Operationalising ecosystem service assessment in Bayesian Belief Networks: Experiences within the OpenNESS project

Ron Smith, David N. Barton, Jan Dick, Roy Haines-Young, Anders Læsø Madsen, Graciela M. Rusch, Mette Termansen, Helen Woods, Laurence Carvalho, Relu Constantin Giuca, Sandra Luque, David Odee, Veronica Rusch, Heli Saarikoski, Christian Mihai Adamescu, Rob Dunford, John Ochieng, Julen Gonzalez-Redin, Erik Stange, Angheluta VadineanuPeter Verweij, Suvi Vikstrom

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

19 Citationer (Scopus)

Resumé

Nine Bayesian Belief Networks (BBNs) were developed within the OpenNESS project specifically for modelling ecosystem services for case study applications. The novelty of the method, its ability to explore problems, to address uncertainty, and to facilitate stakeholder interaction in the process were all reasons for choosing BBNs. Most case studies had some local expertise on BBNs to assist them, and all used expert opinion as well as data to help develop the dependences in the BBNs. In terms of the decision scope of the work, all case studies were moving from explorative and informative uses towards decisive, but none were yet being used for decision-making. Three applications incorporated BBNs with GIS where the spatial component of the management was critical, but several concerns about estimating uncertainty with spatial modelling approaches are discussed. The tool proved to be very flexible and, particularly with its web interface, was an asset when working with stakeholders to facilitate exploration of outcomes, knowledge elicitation and social learning. BBNs were rated as very useful and widely applicable by the case studies that used them, but further improvements in software and more training were also deemed necessary.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftEcosystem Services
Vol/bind29
Udgave nummerPart C
Sider (fra-til)452-464
ISSN2212-0416
DOI
StatusUdgivet - feb. 2018

Fingerprint

ecosystem service
ecosystem services
Ecosystem
stakeholder
case studies
study application
stakeholders
modeling
experience
uncertainty
learning
GIS
decision making
software
Uncertainty
expert opinion
assets
Aptitude
Expert Testimony
social learning

Citer dette

Smith, Ron ; Barton, David N. ; Dick, Jan ; Haines-Young, Roy ; Madsen, Anders Læsø ; Rusch, Graciela M. ; Termansen, Mette ; Woods, Helen ; Carvalho, Laurence ; Giuca, Relu Constantin ; Luque, Sandra ; Odee, David ; Rusch, Veronica ; Saarikoski, Heli ; Adamescu, Christian Mihai ; Dunford, Rob ; Ochieng, John ; Gonzalez-Redin, Julen ; Stange, Erik ; Vadineanu, Angheluta ; Verweij, Peter ; Vikstrom, Suvi. / Operationalising ecosystem service assessment in Bayesian Belief Networks : Experiences within the OpenNESS project. I: Ecosystem Services. 2018 ; Bind 29, Nr. Part C. s. 452-464.
@article{c8b27c1a03b4460090ad4bca59e8f28f,
title = "Operationalising ecosystem service assessment in Bayesian Belief Networks: Experiences within the OpenNESS project",
abstract = "Nine Bayesian Belief Networks (BBNs) were developed within the OpenNESS project specifically for modelling ecosystem services for case study applications. The novelty of the method, its ability to explore problems, to address uncertainty, and to facilitate stakeholder interaction in the process were all reasons for choosing BBNs. Most case studies had some local expertise on BBNs to assist them, and all used expert opinion as well as data to help develop the dependences in the BBNs. In terms of the decision scope of the work, all case studies were moving from explorative and informative uses towards decisive, but none were yet being used for decision-making. Three applications incorporated BBNs with GIS where the spatial component of the management was critical, but several concerns about estimating uncertainty with spatial modelling approaches are discussed. The tool proved to be very flexible and, particularly with its web interface, was an asset when working with stakeholders to facilitate exploration of outcomes, knowledge elicitation and social learning. BBNs were rated as very useful and widely applicable by the case studies that used them, but further improvements in software and more training were also deemed necessary.",
author = "Ron Smith and Barton, {David N.} and Jan Dick and Roy Haines-Young and Madsen, {Anders L{\ae}s{\o}} and Rusch, {Graciela M.} and Mette Termansen and Helen Woods and Laurence Carvalho and Giuca, {Relu Constantin} and Sandra Luque and David Odee and Veronica Rusch and Heli Saarikoski and Adamescu, {Christian Mihai} and Rob Dunford and John Ochieng and Julen Gonzalez-Redin and Erik Stange and Angheluta Vadineanu and Peter Verweij and Suvi Vikstrom",
year = "2018",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.11.004",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "452--464",
journal = "Ecosystem Services",
issn = "2212-0416",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "Part C",

