IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v24y2017icp1-15.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Uncertainty assessment in ecosystem services analyses: Seven challenges and practical responses

Author

Listed:
  • Hamel, Perrine
  • Bryant, Benjamin P.

Abstract

Ecosystem services (ES) analyses are increasingly used to address societal challenges, but too often are not accompanied by uncertainty assessment. This omission limits the validity of their findings and may undermine the ‘science-based’ decisions they inform. We summarize and analyze seven commonly perceived challenges to conducting uncertainty assessment that help explain why it often receives superficial treatment in ES studies. We connect these challenges to solutions in relevant scientific literature and guidance documents. Since ES science is based on a multiplicity of disciplines (e.g. ecology, hydrology, economics, environmental modeling, policy sciences), substantial knowledge already exists to identify, quantify, and communicate uncertainties. The integration of these disciplines for solution-oriented modeling has been the focus of the integrated assessment community for many years, and we argue that many insights and best practices from this field can be directly used to improve ES assessments. We also recognize a number of issues that hinder the adoption of uncertainty assessment as part of standard practice. Our synthesis provides a starting point for ES analysts and other applied modelers looking for further guidance on uncertainty assessment and helps scientists and decision-makers to set reasonable expectations for characterizing the level of confidence associated with an ES assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Hamel, Perrine & Bryant, Benjamin P., 2017. "Uncertainty assessment in ecosystem services analyses: Seven challenges and practical responses," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 1-15.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:24:y:2017:i:c:p:1-15
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.12.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221204161630359X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.12.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Braat, Leon C. & de Groot, Rudolf, 2012. "The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 4-15.
    2. Pannell, David J., 1997. "Sensitivity analysis of normative economic models: theoretical framework and practical strategies," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 16(2), pages 139-152, May.
    3. Warren E. Walker & Marjolijn Haasnoot & Jan H. Kwakkel, 2013. "Adapt or Perish: A Review of Planning Approaches for Adaptation under Deep Uncertainty," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-25, March.
    4. William C. Clark & Thomas P. Tomich & Meine van Noordwijk & Nancy M. Dickson & Delia Catacutan & David Guston & Elizabeth McNie, 2010. "Toward a General Theory of Boundary Work: Insights from the CGIAR’s Natural Resource Management Programs," CID Working Papers 199, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    5. Clark, William C., et al., 2010. "Toward a General Theory of Boundary Work: Insights from the CGIAR's Natural Resource Management Programs," Working Paper Series rwp10-035, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    6. Rosenberger, Randall S. & Stanley, Tom D., 2006. "Measurement, generalization, and publication: Sources of error in benefit transfers and their management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 372-378, December.
    7. Nahuelhual, Laura & Laterra, Pedro & Villarino, Sebastián & Mastrángelo, Matías & Carmona, Alejandra & Jaramillo, Amerindia & Barral, Paula & Burgos, Néstor, 2015. "Mapping of ecosystem services: Missing links between purposes and procedures," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 162-172.
    8. Easterly, William, 2009. "How the Millennium Development Goals are Unfair to Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 26-35, January.
    9. van Noordwijk, Meine & Dickson, Nancy M. & Catacutan, Delia & Guston, David & McNie, Elizabeth & Tomich, Thomas P. & Clark, William C., 2010. "Toward a General Theory of Boundary Work: Insights from the CGIAR’s Natural Resource Management Programs," Scholarly Articles 4450046, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    10. Robert J. Lempert & David G. Groves & Steven W. Popper & Steve C. Bankes, 2006. "A General, Analytic Method for Generating Robust Strategies and Narrative Scenarios," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(4), pages 514-528, April.
    11. Kaul, Sapna & Boyle, Kevin J. & Kuminoff, Nicolai V. & Parmeter, Christopher F. & Pope, Jaren C., 2013. "What can we learn from benefit transfer errors? Evidence from 20 years of research on convergent validity," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 90-104.
    12. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    13. Haiganoush K. Preisler & Benjamin P. Bryant & Anthony L. Westerling, 2014. "Scenarios for future wildfire risk in California: links between changing demography, land use, climate, and wildfire," Environmetrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(6), pages 454-471, September.
    14. Jacobs, Sander & Burkhard, Benjamin & Van Daele, Toon & Staes, Jan & Schneiders, Anik, 2015. "‘The Matrix Reloaded’: A review of expert knowledge use for mapping ecosystem services," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 295(C), pages 21-30.
    15. Andy Stirling, 2010. "Keep it complex," Nature, Nature, vol. 468(7327), pages 1029-1031, December.
    16. Richardson, Leslie & Loomis, John & Kroeger, Timm & Casey, Frank, 2015. "The role of benefit transfer in ecosystem service valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 51-58.
    17. Leamer, Edward E, 1985. "Sensitivity Analyses Would Help," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 308-313, June.
