IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i6p775-d823427.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Hierarchical Binary Process Model to Assess Deviation from Desired Ecological Condition across a Broad Forested Landscape in Alabama

Author

Listed:
  • Pete Bettinger

    (Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, 180 E. Green Street, Athens, GA 30602, USA)

  • Krista Merry

    (Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, 180 E. Green Street, Athens, GA 30602, USA)

  • Jonathan Stober

    (U.S. Forest Service, Talladega National Forest, 45 Highway 281, Heflin, AL 36264, USA)

Abstract

This work describes the development and analysis of a spatially explicit environmental model to estimate the current, ecological, condition class of a managed forest landscape in the southern United States. The model could be extendable to other similar temperate forest landscapes, yet is characterized as a problem-specific, hierarchical, binary process model given the explicit relationships it recognizes between the management of southern United States pine-dominated natural forests and historical ecological conditions. The model is theoretical, based on informed proposals of the landscape processes that influence the ecological condition, and their relationship to perceived ecological condition. The modeling effort is based on spatial data that describe the historical forest community classes, forest plan provisions, fire history, silvicultural treatments, and current vegetation conditions, and six potential ecological condition classes (ECC) are assigned to lands. A case study was provided involving a large national forest, and validation of the outcomes of the modelling effort suggested that the overall accuracy when predicting the exact ecological condition class was about 46%, while the overall accuracy ±1 class was about 81%. For large, heterogeneous forest areas, issues remain in estimating the input variables relatively accurately, particularly the pine basal area.

