|
|
|
|
|
| Nelitz, Marc A; ESSA Technologies Ltd.; mnelitz@essa.com; Beardmore, Ben; Beardmore Consulting LLC; Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources; Alan.Beardmore@wisconsin.gov; Machtans, Craig S; Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada; Craig.Machtans@ec.gc.ca; Hall, Alexander W; ESSA Technologies Ltd.; ahall@essa.com; Wedeles, Chris; ArborVitae Environmental Services Ltd.; chris@avesltd.ca. |
| Complexity and uncertainty are inherent in social-ecological systems. Although they can create challenges for scientists and decision makers, they cannot be a reason for delaying decision making. Two strategies have matured in recent decades to address these challenges. Systems thinking, as embodied by conceptual modeling, is a holistic approach in which a system can be better understood by examining it as a whole. Expert elicitation represents a second strategy that enables a greater diversity of inputs to understand complex systems. We explored the use of conceptual models and expert judgments to inform expansion of monitoring around oil sands development in northern Alberta, Canada, particularly related to migratory forest birds. This study area is a... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed Reports |
Palavras-chave: Complexity; Conceptual modeling; Expert judgment; Migratory birds; Oil sands; Uncertainty. |
| Ano: 2015 |
|
| |
|
|
| Mika, Sarah; School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Australia; sarah.mika@une.edu.au; Hoyle, Joanna; Department of Environment and Geography, Macquarie University;; Kyle, Garreth; Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University;; Howell, Timothy; Australian Rivers Institute, Griffith University;; Wolfenden, Benjamin; School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Australia;; Ryder, Darren; School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Australia; darren.ryder@une.edu.au; Keating, Daniel; Department of Environment and Geography, Macquarie University;; Boulton, Andrew; School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Australia;; Brierley, Gary; School of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science, University of Auckland;; Brooks, Andrew P; Australian Rivers Institute, Griffith University;; Fryirs, Kirstie; Department of Environment and Geography, Macquarie University;; Leishman, Michelle; Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University;; Sanders, Mark; Department of Environment and Geography, Macquarie University;; Arthington, Angela; Australian Rivers Institute, Griffith University;; Creese, Robert; NSW Department of Industry and Innovation, Port Stephens Fisheries Centre, Australia;; Dahm, Mark; School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Australia;; Miller, Craig; Department of Environment and Geography, Macquarie University;; Pusey, Brad; Australian Rivers Institute, Griffith University;; Spink, Alexandra; Department of Environment and Geography, Macquarie University;. |
| Many river restoration projects fail. Inadequate project planning underpins many of the reasons given for failure (such as setting overly ambitious goals; selecting inappropriate sites and techniques; losing stakeholder motivation; and neglecting to monitor, assess, and document projects). Another major problem is the lack of an agreed guiding image to direct the activities aimed at restoring the necessary biophysical and ecological processes within the logistic constraints of on-ground works. Despite a rich literature defining the components of restoration project planning, restoration ecology currently lacks an explicit and logical means of moving from the initial project vision through to on-ground strategies. Yet this process is fundamental because it... |
| Tipo: Peer-Reviewed Reports |
Palavras-chave: Catchment history; Complex ecological systems; Conceptual modeling; Disturbance and response mechanisms; Guiding image; Hunter River Australia; Interdisciplinary research; Process-based restoration; River restoration. |
| Ano: 2010 |
|
| |
|
|
|