}

Smith, R, Barton, DN, Dick, J, Haines-Young, R, Madsen, AL, Rusch, GM, Termansen, M, Woods, H, Carvalho, L, Giuca, RC, Luque, S, Odee, D, Rusch, V, Saarikoski, H, Adamescu, CM, Dunford, R, Ochieng, J, Gonzalez-Redin, J, Stange, E, Vadineanu, A, Verweij, P & Vikstrom, S 2018, 'Operationalising ecosystem service assessment in Bayesian Belief Networks: Experiences within the OpenNESS project', Ecosystem Services, bind 29, nr. Part C, s. 452-464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.11.004

Operationalising ecosystem service assessment in Bayesian Belief Networks : Experiences within the OpenNESS project. / Smith, Ron; Barton, David N.; Dick, Jan; Haines-Young, Roy; Madsen, Anders Læsø; Rusch, Graciela M.; Termansen, Mette; Woods, Helen; Carvalho, Laurence; Giuca, Relu Constantin; Luque, Sandra; Odee, David; Rusch, Veronica; Saarikoski, Heli; Adamescu, Christian Mihai; Dunford, Rob; Ochieng, John; Gonzalez-Redin, Julen; Stange, Erik; Vadineanu, Angheluta; Verweij, Peter; Vikstrom, Suvi.

I: Ecosystem Services, Bind 29, Nr. Part C, 02.2018, s. 452-464.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Operationalising ecosystem service assessment in Bayesian Belief Networks

T2 - Experiences within the OpenNESS project

AU - Smith, Ron

AU - Barton, David N.

AU - Dick, Jan

AU - Haines-Young, Roy

AU - Madsen, Anders Læsø

AU - Rusch, Graciela M.

AU - Termansen, Mette

AU - Woods, Helen

AU - Carvalho, Laurence

AU - Giuca, Relu Constantin

AU - Luque, Sandra

AU - Odee, David

AU - Rusch, Veronica

AU - Saarikoski, Heli

AU - Adamescu, Christian Mihai

AU - Dunford, Rob

AU - Ochieng, John

AU - Gonzalez-Redin, Julen

AU - Stange, Erik

AU - Vadineanu, Angheluta

AU - Verweij, Peter

AU - Vikstrom, Suvi

PY - 2018/2

Y1 - 2018/2

N2 - Nine Bayesian Belief Networks (BBNs) were developed within the OpenNESS project specifically for modelling ecosystem services for case study applications. The novelty of the method, its ability to explore problems, to address uncertainty, and to facilitate stakeholder interaction in the process were all reasons for choosing BBNs. Most case studies had some local expertise on BBNs to assist them, and all used expert opinion as well as data to help develop the dependences in the BBNs. In terms of the decision scope of the work, all case studies were moving from explorative and informative uses towards decisive, but none were yet being used for decision-making. Three applications incorporated BBNs with GIS where the spatial component of the management was critical, but several concerns about estimating uncertainty with spatial modelling approaches are discussed. The tool proved to be very flexible and, particularly with its web interface, was an asset when working with stakeholders to facilitate exploration of outcomes, knowledge elicitation and social learning. BBNs were rated as very useful and widely applicable by the case studies that used them, but further improvements in software and more training were also deemed necessary.

AB - Nine Bayesian Belief Networks (BBNs) were developed within the OpenNESS project specifically for modelling ecosystem services for case study applications. The novelty of the method, its ability to explore problems, to address uncertainty, and to facilitate stakeholder interaction in the process were all reasons for choosing BBNs. Most case studies had some local expertise on BBNs to assist them, and all used expert opinion as well as data to help develop the dependences in the BBNs. In terms of the decision scope of the work, all case studies were moving from explorative and informative uses towards decisive, but none were yet being used for decision-making. Three applications incorporated BBNs with GIS where the spatial component of the management was critical, but several concerns about estimating uncertainty with spatial modelling approaches are discussed. The tool proved to be very flexible and, particularly with its web interface, was an asset when working with stakeholders to facilitate exploration of outcomes, knowledge elicitation and social learning. BBNs were rated as very useful and widely applicable by the case studies that used them, but further improvements in software and more training were also deemed necessary.

U2 - 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.11.004

DO - 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.11.004

M3 - Journal article

VL - 29

SP - 452

EP - 464

JO - Ecosystem Services

JF - Ecosystem Services

SN - 2212-0416

IS - Part C

ER -