Suggested Citation

  • Pete Bettinger & Krista Merry & Jonathan Stober, 2022. "A Hierarchical Binary Process Model to Assess Deviation from Desired Ecological Condition across a Broad Forested Landscape in Alabama," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-14, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:6:p:775-:d:823427
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/6/775/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/6/775/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Cleland & Keith Reynolds & Robert Vaughan & Barbara Schrader & Harbin Li & Larry Laing, 2017. "Terrestrial Condition Assessment for National Forests of the USDA Forest Service in the Continental US," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-19, November.
    2. Bagstad, Kenneth J. & Semmens, Darius J. & Waage, Sissel & Winthrop, Robert, 2013. "A comparative assessment of decision-support tools for ecosystem services quantification and valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 27-39.
    3. Michael C. Stambaugh & Richard P. Guyette & Esther D. Stroh & Matthew A. Struckhoff & Joanna B. Whittier, 2018. "Future southcentral US wildfire probability due to climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 147(3), pages 617-631, April.
    4. Paul F. Hessburg & Keith M. Reynolds & R. Brion Salter & James D. Dickinson & William L. Gaines & Richy J. Harrod, 2013. "Landscape Evaluation for Restoration Planning on the Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest, USA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-36, February.
    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. Ainhoa Gonzalez & Álvaro Enríquez-de-Salamanca, 2018. "Spatial Multi-Criteria Analysis in Environmental Assessment: A Review and Reflection on Benefits and Limitations," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(03), pages 1-24, September.
    2. Drakou, E.G. & Crossman, N.D. & Willemen, L. & Burkhard, B. & Palomo, I. & Maes, J. & Peedell, S., 2015. "A visualization and data-sharing tool for ecosystem service maps: Lessons learnt, challenges and the way forward," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 134-140.
    3. Alessio D’Auria & Pasquale De Toro & Nicola Fierro & Elisa Montone, 2018. "Integration between GIS and Multi-Criteria Analysis for Ecosystem Services Assessment: A Methodological Proposal for the National Park of Cilento, Vallo di Diano and Alburni (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-25, September.
    4. Mayer, Alex & Jones, Kelly & Hunt, David & Manson, Robert & Carter Berry, Z. & Asbjornsen, Heidi & Wright, Timothy Max & Salcone, Jacob & Lopez Ramirez, Sergio & Ã vila-Foucat, Sophie & Von Thaden Uga, 2022. "Assessing ecosystem service outcomes from payments for hydrological services programs in Veracruz, Mexico: Future deforestation threats and spatial targeting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    5. Dong Chen & Rongrong Liu & Maoxian Zhou, 2023. "Delineation of Urban Growth Boundary Based on Habitat Quality and Carbon Storage: A Case Study of Weiyuan County in Gansu, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-17, May.
    6. Ram Avtar & Apisai Vakacegu Rinamalo & Deha Agus Umarhadi & Ankita Gupta & Khaled Mohamed Khedher & Ali P. Yunus & Bhupendra P. Singh & Pankaj Kumar & Netrananda Sahu & Anjar Dimara Sakti, 2022. "Land Use Change and Prediction for Valuating Carbon Sequestration in Viti Levu Island, Fiji," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-17, August.
    7. Moreno-Llorca, R. & Vaz, A.S. & Herrero, J. & Millares, A. & Bonet-García, F.J. & Alcaraz-Segura, D., 2020. "Multi-scale evolution of ecosystem services’ supply in Sierra Nevada (Spain): An assessment over the last half-century," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    8. Mostafa Shaaban & Carmen Schwartz & Joseph Macpherson & Annette Piorr, 2021. "A Conceptual Model Framework for Mapping, Analyzing and Managing Supply–Demand Mismatches of Ecosystem Services in Agricultural Landscapes," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-19, January.
    9. Brown, Melanie G. & Quinn, John E., 2018. "Zoning does not improve the availability of ecosystem services in urban watersheds. A case study from Upstate South Carolina, USA," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 254-265.
    10. Agudelo, César Augusto Ruiz & Bustos, Sandra Liliana Hurtado & Moreno, Carmen Alicia Parrado, 2020. "Modeling interactions among multiple ecosystem services. A critical review," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 429(C).
    11. Liu, Peng & Jiang, Shiwei & Zhao, Lianjun & Li, Yunxi & Zhang, Pingping & Zhang, Li, 2017. "What are the benefits of strictly protected nature reserves? Rapid assessment of ecosystem service values in Wanglang Nature Reserve, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 70-78.
    12. Richard Yao & David Palmer & Barbara Hock & Duncan Harrison & Tim Payn & Juan Monge, 2019. "Forest Investment Framework as a Support Tool for the Sustainable Management of Planted Forests," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-22, June.
    13. Warziniack, Travis & Sims, Charles & Haas, Jessica, 2019. "Fire and the joint production of ecosystem services: A spatial-dynamic optimization approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 1-1.
    14. Vardon, Michael & May, Steve & Keith, Heather & Burnett, Peter & Lindenmayer, David, 2019. "Accounting for ecosystem services – Lessons from Australia for its application and use in Oceania to achieve sustainable development," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    15. Rasmussen, Laura Vang & Mertz, Ole & Christensen, Andreas E. & Danielsen, Finn & Dawson, Neil & Xaydongvanh, Pheang, 2016. "A combination of methods needed to assess the actual use of provisioning ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 75-86.
    16. Yu-Pin Lin & Wei-Chih Lin & Hsin-Yi Li & Yung-Chieh Wang & Chih-Chen Hsu & Wan-Yu Lien & Johnathen Anthony & Joy R. Petway, 2017. "Integrating Social Values and Ecosystem Services in Systematic Conservation Planning: A Case Study in Datuan Watershed," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-22, April.
    17. Stephen B. Stewart & Anthony P. O’Grady & Daniel S. Mendham & Greg S. Smith & Philip J. Smethurst, 2022. "Digital Tools for Quantifying the Natural Capital Benefits of Agroforestry: A Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-32, September.
    18. Kenny, Daniel C. & Costanza, Robert & Dowsley, Tom & Jackson, Nichelle & Josol, Jairus & Kubiszewski, Ida & Narulla, Harkiran & Sese, Saioa & Sutanto, Anna & Thompson, Jonathan, 2019. "Australia's Genuine Progress Indicator Revisited (1962–2013)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 1-10.
    19. Cátia da Silva & Ana Paula Barbosa‐Póvoa & Ana Carvalho, 2022. "Towards sustainable development: Green supply chain design and planning using monetization methods," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1369-1394, May.
    20. Tammi, Ilpo & Mustajärvi, Kaisa & Rasinmäki, Jussi, 2017. "Integrating spatial valuation of ecosystem services into regional planning and development," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 329-344.

    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:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:6:p:775-:d:823427. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.