1 / 24

Chris Stalling, RMRS Forestry Science Lab

Integrating Ecologic, Economic, and Social Sciences Using a Spatially Explicit, Landscape Dynamic Simulation System. Chris Stalling, RMRS Forestry Science Lab. Acknowledgement. Jimmie Chew, RMRS Kirk Moeller, RMRS Anne Black, ALWRI Adam Liljeblad, ALWRI. Introduction.

neva
Télécharger la présentation

Chris Stalling, RMRS Forestry Science Lab

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Integrating Ecologic, Economic, and Social Sciences Using a Spatially Explicit, Landscape Dynamic Simulation System Chris Stalling, RMRS Forestry Science Lab

  2. Acknowledgement • Jimmie Chew, RMRS • Kirk Moeller, RMRS • Anne Black, ALWRI • Adam Liljeblad, ALWRI

  3. Introduction • Integration of knowledge • The interactions of the biophysical, social, and economic landscape components • Use of models for better understanding and communication • Modeling with SIMPPLLE • A method • A tool developed specifically for integration

  4. Theory Social Ecologic Economic

  5. From theory to reality

  6. Reality Ecologic Social Economic

  7. How do we bring these seemingly divergent perspectives together? • Modeling that helps us think about the world by: • Representing interactions of socio-economic values with biophysical environment • Displaying trade-offs necessary for sustainability • Communication using visualization and interactive, ‘real-time’ modeling

  8. SIMPPLLE as the ecological core Designed to simulate complex landscape-scale interactions between vegetation and other abiotic and biotic landscape components. Developed to help managers make decisions that address ecosystem sustainability based on issues, concerns, and knowledge Runs on site-specific empirical, mechanistic, local and expert-knowledge as logic

  9. SIMPPLLE, A Simple Methodology • Basic rule of modeling is to help people better understand the world • Acronym = modeling philosophy to keep things as simple as possible, add complexity only as needed • Modeling system platform allows users to interact and communicate issues and concerns about landscapes • www.fs.fed.us/rm/missoula/4151/SIMPPLLE

  10. Users Decide How to Represent the Landscape • What is the appropriate scale for issues? • Is the analysis to be irregular polygons or grid-based? • Should time be in decades, years, seasons? • Include vegetation, landforms, aquatics, man-made structures, social values? • Should vegetation be dominant forest species, multiple life forms, grass types?

  11. Climate Change Models NAU Wildlife Models R1,GAP, Birdlife Int’l – Europe Insect and Disease Research Watershed Models USGS, CO Plateau SIMPPLLE the ecological core Vegetation FVS Model FCCS PNW Fire Models FMOs Economic Models MAGIS-JFS, BEMRP SPECTRUM, R1 Planning FIA Plots Invasive Species MSU, MESA VERDE NP

  12. What are we missing? Ecologic Social SIMPPLLE Economic

  13. A planning problem: People care about their landscape; yet most planning and analysis activities don’t explicitly acknowledge or incorporate these attachments. Ecologic Social possible acceptable Economic A solution? feasible Incorporate information about ‘attachment to place’ directly into our ecologic/economic models.

  14. Landform PVT Cover Type Cover Type/ Structural phase Location Conceptual framework cohesion Social settings Biophysical settings activities (e) (a) (b) (c) (d) outcomes identity Attachment to place

  15. Community/ Cultural Landform PVT Family/Friends Cover Type Cover Type/ Structural phase Personal Location Conceptual framework cohesion Social settings Biophysical settings activities (e) (a) (b) (c) (d) outcomes identity Attachment to place

  16. Social & Physical Attachment Physical Associates Social Outcomes Family/ Inter-Social Community Objective Subjective Individual Physical Management Influenced Activity Related Ownership Related Density Related

  17. Physical Associates Social Outcomes Objective Subjective Emotional Physical Physical Management Influenced Economic NaturalInquiry Exercise Subsistence Relaxation Employment Activity Related Ownership Related Density Related Social & Physical Attachment Family/ Inter-Social Community Individual

  18. Activity Related Ownership Related Density Related Natural Sounds Abundance of Rec. Opps. Open Space Wilderness Uncrowded Interconnected Trail System Social & Physical Attachment Physical Associates Social Outcomes Family/ Inter-Social Community Objective Subjective Individual Management Influenced Physical Activity Related Ownership Related Density Related

  19. Adapted from Firey, 1960

  20. So What?

More Related