Geology topics

Sondoss Elsawah

Publications and source records attributed to Sondoss Elsawah.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2021

Socio-technical scales in socio-environmental modeling: Managing a system-of-systems modeling approach

System-of-systems approaches for integrated assessments have become prevalent in recent years. Such approaches integrate a variety of models from different disciplines and modeling paradigms to represent a socio-environmental (or social-ecological) system aiming to holistically inform policy and decision-making processes. Central to the system-of-systems approaches is the representation of systems in a multi-tier framework with nested scales. Current modeling paradigms, however, have disciplinary-specific lineage, leading to inconsistencies in the conceptualization and integration of socio-environmental systems. In this paper, a multidisciplinary team of researchers, from engineering, natural and social sciences, have come together to detail socio-technical practices and challenges that arise in the consideration of scale throughout the socio-environmental modeling process. We identify key paths forward, focused on explicit consideration of scale and uncertainty, strengthening interdisciplinary communication, and improvement of the documentation process. We call for a grand vision (and commensurate funding) for holistic system-of-systems research that engages researchers, stakeholders, and policy makers in a multi-tiered process for the co-creation of knowledge and solutions to major socio-environmental problems.

Environmental Modelling and Software↗

USGS2019

Effective modeling for Integrated Water Resource Management: A guide to contextual practices by phases and steps and future opportunities

The effectiveness of Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) modeling hinges on the quality of practices employed through the process, starting from early problem definition all the way through to using the model in a way that serves its intended purpose. The adoption and implementation of effective modeling practices need to be guided by a practical understanding of the variety of decisions that modelers make, and the information considered in making these choices. There is still limited documented knowledge on the modeling workflow , and the role of contextual factors in determining this workflow and which practices to employ. This paper attempts to contribute to this knowledge gap by providing systematic guidance of the modeling practices through the phases (Planning, Development, Application, and Perpetuation) and steps that comprise the modeling process, positing questions that should be addressed. Practice-focused guidance helps explain the detailed process of conducting IWRM modeling, including the role of contextual factors in shaping practices. We draw on findings from literature and the authors’ collective experience to articulate what and how contextual factors play out in employing those practices. In order to accelerate our learning about how to improve IWRM modeling, the paper concludes with five key areas for future practice-related research: knowledge sharing, overcoming data limitations, informed stakeholder involvement, social equity and uncertainty management.

Environmental Modelling & Software↗

USGS2019

A framework for characterising and evaluating the effectiveness of environmental modelling

Environmental modelling is transitioning from the traditional paradigm that focuses on the model and its quantitative performance to a more holistic paradigm that recognises successful model-based outcomes are closely tied to undertaking modelling as a social process, not just as a technical procedure. This paper redefines evaluation as a multi-dimensional and multi-perspective concept, and proposes a more complete framework for identifying and measuring the effectiveness of modelling that serves the new paradigm. Under this framework, evaluation considers a broader set of success criteria, and emphasises the importance of contextual factors in determining the relevance and outcome of the criteria. These evaluation criteria are grouped into eight categories: project efficiency, model accessibility, credibility, saliency, legitimacy, satisfaction, application, and impact. Evaluation should be part of an iterative and adaptive process that attempts to improve model-based outcomes and foster pathways to better futures.

Environmental Modelling and Software↗

USGS2018

Tools and methods in participatory modeling: Selecting the right tool for the job

Various tools and methods are used in participatory modelling, at different stages of the process and for different purposes. The diversity of tools and methods can create challenges for stakeholders and modelers when selecting the ones most appropriate for their projects. We offer a systematic overview, assessment, and categorization of methods to assist modelers and stakeholders with their choices and decisions. Most available literature provides little justification or information on the reasons for the use of particular methods or tools in a given study. In most of the cases, it seems that the prior experience and skills of the modelers had a dominant effect on the selection of the methods used. While we have not found any real evidence of this approach being wrong, we do think that putting more thought into the method selection process and choosing the most appropriate method for the project can produce better results. Based on expert opinion and a survey of modelers engaged in participatory processes, we offer practical guidelines to improve decisions about method selection at different stages of the participatory modeling process.

Environmental Modeling and Software↗

USGS2012

Identifying the decision to be supported: a review of papers from environmental modelling and software

Two of the basic tenets of decision support system efforts are to help identify and structure the decisions to be supported, and to then provide analysis in how those decisions might be best made. One example from wetland management would be that wildlife biologists must decide when to draw down water levels to optimise aquatic invertebrates as food for breeding ducks. Once such a decision is identified, a system or tool to help them make that decision in the face of current and projected climate conditions could be developed. We examined a random sample of 100 papers published from 2001-2011 in Environmental Modelling and Software that used the phrase “decision support system” or “decision support tool”, and which are characteristic of different sectors. In our review, 41% of the systems and tools related to the water resources sector, 34% were related to agriculture, and 22% to the conservation of fish, wildlife, and protected area management. Only 60% of the papers were deemed to be reporting on DSS. This was based on the papers reviewed not having directly identified a specific decision to be supported. We also report on the techniques that were used to identify the decisions, such as formal survey, focus group, expert opinion, or sole judgment of the author(s). The primary underlying modelling system, e.g., expert system, agent based model, Bayesian belief network, geographical information system (GIS), and the like was categorised next. Finally, since decision support typically should target some aspect of unstructured decisions, we subjectively determined to what degree this was the case. In only 23% of the papers reviewed, did the system appear to tackle unstructured decisions. This knowledge should be useful in helping workers in the field develop more effective systems and tools, especially by being exposed to the approaches in different, but related, disciplines. We propose that a standard blueprint for reporting on DSS be developed for consideration by journal editors to aid them in filtering papers that use the term, “decision support”.

Leipzig↗