Conceptual Modeling for Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management in the Barycz Valley, Lower Silesia, Poland
Adaptive Management Framework with Conceptual Modeling
- An open, participatory and recursive process both for policy formulation and indicators selection is used instead of top-down control.
- Systems analysis including many feedbacks between sectors is performed, instead of narrow technical analysis.
- Conceptual, qualitative modeling is used instead of formal, quantitative modeling.
Agreeing on Issues and Objectives
- Identifying Variables and Interrelationships. Here conceptual modeling is used to map the underlying assumptions about the linkages and causality in the system. We have used the qualitative system dynamics methodology with causal loop diagrams as mapping tool.
- Assessing Major Uncertainties and Unknowns. Disagreements reveal gaps in understanding. Uncertainties are pondered to the point when they can be clearly stated as hypotheses.
- Identifying Key Variables. Using the conceptual model developed in 2a, most important (key) variables are selected by considering the number of interactions and/or delays as well as employing a conservative rule that each feedback loop should be represented in the set of indicators by one of its variables.
- Deriving Indicators for Each Variable. Each key variable should be represented by at least one indicator. Often multiple indicators are needed to capture the range of values and qualities associated with a variable.
- Scoring Indicators with Three Sets of Criteria. The scoring process must be streamlined and simple enough to be easily understood and relatively rapid to accomplish. Criteria should also help one examine what makes an indicator useful and convincing. To meet these goals a set of three criteria was employed: importance (work group’s perspective), compellingness (stakeholders’ perspective) and measurability.
- Selecting a Final Set of Sustainability Indicators (based on cumulative scoring).
Monitoring and Evaluation
Project in the Barycz Valley
- Differences (and agreements) in opinions were articulated much more precisely.
- Gaps in understanding were discovered more efficiently.
Regional Sustainability Model
|Environmental Quality||Biodiversity – number of species|
|Percentage of viable habitat (green area)|
|Environmentally Friendly Farms (EFF)||Ratio EFF/Total (Number)|
|Ratio EFF/Total (Area)|
|Revenues from Agri-Environmental Programs||Percentage of maximum subsidy|
|Percentage of minimum yearly income|
|Green Local Product (GLP) Production||Sales revenues as percent of total sales per firm|
|Number of people employed|
|Number of firms|
|Profits from GLP||Total amount earned in region|
|Average profitability from GLP per firm|
|Profits from Environmentally Friendly Crops||Total amount earned in region|
|Average profitability from env. friendly crops per farm|
|Profits from Green Tourism (GT)||Total amount earned from GT in region|
|Average profitability from GT per firm|
|Organizational Support for Environmentally Friendly Farms||Hours of work on projects|
|Perceived support by farmers|
|Brand Attractiveness||Brand awareness and acceptation|
|Support for Green Local Products||Hours of work on projects|
|Perceived support by green local producers|
|Social Support for Environmental Standards||Percentage of population that supports environmental standards|
Appendix 1 – Feedback Loops in Regional Sustainability Model
References and Notes
- Sterman, J. Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World; Irwin/McGraw-Hill: New York, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Sterman, J. Syst. Dyn. Rev 2002, 18, 501–531.
- Rittel, H.; Webber, M. Policy Sciences 1973, 4, 155–159.
- Gleick, P. H. Science 2003, 302(5650), 1524–1528.
- Holling, C. S. (Ed.) Adaptive environmental assessment and management; John Wiley: New York, 1978.
- Walters, C. J. Adaptive Management of Renewable Resources; Macmillan Publishing: New York, 1986. [Google Scholar]
- Gunderson, L. H.; Holling, C. S.; Light, S. S. (Eds.) Barriers and Bridges to the Renewal of Ecosystems and Institutions; Columbia University Press: New York, 1995.
- Sendzimir, J.; Light, S.; Szymanowska, K. Environments 1999, 27(1), 115–136.