    18. Ruckelshaus, Mary & McKenzie, Emily & Tallis, Heather & Guerry, Anne & Daily, Gretchen & Kareiva, Peter & Polasky, Stephen & Ricketts, Taylor & Bhagabati, Nirmal & Wood, Spencer A. & Bernhardt, Joanna, 2015. "Notes from the field: Lessons learned from using ecosystem service approaches to inform real-world decisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 11-21.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Leimona, Beria & Lusiana, Betha & van Noordwijk, Meine & Mulyoutami, Elok & Ekadinata, Andree & Amaruzaman, Sacha, 2015. "Boundary work: Knowledge co-production for negotiating payment for watershed services in Indonesia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 45-62.
    2. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    3. Lamprinakis, L. & Rodriguez, D. G. P. & Prestvik, A. & Veidal, A. & Klimek, B., 2017. "31 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18461/pfsd.2017.1705 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL ON FOOD SYSTEM DYNAMICS A Mixed Methods Approach Towards Mapping and Economic Valuation of the Divici-Pojejena Wetland Ecosystem," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 2017(1), June.
    4. Lamprinakis, L. & Rodriguez, D. G. P. & Prestvik, A. S. & Veidal, A. & Klimek, B., 2017. "31 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18461/pfsd.2017.1705 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL ON FOOD SYSTEM DYNAMICS A Mixed Methods Approach Towards Mapping and Economic Valuation of the Divici-Pojejena Wetland Ecosystem," 2018 International European Forum (163rd EAAE Seminar), February 5-9, 2018, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 276889, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    5. Manuel Rivera, 2013. "Political Criteria for Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) Selection and the Role of the Urban Dimension," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(12), pages 1-18, November.
    6. Röckmann, Christine & van Leeuwen, Judith & Goldsborough, David & Kraan, Marloes & Piet, Gerjan, 2015. "The interaction triangle as a tool for understanding stakeholder interactions in marine ecosystem based management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 155-162.
    7. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Maria L. Loureiro & Ståle Navrud & John Rolfe, 2021. "Guidance to Enhance the Validity and Credibility of Environmental Benefit Transfers," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(3), pages 575-624, July.
    8. Meya, Jasper N. & Drupp, Moritz A. & Hanley, Nick, 2021. "Testing structural benefit transfer: The role of income inequality," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    9. J. J. Warmink & M. Brugnach & J. Vinke-de Kruijf & R. M. J. Schielen & D. C. M. Augustijn, 2017. "Coping with Uncertainty in River Management: Challenges and Ways Forward," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 31(14), pages 4587-4600, November.
    10. William Mobley & Kayode O. Atoba & Wesley E. Highfield, 2020. "Uncertainty in Flood Mitigation Practices: Assessing the Economic Benefits of Property Acquisition and Elevation in Flood-Prone Communities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-14, March.
    11. Jlenia Di Noia, 2022. "Agent-Based Models for Climate Change Adaptation in Coastal Zones. A Review," Working Papers 2022.20, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    12. Gudrun Schwilch & Tatenda Lemann & Örjan Berglund & Carlo Camarotto & Artemi Cerdà & Ioannis N. Daliakopoulos & Silvia Kohnová & Dominika Krzeminska & Teodoro Marañón & René Rietra & Grzegorz Siebiele, 2018. "Assessing Impacts of Soil Management Measures on Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-26, November.
    13. Scemama, Pierre & Mongruel, Rémi & Kermagoret, Charlène & Bailly, Denis & Carlier, Antoine & Mao, Patrick Le & Vaschalde, et Diane, 2022. "Guidance for stakeholder consultation to support national ecosystem services assessment: A case study from French marine assessment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    14. Jaung, Wanggi & Carrasco, L. Roman & Bae, Jae Soo, 2019. "Integration of ecosystem services as public values within election promises: evidence from the 2018 local elections in Korea," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    15. Judy Lawrence & Robert Bell & Adolf Stroombergen, 2019. "A Hybrid Process to Address Uncertainty and Changing Climate Risk in Coastal Areas Using Dynamic Adaptive Pathways Planning, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis & Real Options Analysis: A New Zealand App," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, January.
    16. Fitzpatrick, Luke & Parmeter, Christopher F. & Agar, Juan, 2017. "Threshold Effects in Meta-Analyses With Application to Benefit Transfer for Coral Reef Valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 74-85.
    17. Wilker, Jost & Rusche, Karsten & Benning, Alexander & MacDonald, Michael A. & Blaen, Phillip, 2016. "Applying ecosystem benefit valuation to inform quarry restoration planning," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 44-55.
    18. Biel, Anders & Johansson-Stenman, Olof & Nilsson, Andreas, 2011. "The willingness to pay–willingness to accept gap revisited: The role of emotions and moral satisfaction," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 908-917.
    19. Kieslich, Marcus & Salles, Jean-Michel, 2021. "Implementation context and science-policy interfaces: Implications for the economic valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    20. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Ahtiainen, Heini & Artell, Janne & Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2017. "Choosing a Functional Form for an International Benefit Transfer: Evidence from a Nine-country Valuation Experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 104-113.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:24:y:2017:i:c:p:1-15. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.