The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Adaptive monitoring based on ecosystem services
Abstract
Monitoring consists of repetitive data collection to determine trends in parameters monitored. Unfortunately, too often monitoring consists of "fishing expeditions" where data collection is justified after the fact rather than being based on a priori technically defensible and testable hypotheses. Monitoring conducted following legal (e.g., regulatory) stipulations is not always useful. Ideally, monitoring should be conducted to determine the current status of the parameters monitored, their temporal and spatial trends (to assist in predicting future status), and the possible need for management actions. The most effective and productive scientific monitoring is adaptive, and is based on assessment endpoints that comprise ecosystem services, in other words, the benefits of Nature to human beings.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Some accounts suggest statutory policy requirements may not match with what is actually needed to inform management (e.g. Chapman, 2012)”
From Policy-driven monitoring and evaluation: Does it support adaptive management of socio-ecological systems? (2019) · cites this paper as Chapman, 2012
In the citing paper
“Thus, at present, monitoring often seems to be seen as a technical issue, overly focussed on specified elements of a system (Chapman, 2012).”
From Policy-driven monitoring and evaluation: Does it support adaptive management of socio-ecological systems? (2019) · cites this paper as Chapman, 2012
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- Chapman, 2007, Traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) and scientific weight of evidence determinations, Mar Pollut Bull, 54, 1839, 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2007.10.033 · DOI
- Chapman, 2008, Environmental risks of inorganic metals and metalloids: a continuing, evolving scientific odyssey, Human Ecol Risk Assess, 14, 5, 10.1080/10807030701790272 · DOI
- Cognetti, 2009, Ecosystem service and service providing units (SPUs) in strategies of marine biodiversity conservation, Mar Pollut Bull, 58, 637, 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2009.03.001 · DOI
- Costanza, 1992, Natural capital and sustainable development, Conserv Biol, 6, 37, 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1992.610037.x · DOI
- Fisher, 2009, Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making, Ecol Econom, S68, 643, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.09.014 · DOI
- Karatayev, 2009, Invaders are not a random selection of species, Biol Invas, 11, 2009, 10.1007/s10530-009-9498-0 · DOI
- Liess, 2010, Intraspecific competition delays recovery of population structure, Aquat Toxicol, 97, 15, 10.1016/j.aquatox.2009.11.018 · DOI
- Lindermayer, 2009, Adaptive monitoring: a new paradigm for long-term research and monitoring, Tree, 24, 482
- Luck, 2003, Population diversity and ecosystem services, Tree, 18, 331
- MacCrimmon, 1971, World distribution of rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri), J Fish Res Board Can, 28, 663, 10.1139/f71-098 · DOI
- Munns, 2009, Translating ecological risk to ecosystem service loss, Integr Environ Assess Manage, 5, 500, 10.1897/IEAM_2009-009.1 · DOI
- Norgaard, 2010, Ecosystem services: from eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder, Ecol Econ, 69, 1219, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.009 · DOI
- Norwood, 2003, Effects of metal mixtures on aquatic biota: a review of observations and methods, Human Ecol Risk Assess, 9, 795, 10.1080/713610010 · DOI
- Van Hecken, 2010, Payments for ecosystem services: justified or not? A political view, Environ Sci Policy, 13, 785, 10.1016/j.envsci.2010.09.006 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Waylen, K. A., Blackstock, K. L., van Hulst, F. J., Damian, C., Horváth, F., Johnson, R. K., Kanka, R., Külvik, M., Macleod, C. J. A., Meissner, K., et al. (2019) · Science of the Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.462 · Cited by 83
“Some accounts suggest statutory policy requirements may not match with what is actually needed to inform management (e.g. Chapman, 2012), and that regulatory inflexibility can impede adaptive management (e.g. McLain and Lee, 1996), so a closer examination of this topic is vital.”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Chapman, P. M.
- Corresponding author
- Chapman, Peter M.
- Venue
- Science of The Total Environment
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-01
- Volume
- 415
- Pages
- 56-60
- ISSN
- 0048-9697 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2079162624
- Cited by
- 38
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 3.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Science of The Total Environment (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Ecosystem dynamics and resilience
- Keywords
- adaptive monitoring, ecosystem services, environmental monitoring, monitoring program design, spatiotemporal trends, environmental management, regulatory monitoring
- MeSH terms
- Conservation of Natural Resources, Environmental Monitoring, Ecosystem
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
