A new methodological approach based on conceptual and probabilistic networks to assess ecosystem services provision
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.17.27.1.0.130Abstract
In the last few years, there have been an increasing number of tools to environmentally assess ecosystem services (ES) provision. However, its complexity discourages attempts to adopt a single methodological approach. Then, the aim of this study was to assess a new framework to analyze ES provision, based on conceptual and probabilistic networks. First, the new methodological approach was described. This approach consisted of a conceptual network representing those variables that determine eight ES provided by the Pampa region. The conceptual network was parameterized using a probabilistic methodology known as Bayesian networks, and then was applied to three Pampean agroecosystems. Finally, the new analytical framework was compared with other national and international approaches that assess ES provision, such as InVEST, RIOS, ARIES and ECOSER. The approach presented here could be helpful to: a) assess the sustainability of Pampean agroecosystems from an ecological dimension, and/or b) to assist decision makers (i.e., farmers and their advisors) in the implementation of sustainable land use strategies.References
Ascough II, J. C., H. R. Maier, J. K. Ravalico, and M. W. Strudley. 2008. Future research challenges for incorporation of uncertainty in environmental and ecological decision-making. Ecol Model 219:383-399.
Bressan, G. M., V. A. Oliveira, E. R. Hruschka J. R., and M. C. Nicoletti. 2009. Using Bayesian networks with rule extraction to infer the risk of weed infestation in a corn-crop. Eng Appl Artif Intel 22:579-592.
Busch, M., A. La Notte, V. Laporte, and M. Erhard. 2012. Potentials of quantitative and qualitative approaches to assessing ecosystem services. Ecol Indic 21:89-103.
Chen, S. H., and C. A. Pollino. 2012. Good practice in Bayesian network modelling. Environ Modell Softw 37:134-145.
Cornelissen, A. M. G., J. Van Den Berg, W. J. Koops, and U. Kaymak. 2003. Elicitation of expert knowledge for fuzzy evaluation of agricultural production systems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 95:1-18.
Dlamini, W. M. 2010. A Bayesian belief network analysis of factors influencing wildfire occurrence in Swaziland. Environ Modell Softw 25:199-208.
Dorner, S., J. Shi, and D. Swayne. 2007. Multi-objective modelling and decision support using a Bayesian network approximation to a non-point source pollution model. Environ Modell Softw 22:211-222.
Ellison, S. L. R., S. Gregory, and W. A. Hardcastle. 1998. Quantifying uncertainty in qualitative analysis. The Analyst 123:1155-1161.
Grêt-Regamey, A., S. H. Brunner, J. Altwegg, and P. Bebi. 2012. Facing uncertainty in ecosystem services-based resource management. J Environ Manage 127:145-154.
Haines-Young, R. 2011. Exploring ecosystem service issues across diverse knowledge domains using Bayesian Belief Networks. Prog Phys Geogr 35:681-699.
Kareiva, P., H. Tallis, T. H. Ricketts, G. C. Daily, and S. Polasky. 2011. Natural Capital: Theory and Practice of Mapping Ecosystem Services. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Lamanda, N., S. Roux, S. Delmotte, A. Merot, B. Rapidel, et al. 2012. A protocol for the conceptualisation of an agro-ecosystem to guide data acquisition and analysis and expert knowledge integration. Eur J Agr 38:104-116.
Landuyt, D., S. Broekx, R. D’Hondt, G. Engelen, J. Aertsens, and P. L. M. Goethals. 2014. A review of Bayesian belief networks in ecosystem service modeling. Environ Modell Softw 46:1-11.
Laterra, P., P. Barral, A. Carmona, and L. Nahuelhual. 2015. ECOSER. Protocolo colaborativo de evaluación y mapeo de servicios ecosistémicos y vulnerabilidad socio-ecológica para el ordenamiento territorial. Documento Introductorio. Versión 2.0. Ediciones INTA, Colección Investigación, Desarrollo e Innovación No. 99. Santa Rosa, La Pampa. ISSN impreso 0325-2132. Pp. 56.
Laterra, P., P. Barral, A. Carmona, and L. Nahuelhual. 2016. Focusing conservation efforts on ecosystem service supply may increase vulnerability of socio-ecological systems. PLoS ONE 11(5):e0155019. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0155019.
