IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/marpol/v61y2015icp291-302.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Making modelling count - increasing the contribution of shelf-seas community and ecosystem models to policy development and management

Author

Listed:
  • Hyder, Kieran
  • Rossberg, Axel G.
  • Allen, J. Icarus
  • Austen, Melanie C.
  • Barciela, Rosa M.
  • Bannister, Hayley J.
  • Blackwell, Paul G.
  • Blanchard, Julia L.
  • Burrows, Michael T.
  • Defriez, Emma
  • Dorrington, Tarquin
  • Edwards, Karen P.
  • Garcia-Carreras, Bernardo
  • Heath, Michael R.
  • Hembury, Deborah J.
  • Heymans, Johanna J.
  • Holt, Jason
  • Houle, Jennifer E.
  • Jennings, Simon
  • Mackinson, Steve
  • Malcolm, Stephen J.
  • McPike, Ruaraidh
  • Mee, Laurence
  • Mills, David K.
  • Montgomery, Caron
  • Pearson, Dean
  • Pinnegar, John K.
  • Pollicino, Marilena
  • Popova, Ekaterina E.
  • Rae, Louise
  • Rogers, Stuart I.
  • Speirs, Douglas
  • Spence, Michael A.
  • Thorpe, Robert
  • Turner, R. Kerry
  • van der Molen, Johan
  • Yool, Andrew
  • Paterson, David M.

Abstract

Marine legislation is becoming more complex and marine ecosystem-based management is specified in national and regional legislative frameworks. Shelf-seas community and ecosystem models (hereafter termed ecosystem models) are central to the delivery of ecosystem-based management, but there is limited uptake and use of model products by decision makers in Europe and the UK in comparison with other countries. In this study, the challenges to the uptake and use of ecosystem models in support of marine environmental management are assessed using the UK capability as an example. The UK has a broad capability in marine ecosystem modelling, with at least 14 different models that support management, but few examples exist of ecosystem modelling that underpin policy or management decisions. To improve understanding of policy and management issues that can be addressed using ecosystem models, a workshop was convened that brought together advisors, assessors, biologists, social scientists, economists, modellers, statisticians, policy makers, and funders. Some policy requirements were identified that can be addressed without further model development including: attribution of environmental change to underlying drivers, integration of models and observations to develop more efficient monitoring programmes, assessment of indicator performance for different management goals, and the costs and benefit of legislation. Multi-model ensembles are being developed in cases where many models exist, but model structures are very diverse making a standardised approach of combining outputs a significant challenge, and there is a need for new methodologies for describing, analysing, and visualising uncertainties. A stronger link to social and economic systems is needed to increase the range of policy-related questions that can be addressed. It is also important to improve communication between policy and modelling communities so that there is a shared understanding of the strengths and limitations of ecosystem models.