- Gunderson, L. H.; Holling, C. S. Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Systems of Humans and Nature; Island Press: Washington, D.C, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Light, S. S.; Blann, K. Adaptive management and the Kissimmee River restoration project unpublished manuscript. 2000.
- Walters, C.; Korman, J.; Stevens, L. E.; Gold, B. Conservation Ecology. 2000, 4, p. 1. [online] URL: http://www.consecol.org/Journal/vol4/iss2/art1/index.html.
- Sendzimir, J.; Balogh, P.; Vári, A. Modelling Biocomplexity in the Tisza River Basin within a Participatory Adaptive Framework. Proceedings iEMSs Conference, Osnabruck; 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Vennix, J. A. M. Syst. Dyn. Rev 1999, 15, 379–401.
- Senge, P. M. The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of The Learning Organization; Currency Doubleday: New York, 1990. [Google Scholar]
- Repenning, N. Organization Science 2002, 13(2), 109–127.
- For a historical review of community indicators, see: Gahin, R.; Paterson, C. National Civic Review 2001, 90(4), 347–361.
- A lot of information about sustainability indicators is available in the internet and the good selection of websites was provided by: Hecht, J. E. Environment 2003, 45(1), 3–4.
- Besleme, K.; Mullin, M. National Civic Review 1997, 86(1), 43–52.
- Meppem, T.; Gill, R. Ecological Economics 1998, 26(2), 121–137.
- Bell, S.; Morse, S. Sustainability Indicators: Measuring the Immeasurable; Earthscan: London, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Bell, S.; Morse, S. Sustainable Development 2004, 12, 1–14.
- King, C. A.; Gunton, J.; Freebairn, D.; Coutts, J.; Webb, I. Australian J. of Experimental Agriculture 2000, 40(4), 631–642.
- Woodhouse, P.; Howlett, D.; Rigby, D. A framework for research on sustainability indicators for agriculture and rural livelihoods. In Working Paper no. 2, Sustainability Indicators for Natural Resource Management and Policy; University of Manchester: Manchester, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Bossel, H. Conservation Ecology. 2001, 5, p. 12. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol5/iss2/art12/.
- Morse, S.; McNamara, N.; Acholo, M.; Okwoli, B. Sustainable Development 2000, 9, 1–15.
- Kelly, R.; Moles, R. J. of Environmental Planning and Management 2002, 45(6), 889–912.
- Reed, M. S.; Dougill, A. J. The Geographical J 2002, 168(3), 224–234.
- Freebairn, D. M.; King, C. A. Australian J. of Experimental Agriculture 2003, 43, 223–238.
- Pretty, J. Regenerating Agriculture: policies and practice for sustainability and self-reliance; Earthscan: London, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Bell, S.; Morse, S. Local Environment 2001, 6(3), 291–309.
- Checkland, P. B.; Scholes, J. Soft Systems Methodology in Action; John Wiley: Chichester, UK, 1990. [Google Scholar]
- Flood, R.; Jackson, M. Creative Problem Solving; Wiley: London, 1991. [Google Scholar]
- Coyle, G. System Dynamics Review 2000, 16, 225–244.
- Mingers, J.; Rosenhead, J. European J. of Operational Research 2004, 152, 530–554.
© 2005 MDPI. All rights reserved.
Share and Cite
Magnuszewski, P.; Sendzimir, J.; Kronenberg, J. Conceptual Modeling for Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management in the Barycz Valley, Lower Silesia, Poland. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2005, 2, 194-203. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph2005020001
Magnuszewski P, Sendzimir J, Kronenberg J. Conceptual Modeling for Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management in the Barycz Valley, Lower Silesia, Poland. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2005; 2(2):194-203. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph2005020001Chicago/Turabian Style
Magnuszewski, Piotr, Jan Sendzimir, and Jakub Kronenberg. 2005. "Conceptual Modeling for Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management in the Barycz Valley, Lower Silesia, Poland" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2, no. 2: 194-203. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph2005020001