CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 72Sustainability and Climate Change GovernanceWetland Management and ConservationHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes

Lessons Learned from the First Decade of Adaptive Management in Comprehensive Everglades Restoration

Open access
LoSchiavo, Andrew J., Best, Ronnie G., Burns, Rebecca E., Gray, Susan, Harwell, Matthew C., Hines, Eliza B., McLean, Agnes R., St. Clair, Tom +2 more·2013·Ecology and Society
DOI 10.5751/es-06065-180470
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

LoSchiavo, A. J., R. G. Best, R. E. Burns, S. Gray, M. C. Harwell, E. B. Hines, A. R. McLean, T. St. Clair, S. Traxler, and J. W. Vearil. 2013. Lessons learned from the first decade of adaptive management in comprehensive Everglades restoration. Ecology and Society 18(4): 70. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-06065-180470

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5751/es-06065-180470

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • With increasing scale of restoration planning, potential interactions encompass many ecosystem types, plant communities, and species affected by changing landscape patterns and ecological processes.

    “With the increasing scale of restoration planning in response to disasters, human population growth, and climate change (Figure 6), potential interactions encompass many ecosystem types, plant communities, and species affected by changing landscape patterns and ecological processes (WebTable 2; Nakano and Murakami 2001; LoSchiavo et al. 2013).”

    From Applying cumulative effects to strategically advance large‐scale ecosystem restoration (2021) · cites this paper as LoSchiavo et al. 2013

    The section ‘Developing an applied science framework’ (page not provided) describes landscape-scale models spanning South Florida’s major wetland systems, and the Background notes effects on species and habitats. The paper does not establish the broader claim that restoration planning is increasing in scale in response to disasters, population growth, and climate change, or specifically describe interactions across many plant communities. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 29

