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.
KW - Decision scope
KW - Spatial modelling
KW - Stakeholder participation
KW - Uncertainty
KW - Web interface
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85034441213&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.11.004
DO - 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.11.004
M3 - Journal article
SN - 2212-0416
VL - 29
SP - 452
EP - 464
JO - Ecosystem Services
JF - Ecosystem Services
IS - Part C
ER -