A multi-dimensional approach to improve validation practices for qualitative models of marine social-ecological systems

IF 3.7 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Bruno Oliveira , Nuno V. Álvaro , Furqan Asif , Andrea Z. Botelho , João Canning-Clode , Daniela Casimiro , Candelaria Cecilia-Ruano , Catherine Chambers , Ana C. Costa , Ana Dinis , Jesús P. García , Ricardo Haroun , Unn Laksá , Gustavo M. Martins , Alexander H. McGrath , Caterina Mintrone , Mirjam Carlsdóttir Olsen , Manuela I. Parente , Paola Parretti , Sarai Pouso , Angel Borja
{"title":"A multi-dimensional approach to improve validation practices for qualitative models of marine social-ecological systems","authors":"Bruno Oliveira ,&nbsp;Nuno V. Álvaro ,&nbsp;Furqan Asif ,&nbsp;Andrea Z. Botelho ,&nbsp;João Canning-Clode ,&nbsp;Daniela Casimiro ,&nbsp;Candelaria Cecilia-Ruano ,&nbsp;Catherine Chambers ,&nbsp;Ana C. Costa ,&nbsp;Ana Dinis ,&nbsp;Jesús P. García ,&nbsp;Ricardo Haroun ,&nbsp;Unn Laksá ,&nbsp;Gustavo M. Martins ,&nbsp;Alexander H. McGrath ,&nbsp;Caterina Mintrone ,&nbsp;Mirjam Carlsdóttir Olsen ,&nbsp;Manuela I. Parente ,&nbsp;Paola Parretti ,&nbsp;Sarai Pouso ,&nbsp;Angel Borja","doi":"10.1016/j.crsust.2024.100273","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Current modeling practices for social-ecological systems (SES) are often qualitative and use causal loop diagrams (CLDs), as these models promote an evaluation of the systems loops and variable connectivity. Our literature review demonstrated that quality assurance of these models often lacks a consistent validation procedure. Therefore, a guide to improving the validation of qualitative models is presented. The presumed utility protocol is a multi-dimensional protocol with 26 criteria, organized into four dimensions, designed to assess specific parts of the modeling process and provide recommendations for improvement. This protocol was applied to three demonstration cases, located in the Arctic Northeast Atlantic Ocean, Macaronesia, and the Tuscan archipelago. The “Specific Model Tests” dimension, which focuses on the structure of the model, revealed positive evaluations of its structure, boundaries, and capacity to be scaled up. “Guidelines and Processes”, which focuses on the meaning and representativeness of the process, showed positive results regarding purpose, usefulness, presentation, and meaningfulness. “Policy Insights and Spillovers”, a dimension focused on the policy recommendations, revealed a high number of “not apply”, indicating that several criteria are too advanced for the status of the models tested. The “Administrative, Review, and Overview” dimension, which focused on the managerial overview, showed the models needed improvement in the documentation and replicability, while time and cost constraints were positively evaluated. The presumed utility protocol has shown to be a useful tool providing quantitative and qualitative evaluations for an intermediate evaluation of the model-building process, helping to substantiate confidence, with recommendations for improvements and applications elsewhere.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34472,"journal":{"name":"Current Research in Environmental Sustainability","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100273"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Research in Environmental Sustainability","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666049024000331","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Current modeling practices for social-ecological systems (SES) are often qualitative and use causal loop diagrams (CLDs), as these models promote an evaluation of the systems loops and variable connectivity. Our literature review demonstrated that quality assurance of these models often lacks a consistent validation procedure. Therefore, a guide to improving the validation of qualitative models is presented. The presumed utility protocol is a multi-dimensional protocol with 26 criteria, organized into four dimensions, designed to assess specific parts of the modeling process and provide recommendations for improvement. This protocol was applied to three demonstration cases, located in the Arctic Northeast Atlantic Ocean, Macaronesia, and the Tuscan archipelago. The “Specific Model Tests” dimension, which focuses on the structure of the model, revealed positive evaluations of its structure, boundaries, and capacity to be scaled up. “Guidelines and Processes”, which focuses on the meaning and representativeness of the process, showed positive results regarding purpose, usefulness, presentation, and meaningfulness. “Policy Insights and Spillovers”, a dimension focused on the policy recommendations, revealed a high number of “not apply”, indicating that several criteria are too advanced for the status of the models tested. The “Administrative, Review, and Overview” dimension, which focused on the managerial overview, showed the models needed improvement in the documentation and replicability, while time and cost constraints were positively evaluated. The presumed utility protocol has shown to be a useful tool providing quantitative and qualitative evaluations for an intermediate evaluation of the model-building process, helping to substantiate confidence, with recommendations for improvements and applications elsewhere.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Current Research in Environmental Sustainability
Current Research in Environmental Sustainability Environmental Science-General Environmental Science
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
9.10%
发文量
76
审稿时长
95 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信