  1. Bedford, B., R. Labisky, A. van der Valk, and J. Volin. 2012. Ecological effects of extreme hydrological events on the Greater Everglades. Independent Scientific Review Panel Report to RECOVER. Unpublished report. [online] URL: http://www. evergladesplan.org/pm/recover/recover_docs/rlg/041912_rlg_rec_isr_report. pdf.
  2. Bormann, B. T., R. W. Haynes, and J. R. Martin. 2007. Adaptive management of forest ecosystems: Did some rubber hit the road? BioScience 57(2):186-191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1641/B570213 · DOI
  3. Browder, J. A., and J. C. Ogden. 1999. The natural South Florida system II: predrainage ecology. Urban Ecosystems 3(3-4):245-277. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1009504601357 · DOI
  4. Doremus, H. 2011. Adaptive management as an information problem. North Carolina Law Review 89:1455-1495.
  5. Gregory, R., D. Ohlson, and J. Arvai. 2006. Deconstructing adaptive management: criteria for applications to environmental management. Ecological Applications 16(6):2411-2425. http://dx. doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2006)016[2411:DAMCFA]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  6. Gunderson, L. 1999. Resilience, flexibility and adaptvie management-antidotes for spurious certitude? Conservation Ecology 3(1): 7. [online] URL: http://www.consecol.org/vol3/iss1/ art7/.
  7. Gunderson, L., and S. S. Light. 2006. Adaptive management and adaptive governance in the Everglades ecosystem. Policy Sciences 39(4):323-334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11077-006-9027-2 · DOI
  8. Harwell, M. A. 1997. Ecosystem management of South Florida. BioScience 47(8):499-512. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1313118 · DOI
  9. Harwell, M. A., J. H. Gentile, A. Bartuska, C. C. Harwell, V. Myers, J. Obeysekera, J. C. Ogden, and S. C. Tosini. 1999. A science-based strategy for ecological restoration in South Florida. Urban Ecosystems 3(3-4):201-222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/ A:1009500516378 · DOI
  10. Johnson, B. L. 1999. Introduction to the special feature: adaptive management-scientifically sound, socially challenged? Conservation Ecology 3(1): 10. [online] URL: http://www.consecol.org/vol3/ iss1/art10/.
  11. Lall, U., D. L. Phillips, K. H. Reckhow, and D. P. Loucks. 2002. Quantifying and communicating model uncertainty for decision making in the Everglades. Report of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan's Model Uncertainty Workshop, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, Forida, USA.
  12. Light, S. S., and J. W. Dineen. 1994. Water control in the Everglades: a historical perspective. Pages 47-84 in S. M. Davis and J. C. Ogden, editors. Everglades: the ecosystem and its restoration. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, Florida, USA.
  13. McVoy, C. W., W. P. Said, J. Obeysekera, J. V. Arman, and T. Dreschel. 2011. Landscapes and hydrology of the predrainage Everglades. University Press of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
  14. Nie, M., and C. Schultz. 2011. Decision making triggers in adaptive management. Report to USDA Pacific Northwest research station, NEPA for the 21st Century. U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, Oregon, USA. [online] URL: http://www.fs. usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5367512.pdf. · DOI
  15. Nie, M., and C. Schultz. 2012. Decision-making triggers in adaptive management. Conservation Biology 26(6):1137-1144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2012.01915.x · DOI
  16. NRC. 2003. Adaptive monitoring and assessment for the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
  17. NRC. 2004. Adaptive management for water resources project planning. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., USA. [online] URL: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10972. NRC. 2007. Progress toward restoring the Everglades: the first biennial review. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., USA. Ecology and Society 18(4): 70 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol18/iss4/art70/ NRC. 2008. Progress toward restoring the Everglades: the second biennial review. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
  18. NRC. 2010. Progress toward restoring the Everglades: the third biennial review. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
  19. NRC. 2012. Progress toward restoring the Everglades: the fourth bienneial review. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
  20. Ogden, J. C., S. M. Davis, K. J. Jacobs, T. Barnes, and H. E. Fling. 2005. The use of conceptual ecological models to guide ecosystem restoration in South Florida. Wetlands 25(4):795-809. http://dx. doi.org/10.1672/0277-5212(2005)025[0795:TUOCEM]2.0.CO;2 RECOVER. 2005. RECOVER team's recommendations for interim goals and interim targets for the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. Restoration Coordination and Verification, c/ o U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville, Florida, USA, and South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, Florida, USA. [online] URL: http://www.evergladesplan.org/pm/ recover/igit_subteam.aspx. · DOI
  21. Ruhl, J. B., and R. L. Fischman. 2010. Adaptive management in the Courts. Minnesota Law Review 95(2):424-484.
  22. Schreiber, E. S. G., A. R. Bearlin, S. J. Nicol, and C. R. Todd. 2004. Adaptive management: a synthesis of current understanding and effective application. Ecological Management and Restoration 5(3):177-182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ j.1442-8903.2004.00206.x · DOI
  23. Sklar, F. H., M. J. Chimney, S. Newman, P. McCormick, D. Gawlik, S. Miao, C. McVoy, W. Said, J. Newman, C. Coronado, G. Crozier, M. Korvela, and K. Rutchey. 2005. The ecological- societal underpinnings of Everglades restoration. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 3(3):161-169. http://dx.doi. org/10.1890/1540-9295(2005)003[0161:TEUOER]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  24. Stankey, G. H., B. T. Bormann, C. Ryan, B. Shindler, V. Sturtevant, R. N. Clark, and C. Philpot. 2003. Adaptive management and the Northwest Forest Plan: rhetoric and reality. Journal of Forestry 101(1):40-46.
  25. Sustainable Ecosystems Institute. 2007. Everglades multi-species avian ecology and restoration review. Final report. Sustainable Ecosystems Institute, Portland, Oregon, USA. [online] URL: http://www.fws.gov/verobeach/CERPPDFs/Everglades2007FinalReport. pdf. · DOI
  26. Thom, R. M. 2000. Adaptive management of coastal ecosystem restoration projects. Ecological Engineering 15(3-4):365-372. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0925-8574(00)00086-0 · DOI
  27. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville, Florida, USA, and South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, Florida, USA. [online] URL: http://www.evergladesplan. org/pm/projects/proj_51_cepp.aspx. Ecology and Society 18(4): 70 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol18/iss4/art70/
  28. Walters, C. J. 2007. Is adaptive management helping to solve fisheries problems? Ambio 36(4):304-307. http://dx.doi. org/10.1579/0044-7447(2007)36[304:IAMHTS]2.0.CO;2 Wetlands. 2005. Special issue. Wetlands 25(4):795-997. · DOI
  29. Wilhere, G. F. 2002. Adaptive management in habitat conservation plans. Conservation Biology 16(1):20-29. http://dx. doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.00350.x · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
LoSchiavo, A. J., Best, R. G., Burns, R. E., Gray, S., Harwell, M. C., Hines, E. B., McLean, A. R., St. Clair, T., Traxler, S., & Vearil, J. W.
Affiliations
  • United States Army Corps of Engineers (US)
  • United States Geological Survey (US)
  • South Florida Water Management District (US)
  • Environmental Protection Agency (US)
  • Everglades National Park (US)
  • Respec (United States) (US)
ORCID
Harwell, Matthew C.
Venue
Ecology and Society
Publisher
Resilience Alliance, Inc.
Published
2013
Volume
18
Issue
4
ISSN
1708-3087 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.5751/es-06065-180470
OpenAlex
W2317351031
Cited by
72
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4
FWCI
4.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Ecology and Society (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
  • South Florida Water Management District
  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
  • U.S. Geological Survey
  • National Park Service
  • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Ocean Engineering › Wetland Management and Conservation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Hydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Keywords
adaptive management, Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, Everglades restoration, lessons learned, wetland restoration, water management

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