López Puga, J., J. García García, L. De La Fuente Sánchez, and E. I. De La Fuente Solana. 2007. Las redes bayesianas como herramientas de modelado en psicología. An Psicol 23:307-316.
Low Choy, S., R. O’Leary, and K. Mengersen. 2009. Elicitation by design in ecology: using expert opinion to inform priors for Bayesian statistical models. Ecology 90:265-277.
Müller, F. 2005. Indicating ecosystem and landscape organisation. Ecol Indic 5:280-294.
Pollino, C. A., O. Woodberry, A. Nicholson, K. Korb, and B. T. Hart. 2007. Parameterisation and evaluation of a Bayesian network for use in an ecological risk assessment. Environ Modell Softw 22:1140-1152.
Rapidel, B., C. Defèche, B. Traoré, J. Lancon, and J. Wery. 2006. In field development of a conceptual model for crop functioning and management: a case study on cotton in Southern Mali. Eur J Agr 24:304-315.
Rositano, F., and D. O. Ferraro. 2014. Ecosystem services provided by agroecosystems: A qualitative and quantitative assessment of this relationship in the Pampa region, Argentina. Environ Manage 53(3):606-619.
Rowe, G., and L. J. Frewer. 2004. Evaluating public-participation exercises: a research agenda. Sci Technol Hum Val 29:512-557.
Smith, R. I., J. M. C. P. Dick, and E. M. Scott. 2011. The role of statistics in the analysis of ecosystem services. Environmetrics 22:608-617.
Tallis, H. T., T. Ricketts, A. D. Guerry, S. A. Wood, R. Sharp, et al. 2013. InVEST 2.6.0 User’s Guide. The Natural Capital Project, Stanford.
Tuler, S., and T. Webler. 1999. Voices from the forest: what participants expect of a publication participation process. Soc Natur Resour 12:437-453.
Uusitalo, L. 2007. Advantages and challenges of Bayesian networks in environmental modelling. Ecol Model 203:312-318.
Van Der Gaag, L., and E. Helsper. 2002. Experiences with modelling issues in building probabilistic networks. Pp. 21-26 in: A. Gómez-Pérez and V. R. Benjamins (eds.). Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management: Ontologies and the Semantic Web. Springer Verlag, Berlin.
Vihervaara, P., T. Kumpula, A. Tanskanen, and B. Burkhard. 2010. Ecosystem services - A tool for sustainable management of human-environment systems. Case study Finnish Forest Lapland. Ecol Complexity 7:410-420.
Villa, F., M. Ceroni, K. Bagstad, G. Johnson, and S. Krivov. 2009. ARIES (ARtificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services): a new tool for ecosystem services assessment, planning, and valuation. BioEcon 1-10.
Villa, F., K. J. Bagstad, B. Voigt, G. W. Johnson, R. Portela, et al. 2014. A methodology for adaptable and robust ecosystem services assessment. PLoS ONE 9(3):e91001.
Vogl, A., H. Tallis, J. Douglass, R. Sharp, F. Veiga, et al. 2013. Sistema de Optimización de Inversión de Recursos. Introducción y Documentación teórica. Pp. 26.
Walker, W. E., P. Harremoes, J. Rotmans, J. P. Van Der Sluijs, M. B. A. Van Asselt, et al. 2003. Defining uncertainty. A conceptual basis for uncertainty management in model-based decision support. Integr Assess 4(1):5-17.
Wand, Y., V. C. Storey, and R. Weber. 1999. An ontological analysis of the relationship construct in conceptual modelling. Acm T Database Syst 24:494-528.
Webler, T., S. Tuler, and R. Krueger. 2001. What is a good public participation process? Five perspectives from the public. Environ Manage 27:435-450.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2017 Florencia Rositano, Diego O. Ferraro
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Authors retain their rights as follows: 1) by granting the journal the right to its first publication, and 2) by registering the published article with a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which allows authors and third parties to view and use it as long as they clearly mention its origin (citation or reference, including authorship and first publication in this journal). Authors can make other non-exclusive distribution agreements as long as they clearly indicate their origin and are encouraged to widely share and disseminate the published version of their work.
