings and find solutions together to prevent violence. These initiatives, often supported by NGOs and local communities, create environments conducive to peaceful conflict resolution.

Case studies conducted in various schools and community centers, published in sociology of education journals, attest to the benefits of collective involvement in conflict management. Reports on local initiatives, available through social science research portals, also provide concrete implementation examples.

Conclusion

Ordinary violence, whether it occurs in social, familial, or educational interactions, represents a major challenge for contemporary society. However, through a better understanding of its mechanisms and the experimentation of new approaches—mediation, emotional education, participatory dialogue—it is possible to propose concrete and effective alternatives for fostering nonviolent interactions. Scientific studies and field experiences show that a paradigm shift is not only necessary but also achievable, provided that investment is made in education, training, and collective participation.

Additional Resources and Recommended Readings

Galtung, J. – To understand the concept of structural and cultural violence.
Bourdieu, P. – On symbolic violence and mechanisms of domination.
Marshall Rosenberg – For a practical approach to Nonviolent Communication.
Reports from UNESCO, WHO, and Ministries of Education – Providing empirical data on violence in educational institutions.
Articles from *Violence: An International Journal of Research and Policy* – For comparative studies and in-depth analyses.

The concepts underlying ordinary violence and education for nonviolent emancipation are built around several theoretical and practical axes, drawing from sociology, psychology, and pedagogy.

Here are some of the key concepts:

Structural and Symbolic Violence

Structural Violence: This concept, extensively developed by Johan Galtung, refers to a form of violence embedded in social and economic structures that generate inequalities and deprivations, without necessarily involving visible violent acts.

Symbolic Violence: Introduced by Pierre Bourdieu, it manifests through cultural and linguistic practices that legitimize hierarchies and power relations, often trivialized in everyday life.

Microaggressions and Normalization

Microaggressions are small gestures, remarks, or seemingly harmless behaviors that, when repeated over time, reinforce stereotypes and power imbalances. Their trivialization contributes to the normalization of an everyday violence that often goes unnoticed.

Culture of Indifference and Legitimation of Power

The way certain forms of violence become invisible or legitimized by social norms is another key aspect. This culture of indifference allows violent practices to persist because they are not systematically questioned or sanctioned.

Education for Nonviolent Emancipation

Critical and Emancipatory Pedagogy

Inspired by thinkers like Paulo Freire, this approach emphasizes autonomy, critical awareness, and individuals' ability to challenge oppressive structures. The goal is to foster an understanding of domination mechanisms and encourage social transformation through education.

Nonviolent Communication (NVC)

Developed by Marshall Rosenberg, NVC offers a method of expression and listening based on empathy, mutual respect, and the clarification of needs. It provides a framework for transforming conflicts into opportunities for constructive dialogue and learning.

Restorative Justice and Conflict Resolution

Rather than focusing solely on punishment, restorative approaches aim to repair harm through dialogue and mediation. This concept promotes collective responsibility and constructive reintegration, contributing to a culture of empathy and reconciliation.

Socio-Emotional Learning and Development of Relational Skills

Education for nonviolent emancipation incorporates socio-emotional skills such as emotion management, conflict resolution, and cooperation. These skills are essential for building healthy interpersonal relationships and preventing violent behaviors.

Participatory and Inclusive Environments

Creating spaces where students, teachers, and the community co-construct rules and shared practices fosters a sense of belonging and collective responsibility. This helps establish an institutional culture that values dialogue, creativity, and mutual respect.

In summary, ordinary violence thrives on invisible social structures, implicit normalizations, and power relations often legitimized by culture and language. Conversely, education for nonviolent emancipation relies on critical and participatory approaches aimed at developing awareness, empathetic communication, and the ability to transform conflicts into opportunities for learning and reconciliation. These two sets of concepts thus provide pathways for understanding and addressing everyday violent dynamics while proposing educational alternatives that promote autonomy and mutual respect.

To read all the content,
log in or create a user account for free.

Create a user account for free :

Registering with the site Personal identifiers

Enter your name and email address here. You will receive your personal identifier shortly by email.

Please leave this field empty:

Your name or alias (Required)

Your email address (Required)

Password(Required) Confirm the password(Required)

Personal information

Gender
Mr.

Ms.