Suggested Citation

  • Hyder, Kieran & Rossberg, Axel G. & Allen, J. Icarus & Austen, Melanie C. & Barciela, Rosa M. & Bannister, Hayley J. & Blackwell, Paul G. & Blanchard, Julia L. & Burrows, Michael T. & Defriez, Emma & , 2015. "Making modelling count - increasing the contribution of shelf-seas community and ecosystem models to policy development and management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 291-302.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:marpol:v:61:y:2015:i:c:p:291-302
    DOI: 10.1016/j.marpol.2015.07.015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X1500216X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.marpol.2015.07.015?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. Libralato, Simone & Solidoro, Cosimo, 2009. "Bridging biogeochemical and food web models for an End-to-End representation of marine ecosystem dynamics: The Venice lagoon case study," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(21), pages 2960-2971.
    2. Jobstvogt, Niels & Hanley, Nick & Hynes, Stephen & Kenter, Jasper & Witte, Ursula, 2014. "Twenty thousand sterling under the sea: Estimating the value of protecting deep-sea biodiversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 10-19.
    3. Måns Nilsson & Andrew Jordan & John Turnpenny & Julia Hertin & Björn Nykvist & Duncan Russel, 2008. "The use and non-use of policy appraisal tools in public policy making: an analysis of three European countries and the European Union," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 41(4), pages 335-355, December.
    4. Fisher, Brendan & Turner, R. Kerry & Morling, Paul, 2009. "Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 643-653, January.
    5. Hae-Kyung Park & Kang-Hyun Cho & Doo Won & Jangho Lee & Dong-Soo Kong & Dong-Il Jung, 2013. "Ecosystem responses to climate change in a large on-river reservoir, Lake Paldang, Korea," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 120(1), pages 477-489, September.
    6. Mark Strong & Jeremy E. Oakley & Jim Chilcott, 2012. "Managing structural uncertainty in health economic decision models: a discrepancy approach," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 61(1), pages 25-45, January.
    7. Michael Mastrandrea & Katharine Mach & Gian-Kasper Plattner & Ottmar Edenhofer & Thomas Stocker & Christopher Field & Kristie Ebi & Patrick Matschoss, 2011. "The IPCC AR5 guidance note on consistent treatment of uncertainties: a common approach across the working groups," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 108(4), pages 675-691, October.
    8. Maciej T Tomczak & Johanna J Heymans & Johanna Yletyinen & Susa Niiranen & Saskia A Otto & Thorsten Blenckner, 2013. "Ecological Network Indicators of Ecosystem Status and Change in the Baltic Sea," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-11, October.
    9. Lixin Wu & Wenju Cai & Liping Zhang & Hisashi Nakamura & Axel Timmermann & Terry Joyce & Michael J. McPhaden & Michael Alexander & Bo Qiu & Martin Visbeck & Ping Chang & Benjamin Giese, 2012. "Enhanced warming over the global subtropical western boundary currents," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 2(3), pages 161-166, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Heymans, Johanna Jacomina & Coll, Marta & Link, Jason S. & Mackinson, Steven & Steenbeek, Jeroen & Walters, Carl & Christensen, Villy, 2016. "Best practice in Ecopath with Ecosim food-web models for ecosystem-based management," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 331(C), pages 173-184.
    2. Lopez de Gamiz-Zearra, A. & Hansen, C. & Corrales, X. & Andonegi, E., 2024. "Increasing the reliability of the Bay of Biscay Atlantis model: A sensitivity analysis to parameters perturbations using a Morris screening approach," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 488(C).
    3. Wilding, Thomas A. & Gill, Andrew B. & Boon, Arjen & Sheehan, Emma & Dauvin, Jean–Claude & Pezy, Jean-Philippe & O’Beirn, Francis & Janas, Urszula & Rostin, Liis & De Mesel, Ilse, 2017. "Turning off the DRIP (‘Data-rich, information-poor’) – rationalising monitoring with a focus on marine renewable energy developments and the benthos," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 848-859.
    4. Cartwright, Samantha J. & Bowgen, Katharine M. & Collop, Catherine & Hyder, Kieran & Nabe-Nielsen, Jacob & Stafford, Richard & Stillman, Richard A. & Thorpe, Robert B. & Sibly, Richard M., 2016. "Communicating complex ecological models to non-scientist end users," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 338(C), pages 51-59.
    5. Weijerman, M. & Link, J.S. & Fulton, E.A. & Olsen, E. & Townsend, H. & Gaichas, S. & Hansen, C. & Skern-Mauritzen, M. & Kaplan, I.C. & Gamble, R. & Fay, G. & Savina, M. & Ainsworth, C. & van Putten, I, 2016. "Atlantis Ecosystem Model Summit: Report from a workshop," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 335(C), pages 35-38.

