Integrated wetland management: An analysis with group model building based on system dynamics model

Chen, Hsin; Chang, Yang‐Ming; Chen, Kung-Chen

doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.05.038

Cited by 39 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Chen et al (2014) develop a model that simulates the effect of air pollution on habitat, which in turn affects the migratory behaviour of birds. Beall and Zeoli (2008) model the dynamics of Greater sage grouse populations in Western North America.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Debunking the myth that a legal trade will solve the rhino horn crisis: A system dynamics model for market demand

Crookes

Blignaut

2015

Journal for Nature Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is considerable debate in the literature over whether or not to legalise the trade in rhino horns. Here a system dynamics model is developed that considers five components: rhino abundance, rhino demand, a price model, an income model and a supply model. The results indicate that income elasticities are much greater than previously observed, while demand is relatively insensitive to price. At the same time, legalising the trade without income modification policies did not prevent extinction. The theory of s-curve growth may provide some indications of future growth patterns of Asian economies. Results suggest that, even though the demand curve for rhino horn may be downward sloping as conventional theory predicts, non-conventional demand management strategies may be more effective than price orientated demand curve strategies such as trade legalisation in curbing supply.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Debunking the myth that a legal trade will solve the rhino horn crisis: A system dynamics model for market demand

Crookes

Blignaut

2015

Journal for Nature Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, it represents a good source of complex diagrams that can be used for the purpose of this study. Mostly, the final product of the group diagram development is a complex model with many variables and even more links included (see [56,57]). The main reason for this is grounded in methods applied for grouping together single diagrams [58].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Method for Simplification of Complex Group Causal Loop Diagrams Based on Endogenisation, Encapsulation and Order-Oriented Reduction

Bureš

2017

Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Growing complexity represents an issue that can be identified in various disciplines. In system dynamics, causal loop diagrams are used for capturing dynamic nature of modelled systems. Increasing complexity of developed diagrams is associated with the tendency to include more variables into a model and thus make it more realistic and improve its value. This is even multiplied during group modelling workshops where several perspectives are articulated, shared and complex diagrams developed. This process easily generates complex diagrams that are difficult or even impossible to be comprehended by individuals. As there is a lack of available methods that would help users to cope with growing complexity, this manuscript suggests an original method. The proposed method systematically helps to simplify the complex causal loop diagrams. It is based on three activities iteratively applied during particular steps: endogenisation, encapsulation and order-oriented reduction. Two case studies are used to explain method details, prove its applicability and highlight added value. Case studies include the simplification of both original group causal loop diagram, and group diagram adapted from a study already published in a prestigious journal. Although the presented method has its own limitations, meaningfulness of its application in practice is verified. The method can help to cope with the complexity in any domain, in which causal loop diagrams are used.

show abstract

“…3). The framework was developed through a review of applications of various group modelling applications (see Chen et al 2014;Naivinit et al 2010;Sano et al 2014;Setianto et al 2014) as well as key systems thinking literature (Maani and Cavana 2007;Senge 2006;Sterman 2000). The framework, as with the range of participatory modelling methodologies, is integrative of both qualitative and quantitative aspects.…”

Section: Limitations Of Systems Thinking Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Conceptual, qualitative model building in the form of constructing CLDs is commonly applied when determining an initial candidate set of indicators (e.g. Chen et al 2014;Vugteveen et al 2015). This method is often the initial step in integrated participatory systems thinking frameworks (Hovmand 2014;Senge 2006;Sherwood 2002).…”

Section: Causal Loop Diagrams and Soft-systems Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the potential of participatory systems thinking techniques in progressing SLCA

McCabe

Halog

2016

Int J Life Cycle Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose There are a range of systems thinking-based methods well established for participatory actions that allow for greater integration of various mental models and understanding of systems that should be considered in advancing engagement methods in SLCA. This paper highlights the potential application of participatory modelling approaches based in systems thinking theory as a potential entry point in stakeholder inclusion and understanding impact pathways and system behaviour in social life cycle assessment (SLCA). Methods We discuss the application of various systems thinking methodologies to SLCA, along with pertinent examples from literature, and develop a framework that integrates both methodologies.Results and discussion Here we propose three distinct benefits of group modelling approaches; (1) procedural benefits through the ability to be inclusive of mental models, various perspectives and enhance stakeholder conceptualisation of a system; and the ability to combine both (2) qualitative and (3) quantitative analysis techniques under a cohesive framework. We propose the specific merits of combining the use of agentbased (AB) and system dynamic (SD) modelling in SLCA due to the emphasis upon consumer decisions and behaviour and the inherently dynamic non-linear cause-effect chains that are common in social systems. Conclusions We conclude that many facets of participatory modelling techniques can align with SLCA across the methodology, particularly if enhanced consideration of stakeholders and their various values is desired. We recommend the further development and inclusion of participatory systems thinking-based frameworks to advance the SLCA methodology with specific reference to the ability to enhance interpretation through the analysis of feedbacks that may not be addressed in current approaches.

show abstract

Integrated wetland management: An analysis with group model building based on system dynamics model

Cited by 39 publications

References 33 publications

Debunking the myth that a legal trade will solve the rhino horn crisis: A system dynamics model for market demand

Debunking the myth that a legal trade will solve the rhino horn crisis: A system dynamics model for market demand

A Method for Simplification of Complex Group Causal Loop Diagrams Based on Endogenisation, Encapsulation and Order-Oriented Reduction

Exploring the potential of participatory systems thinking techniques in progressing SLCA

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About