IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v486y2023ics0304380023002661.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conceptual framework addressing timescale mismatch uncertainty: Nitrous-oxide (N2O) modeled and measured, Kansas, USA

Author

Listed:
  • Arango, Miguel A.
  • Anandhi, Aavudai
  • Rice, Charles W.

Abstract

The uncertainty that arises from the differences in time scales between modeled and measured variables during sensitivity analysis, calibration, and validation in process-based models are often not addressed in the literature. A conceptual framework was developed to represent the uncertainty arising due to this mismatch in timescales. Modeling N2O fluxes from agricultural lands in Manhattan, Kansas using Denitrification–Decomposition (DNDC) model, and with measurements available at biweekly time scale is chosen in the demonstration. A conceptual framework was developed to represent the known-unknown uncertainty using integration methods, management practices, sensitivity analysis methods, calibration and validation performance measures. The known-known and known-unknown uncertainty were represented for combinations of three integration methods (mean, median and cumulative sum), four management practice combinations (till-urea, no-till-urea, till-compost, no-till-compost), three sensitivity analysis methods (two graphical approaches and an index based method), and two calibration and validation performance measures (ME, R2). In the framework, the unknown uncertainty was represented but not quantified. The various assumptions and some of the implications were also discussed. The framework followed in this exercise and insights gained can be applicable to other process-based models.

Suggested Citation

  • Arango, Miguel A. & Anandhi, Aavudai & Rice, Charles W., 2023. "Conceptual framework addressing timescale mismatch uncertainty: Nitrous-oxide (N2O) modeled and measured, Kansas, USA," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 486(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:486:y:2023:i:c:s0304380023002661
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2023.110536
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380023002661
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2023.110536?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Clare Chua Chow & Rakesh Sarin, 2002. "Known, Unknown, and Unknowable Uncertainties," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 127-138, March.
    2. Izaurralde, R. César & McGill, William B. & Williams, Jimmy R. & Jones, Curtis D. & Link, Robert P. & Manowitz, David H. & Schwab, D. Elisabeth & Zhang, Xuesong & Robertson, G. Philip & Millar, Nevill, 2017. "Simulating microbial denitrification with EPIC: Model description and evaluation," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 359(C), pages 349-362.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Karner, Katrin & Schmid, Erwin & Schneider, Uwe A. & Mitter, Hermine, 2021. "Computing stochastic Pareto frontiers between economic and environmental goals for a semi-arid agricultural production region in Austria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    2. Corgnet, Brice & Hernán-González, Roberto & Kujal, Praveen, 2020. "On booms that never bust: Ambiguity in experimental asset markets with bubbles," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    3. Mercè Roca & Robin Hogarth & A. Maule, 2006. "Ambiguity seeking as a result of the status quo bias," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 175-194, May.
    4. Michèle Cohen & Jean-Marc Tallon & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud, 2011. "An experimental investigation of imprecision attitude and its relation with risk attitude and impatience," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(1), pages 81-109, July.
    5. Oechssler, Jörg & Roomets, Alex, 2015. "A test of mechanical ambiguity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 153-162.
    6. Théodora Dupont-Courtade, 2012. "Insurance demand under ambiguity and conflict for extreme risks : Evidence from a large representative survey," Post-Print halshs-00718642, HAL.
    7. M. Vittoria Levati & Stefan Napel & Ivan Soraperra, 2017. "Collective Choices Under Ambiguity," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 133-149, January.
    8. Anthony Perl & Michael Howlett & M. Ramesh, 2018. "Policy-making and truthiness: Can existing policy models cope with politicized evidence and willful ignorance in a “post-fact” world?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(4), pages 581-600, December.
    9. Jean Desrochers & J. Francois Outreville, 2013. "Uncertainty, Ambiguity and Risk Taking: an experimental investigation of consumer behavior and demand for insurance," ICER Working Papers 10-2013, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    10. Roxane Bricet, 2018. "The price for instrumentally valuable information," THEMA Working Papers 2018-10, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    11. Fujii, Tomoki, 2017. "Dynamic Poverty Decomposition Analysis: An Application to the Philippines," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 69-84.
    12. Berger, Loic & Bosetti, Valentina, 2016. "Ellsberg Re-revisited: An Experiment Disentangling Model Uncertainty and Risk Aversion," MITP: Mitigation, Innovation and Transformation Pathways 236239, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    13. Ilke Aydogan & Lo?c Berger & Valentina Bosetti & Ning Liu, 2018. "Three Layers of Uncertainty: an Experiment," Working Papers 2018.24, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    14. Bentley, Chance & Anandhi, Aavudai, 2020. "Representing driver-response complexity in ecosystems using an improved conceptual model," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 437(C).
    15. Théodora Dupont-Courtade, 2012. "Insurance demand under ambiguity and conflict for extreme risks : Evidence from a large representative survey," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00718642, HAL.
    16. Loic Berger & Valentina Bosetti, 2016. "Ellsberg Re-revisited: An Experiment Disentangling Model Uncertainty and Risk Aversion," Working Papers 2016.37, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    17. Takashi Hayashi & Ryoko Wada, 2010. "Choice with imprecise information: an experimental approach," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 69(3), pages 355-373, September.
    18. Johanna Etner & Meglena Jeleva & Jean‐Marc Tallon, 2012. "Decision Theory Under Ambiguity," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 234-270, April.
    19. Nate Kauffman & Kristina Hill, 2021. "Climate Change, Adaptation Planning and Institutional Integration: A Literature Review and Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-28, September.
    20. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:3:p:335-348 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Inhwa Kim & Keith J. Gamble, 2022. "Too much or too little information: how unknown uncertainty fuels time inconsistency," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 1-33, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:486:y:2023:i:c:s0304380023002661. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.