    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. Glenk, Klaus & Schaafsma, Marije & Moxey, Andrew & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Hanley, Nick, 2014. "A framework for valuing spatially targeted peatland restoration," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 20-33.
    2. 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.
    3. Sujith S. Ratnayake & Azeem Khan & Michael Reid & Punchi B. Dharmasena & Danny Hunter & Lalit Kumar & Keminda Herath & Benjamin Kogo & Harsha K. Kadupitiya & Thilantha Dammalage & Champika S. Kariyawa, 2022. "Land Use-Based Participatory Assessment of Ecosystem Services for Ecological Restoration in Village Tank Cascade Systems of Sri Lanka," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-21, August.
    4. Hattam, Caroline & Böhnke-Henrichs, Anne & Börger, Tobias & Burdon, Daryl & Hadjimichael, Maria & Delaney, Alyne & Atkins, Jonathan P. & Garrard, Samantha & Austen, Melanie C., 2015. "Integrating methods for ecosystem service assessment and valuation: Mixed methods or mixed messages?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 126-138.
    5. Comino, E. & Ferretti, V., 2016. "Indicators-based spatial SWOT analysis: supporting the strategic planning and management of complex territorial systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64142, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Daniela D’Alessandro & Andrea Rebecchi & Letizia Appolloni & Andrea Brambilla & Silvio Brusaferro & Maddalena Buffoli & Maurizio Carta & Alessandra Casuccio & Liliana Coppola & Maria Vittoria Corazza , 2023. "Re-Thinking the Environment, Cities, and Living Spaces for Public Health Purposes, According with the COVID-19 Lesson: The LVII Erice Charter," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-17, September.
    7. Bolaños-Valencia, Ingrid & Villegas-Palacio, Clara & López-Gómez, Connie Paola & Berrouet, Lina & Ruiz, Aura, 2019. "Social perception of risk in socio-ecological systems. A qualitative and quantitative analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Ze Han & Wei Song & Xiangzheng Deng, 2016. "Responses of Ecosystem Service to Land Use Change in Qinghai Province," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-16, April.
    9. Alessio D’Auria & Pasquale De Toro & Nicola Fierro & Elisa Montone, 2018. "Integration between GIS and Multi-Criteria Analysis for Ecosystem Services Assessment: A Methodological Proposal for the National Park of Cilento, Vallo di Diano and Alburni (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-25, September.
    10. David Klenert & Franziska Funke & Linus Mattauch & Brian O’Callaghan, 2020. "Five Lessons from COVID-19 for Advancing Climate Change Mitigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(4), pages 751-778, August.
    11. Johann Audrain & Mateo Cordier & Sylvie Faucheux & Martin O’Connor, 2013. "Écologie territoriale et indicateurs pour un développement durable de la métropole parisienne," Revue d'économie régionale et urbaine, Armand Colin, vol. 0(3), pages 523-559.
    12. Vargas, Andrés & Sarmiento Erazo, Juan Pablo & Diaz, David, 2020. "Has Cost Benefit Analysis Improved Decisions in Colombia? Evidence from the Environmental Licensing Process," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    13. Hooper, Tara & Cooper, Philip & Hunt, Alistair & Austen, Melanie, 2014. "A methodology for the assessment of local-scale changes in marine environmental benefits and its application," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 65-74.
    14. Yi Li & Youmin Tang & Shuai Wang & Ralf Toumi & Xiangzhou Song & Qiang Wang, 2023. "Recent increases in tropical cyclone rapid intensification events in global offshore regions," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-9, December.
    15. Tomich, Thomas P. & Lidder, Preetmoninder & Coley, Mariah & Gollin, Douglas & Meinzen-Dick, Ruth & Webb, Patrick & Carberry, Peter, 2019. "Food and agricultural innovation pathways for prosperity," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 1-15.
    16. H. Spencer Banzhaf & James Boyd, 2012. "The Architecture and Measurement of an Ecosystem Services Index," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-32, March.
    17. Wang, Shifeng & Wang, Sicong & Smith, Pete, 2015. "Quantifying impacts of onshore wind farms on ecosystem services at local and global scales," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1424-1428.
    18. Ranger, S. & Kenter, J.O. & Bryce, R. & Cumming, G. & Dapling, T. & Lawes, E. & Richardson, P.B., 2016. "Forming shared values in conservation management: An interpretive-deliberative-democratic approach to including community voices," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 344-357.
    19. Nicholas Tyack & Milan Ščasný, 2018. "Social Valuation of Genebank Activities: Assessing Public Demand for Genetic Resource Conservation in the Czech Republic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, November.
    20. Elena Ojea & Paulo Nunes & Maria Loureiro, 2010. "Mapping Biodiversity Indicators and Assessing Biodiversity Values in Global Forests," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(3), pages 329-347, November.

    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:marpol:v:61:y:2015:i:c:p:291-302. 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: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/marpol .

    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.