Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKnapp, Corrine N.
dc.contributor.authorFernandez-Gimenez, Maria E.
dc.contributor.authorBriske, David D.
dc.contributor.authorWu, X. Ben
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-05T07:04:04Z
dc.date.available2020-09-05T07:04:04Z
dc.date.issued2011-11-01
dc.identifier.citationKnapp, C. N., Fernandez-Gimenez, M. E., Briske, D. D., Bestelmeyer, B. T., & Wu, X. B. (2011). An assessment of state-and-transition models: perceptions following two decades of development and implementation. Rangeland Ecology & Management, 64(6), 598-606.
dc.identifier.issn0022-409X
dc.identifier.doi10.2111/REM-D-10-00188.1
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/642906
dc.description.abstractState-and-transition models (STMs) are being developed for many areas in the United States and represent an important tool for assessing and managing public and private rangelands. Substantial resources have been invested in model development, yet minimal efforts have been made to evaluate the utility of STMs for rangeland assessment and management. We interviewed 47 rangeland professionals, equally divided between managers and researchers, in four ecoregions to determine their perceptions of the purpose, development, and strengths and weaknesses of STMs to assess the status of the STM framework. Our analysis identified three primary perspectives regarding the purpose of STMs: a decision-making tool for land managers, a means to represent the complex dynamics of rangeland ecosystems, and an effective communication tool. These diverse views of STM purposes were associated with differing perspectives concerning model development that identified five major issues in need of further development and refinement: 1) the relative importance of management practices and ecological processes in driving transitions, 2) the criteria used to define thresholds, 3) the appropriate level of model complexity, 4) the respective roles of expert knowledge and ecological data in model development, and 5) processes for model review and revision. We recommend greater dialogue among researchers and managers to further clarify STM terminology and develop standard protocols for model development and validation. Mechanisms are critically needed to assure peer review and revision of existing models so that STMs are continually updated to reflect current understanding of rangeland dynamics.
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSociety for Range Management
dc.relation.urlhttps://rangelands.org/
dc.rightsCopyright © Society for Range Management.
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
dc.subjectadaptive management
dc.subjectecosystem management
dc.subjectexpert knowledge
dc.subjectlocal knowledge
dc.subjectmonitoring and assessment
dc.titleAn Assessment of State-and-Transition Models: Perceptions Following Two Decades of Development and Implementation
dc.typetext
dc.typeArticle
dc.identifier.journalRangeland Ecology & Management
dc.description.collectioninformationThe Rangeland Ecology & Management archives are made available by the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact lbry-journals@email.arizona.edu for further information.
dc.eprint.versionFinal published version
dc.description.admin-noteMigrated from OJS platform August 2020
dc.source.volume64
dc.source.issue6
dc.source.beginpage598-606
refterms.dateFOA2020-09-05T07:04:04Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
20299-35745-1-PB.pdf
Size:
105.7Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record