Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24625496›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

A methodology for adaptable and robust ecosystem services assessment.

Ferdinando Villa, Kenneth J Bagstad, Brian Voigt, Gary W Johnson, Rosimeiry Portela, Miroslav Honzák, David Batker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Natural capital approaches for the optimal design of policies for nature recovery.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Fragmentation and thresholds in hydrological flow-based ecosystem services.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2020
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Ferdinando VillaBasque Centre for Climate Change (BC3), IKERBASQUE, Basque Foundation for Science, Bilbao, Bizkaia, Spain.
Kenneth J BagstadGeosciences & Environmental Change Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado, United States of America.
Brian VoigtGund Institute for Ecological Economics, Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont, United States of America.
Gary W JohnsonDepartment of Computer Science, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont, United States of America.
Rosimeiry PortelaConservation International, Arlington, Virginia, United States of America.
Miroslav HonzákConservation International, Arlington, Virginia, United States of America.
David BatkerEarth Economics, Tacoma, Washington, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ecosystem Services (ES) are an established conceptual framework for attributing value to the benefits that nature provides to humans. As the promise of robust ES-driven management is put to the test, shortcomings in our ability to accurately measure, map, and value ES have surfaced. On the research side, mainstream methods for ES assessment still fall short of addressing the complex, multi-scale biophysical and socioeconomic dynamics inherent in ES provision, flow, and use. On the practitioner side, application of methods remains onerous due to data and model parameterization requirements. Further, it is increasingly clear that the dominant "one model fits all" paradigm is often ill-suited to address the diversity of real-world management situations that exist across the broad spectrum of coupled human-natural systems. This article introduces an integrated ES modeling methodology, named ARIES (ARtificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services), which aims to introduce improvements on these fronts. To improve conceptual detail and representation of ES dynamics, it adopts a uniform conceptualization of ES that gives equal emphasis to their production, flow and use by society, while keeping model complexity low enough to enable rapid and inexpensive assessment in many contexts and for multiple services. To improve fit to diverse application contexts, the methodology is assisted by model integration technologies that allow assembly of customized models from a growing model base. By using computer learning and reasoning, model structure may be specialized for each application context without requiring costly expertise. In this article we discuss the founding principles of ARIES--both its innovative aspects for ES science and as an example of a new strategy to support more accurate decision making in diverse application contexts.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsConservation of Natural ResourcesDecision MakingEcosystemEnvironmental MonitoringGeographySocial ClassSoftwareWashingtonWater PollutantsWater Pollutants

Identifiers

PMID24625496
PMCPMC3953216

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.