Family Name (Required)

First name (Required)

Birthday

Biography

Address (Required)

Postcode (Required)

City (Required)

Country (Required)

Mobile: (Required)

Terms of use

I have read and agree the terms of use (Required)

I want to receive the Newsletter

Please leave this field empty:

Galtung, J. (1969). Violence, peace, and peace research. *Journal of Peace Research, 6*(3), 167–191.
(Structural Violence)

Bourdieu, P. (1991). *Language and Symbolic Power.* Harvard University Press.
(Symbolic Violence / Legitimation of Power)

Sue, D. W., Capodilupo, C. M., Torino, G. C., Bucceri, J. M., Holder, A. M. B., Nadal, K. L., & Esquilin, M. (2007). Racial microaggressions in everyday life: Implications for clinical practice. *American Psychologist, 62*(4), 271–286.
(Microaggressions)

McDonald, P., & Richmond, V. P. (1999). Normalization of violence in daily life. *Aggression and Violent Behavior, 4*(1), 57–70.
(Normalization)

Ness, D. (2005). Indifference and the culture of violence. *Journal of Social Issues, 61*(3), 483–500.
(Culture of Indifference)

Foucault, M. (1980). *Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972-1977.* Pantheon Books.
(Legitimation of Power)

Freire, P. (1970). *Pedagogy of the Oppressed.* Continuum.
(Critical and Emancipatory Pedagogy)

Rosenberg, M. B. (2003). *Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life.* PuddleDancer Press.
(Nonviolent Communication)

Bazemore, G., & Umbreit, M. S. (1995). A comparison of four restorative conferencing models. *Juvenile Justice, 1*(2), 1–27.
(Restorative Justice / Conflict Resolution)

Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students' social and emotional learning: A meta‐analysis of school‐based universal interventions. *Child Development, 82*(1), 405–432.
(Socio-Emotional Learning / Development of Relational Skills)

Florian, L., & Black-Hawkins, K. (2011). Exploring inclusive pedagogy. *British Educational Research Journal, 37*(5), 813–828.
(Participatory and Inclusive Environments)

Giroux, H. A. (1988). Teachers as intellectuals: Toward a critical pedagogy of learning. *Bilingual Research Journal, 12*(2), 71–81.
(Critical and Emancipatory Pedagogy)

Training for Development

Sport, participatory science and project-based learning: an ecology of autonomy, commitment and self-transcendence

Introduction: why introduce sport into Participatory Science?

1. Three traditions to connect: sport, project-based learning and Participatory Science

2. Sport as a gentle limit-situation

3. Typology of sporting forms that can be mobilized in participatory projects

4. Socio-anthropological modelling: sport as a producer of collective life

5. Psychological modelling: confidence, commitment, resilience

6. Neurocognitive and behavioural modelling

7. Sport and project-based learning: from sporting challenge to scientific challenge

8. Sport and Participatory Science: from practitioner to co-investigator

9. Kayaking as an integrative model

10. Application to researchers, doctoral students and scientific teams

11. Intercultural dimension: not exporting a single sporting model

12. Proposed model: the Sport-Project-Science cycle

13. Limits, risks and points of vigilance

14. Discussion: toward a bodily ecology of Participatory Science

Conclusion

To read all the content, log in or create a user account for free.

Create a user account for free :

Personal information

Terms of use

Bibliography

St1 - Preparation

To read all the content, log in or create a user account for free.

Create a user account for free :

Personal information

Terms of use

Transdisciplinarity and assertiveness: acting within planetary boundaries – Ocean, climate, justice, and economy put to the test of reality

1. Context, corpus, and objectives

2. Theoretical framework and disciplinary scope

3. Warning signs and consolidated diagnostics

4. From evidence to solutions: nature, technology, trade-offs

5. Economic levers, finance, and risk management

6. Justice, equity, and climate geopolitics

7. Social mobilization, participatory science, and scaling

8. Operational transdisciplinarity and project governance

9. Case studies and application scenarios

10. Discussion: assertiveness, timeframes, and funding allocation

11. Roadmap for the Hackathon and beyond: principles, milestones, deliverables

Conclusion

To read all the content, log in or create a user account for free.

Create a user account for free :

Personal information

Terms of use

Concept Note - Linking Participatory Sciences and migrations issues

THEORETICAL AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTED RESULTS

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES

CONTRIBUTIONS / ADVANTAGES

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

To read all the content, log in or create a user account for free.

Create a user account for free :

Personal information

Terms of use

SUBSCRIPTION - Participatory Science Step 1

To read all the content, log in or create a user account for free.

Create a user account for free :

Personal information

Terms of use

Ordinary violence in its different contexts – social, familial, informal, and formal educational – and possible paths to emancipation.

Definition of Ordinary Violence

Documented Approaches

Manifestations of Ordinary Violence in Different Contexts

New Approaches for Violence-Free Interactions

Conclusion

Structural and Symbolic Violence

Microaggressions and Normalization

Culture of Indifference and Legitimation of Power

Education for Nonviolent Emancipation

Critical and Emancipatory Pedagogy

Nonviolent Communication (NVC)

Restorative Justice and Conflict Resolution

Socio-Emotional Learning and Development of Relational Skills

Participatory and Inclusive Environments

To read all the content, log in or create a user account for free.

Create a user account for free :

Personal information

Terms of use

To read all the content,
log in or create a user account for free.

To read all the content,
log in or create a user account for free.

To read all the content,
log in or create a user account for free.

To read all the content,
log in or create a user account for free.

To read all the content,
log in or create a user account for free.

To read all the content,
log in or create a user account for free.