Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Policy Sciences”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 199 records · Page 11Linked to original sources
USGS1998

Chapter D. The Loma Prieta, California, Earthquake of October 17, 1989 - Recovery, Mitigation, and Reconstruction

The papers in this chapter reflect the broad spectrum of issues that arise following a major damaging urban earthquake-the regional economic consequences, rehousing problems, reconstruction strategies and policies, and opportunities for mitigation before the next major seismic event. While some of these papers deal with structural or physical science topics, their significant social and policy implications make them relevant for improving our understanding of the processes and dynamics that take place during the recovery period.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2006

U.S. Geological Survey Chesapeake Bay Studies: Scientific Solutions for a Healthy Bay and Watershed

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the science agency for the Department of Interior (DOI), has the critical role of providing objective science to document and understand ecosystem change in the Chesapeake Bay and its watershed. The human population in the Bay watershed , which grew from 8.1 million in 1950 to almost 16 million in 2000, has resulted in degraded water quality, loss of habitat, and declines in fish and bird populations. USGS scientists are leaders in understanding cause and effect of human activities and natural changes on water quality and the health of the ecosystem. The USGS interacts with resource managers and policy makers to use the science to adapt approaches for implementation, and assess effectiveness of, management actions for ecosystem conservation, restoration, and sustainability. Since the mid-1980s, the USGS has been an active partner in the Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) , a multi-agency partnership led by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, working to achieve the restoration goals set forth in the Chesapeake 2000 agreement . This agreement established over 100 restoration commitments to be addressed by 2010. In 2005, which was the mid-point of the agreement, there was growing concern at all levels of government and by the public that ecological conditions in the Bay and its watershed had not significantly improved. The slow rate of improvement, coupled with the projected impact of human-population increase in the Bay watershed (fig. 1) , implied that many desired ecological conditions will not be achieved by 2010. To address these challenges, the USGS wrote a new science plan for 2006-2011 , and is synthesizing key findings to highlight the accomplishments from science activities for 2000-2005.

Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virgin↗
USGS2008

Quality-Assurance Plan for Water-Quality Activities in the USGS Ohio Water Science Center

In accordance with guidelines set forth by the Office of Water Quality in the Water Resources Discipline of the U.S. Geological Survey, a quality-assurance plan has been written for use by the Ohio Water Science Center in conducting water-quality activities. This quality-assurance plan documents the standards, policies, and procedures used by the Ohio Water Science Center for activities related to the collection, processing, storage, analysis, and publication of water-quality data. The policies and procedures documented in this quality-assurance plan for water-quality activities are meant to complement the Ohio Water Science Center quality-assurance plans for water-quality monitors, the microbiology laboratory, and surface-water and ground-water activities.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2003

The National Map: from geography to mapping and back again

When the means of production for national base mapping were capital intensive, required large production facilities, and had ill-defined markets, Federal Government mapping agencies were the primary providers of the spatial data needed for economic development, environmental management, and national defense. With desktop geographic information systems now ubiquitous, source data available as a commodity from private industry, and the realization that many complex problems faced by society need far more and different kinds of spatial data for their solutions, national mapping organizations must realign their business strategies to meet growing demand and anticipate the needs of a rapidly changing geographic information environment. The National Map of the United States builds on a sound historic foundation of describing and monitoring the land surface and adds a focused effort to produce improved understanding, modeling, and prediction of land-surface change. These added dimensions bring to bear a broader spectrum of geographic science to address extant and emerging issues. Within the overarching construct of The National Map, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is making a transition from data collector to guarantor of national data completeness; from producing paper maps to supporting an online, seamless, integrated database; and from simply describing the Nation’s landscape to linking these descriptions with increased scientific understanding. Implementing the full spectrum of geographic science addresses a myriad of public policy issues, including land and natural resource management, recreation, urban growth, human health, and emergency planning, response, and recovery. Neither these issues nor the science and technologies needed to deal with them are static. A robust research agenda is needed to understand these changes and realize The National Map vision. Initial successes have been achieved. These accomplishments demonstrate the utility of The National Map to the Nation and give confidence in evolving its future applications.

Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing↗
USGS2007

Fly Ash: From Cradle to Grave

The Energy Resources Program of the U.S. Geological Survey promotes and supports coal research to improve the understanding of the coal endowment of the United States. This results in geologically based, non-biased energy information products for policy and decision makers, land and resource managers, other federal and state agencies, the domestic energy industry, foreign governments, nongovernmental groups, academia, and other scientists. A more integrated approach to our coal quality work involves what we call a 'cradle to grave' approach. These types of studies focus not on just one aspect of the coal but rather on how or where different quality parameters form and (or) occur and what happens to them through the mining, production, transport, utilization and waste disposal process. An extensive suite of coal quality analyses, mineralogical, petrology, and leaching investigations are determined on samples taken from the different phases of the coal utilization process. This report consists of a tutorial that was given on June 10, 2007 at the 32nd International Technical Conference on Coal Utilization & Fuel Systems, The Power of Coal, Clearwater Coal Conference in Clearwater, Florida, USA. This tutorial covers how these studies are conducted and the importance of providing improved, comprehensive, science-based data sets for policy and decision makers.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2011

Multimodel inference and adaptive management

Ecology is an inherently complex science coping with correlated variables, nonlinear interactions and multiple scales of pattern and process, making it difficult for experiments to result in clear, strong inference. Natural resource managers, policy makers, and stakeholders rely on science to provide timely and accurate management recommendations. However, the time necessary to untangle the complexities of interactions within ecosystems is often far greater than the time available to make management decisions. One method of coping with this problem is multimodel inference. Multimodel inference assesses uncertainty by calculating likelihoods among multiple competing hypotheses, but multimodel inference results are often equivocal. Despite this, there may be pressure for ecologists to provide management recommendations regardless of the strength of their study’s inference. We reviewed papers in the Journal of Wildlife Management (JWM) and the journal Conservation Biology (CB) to quantify the prevalence of multimodel inference approaches, the resulting inference (weak versus strong), and how authors dealt with the uncertainty. Thirty-eight percent and 14%, respectively, of articles in the JWM and CB used multimodel inference approaches. Strong inference was rarely observed, with only 7% of JWM and 20% of CB articles resulting in strong inference. We found the majority of weak inference papers in both journals (59%) gave specific management recommendations. Model selection uncertainty was ignored in most recommendations for management. We suggest that adaptive management is an ideal method to resolve uncertainty when research results in weak inference.

Journal of Environmental Management↗
USGS2016

Surface-water quality-assurance plan for the U.S. Geological Survey Washington Water Science Center

This Surface-Water Quality-Assurance Plan documents the standards, policies, and procedures used by the U.S. Geological Survey Washington Water Science Center (WAWSC) for activities related to the collection, processing, storage, analysis, and publication of surface-water data. This plan serves as a guide to all WAWSC personnel involved in surface-water data activities, and changes as the needs and requirements of the WAWSC change. Regular updates to this plan represent an integral part of the quality-assurance process. In the WAWSC, direct oversight and responsibility by the hydrographer(s) assigned to a surface-water station, combined with team approaches in all work efforts, assure highquality data, analyses, reviews, and reports for cooperating agencies and the public.

Washington↗
USGS2017

Building translational ecology communities of practice: insights from the field

Translational ecology (TE) prioritizes the understanding of social systems and decision contexts in order to address complex natural resource management issues. Although many practitioners in applied fields employ translational tactics, the body of literature addressing such approaches is limited. We present several case studies illustrating the principles of TE and the diversity of its applications. We anticipate that these examples will help others develop scientific products that decision makers can use “off the shelf” when solving critical ecological and social challenges. Our collective experience suggests that research of such immediate utility is rare. Long‐term commitment to working directly with partners to develop and reach shared goals is central to successful translation. The examples discussed here highlight the benefits of translational processes, including actionable scientific results, more informed policy making, increased investment in science‐driven solutions, and inspiration for partnerships. We aim to facilitate future TE‐based projects and build momentum for growing this community of practice.

Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment↗
USGS2022

Applied citizen science in freshwater research

Worldwide, scientists are increasingly collaborating with the general public. Citizen science methods are readily applicable to freshwater research, monitoring, and education. In addition to providing cost-effective data on spatial and temporal scales that are otherwise unattainable, citizen science provides unique opportunities for engagement with local communities and stakeholders in resource management and decision-making. However, these methods are not infallible. Citizen science projects require deliberate planning in order to collect high data quality and sustain meaningful community partnerships. Citizen science practitioners also have an ethical responsibility to ensure that projects are not putting the safety of participants at stake. We discuss here how citizen science is being applied in freshwater research, emerging challenges in project planning and implementation, as well as how citizen science is shaping public understanding, policy, and management of freshwaters.

WIREs Water↗
USGS2013

Integrated environmental modeling: a vision and roadmap for the future

Integrated environmental modeling (IEM) is inspired by modern environmental problems, decisions, and policies and enabled by transdisciplinary science and computer capabilities that allow the environment to be considered in a holistic way. The problems are characterized by the extent of the environmental system involved, dynamic and interdependent nature of stressors and their impacts, diversity of stakeholders, and integration of social, economic, and environmental considerations. IEM provides a science-based structure to develop and organize relevant knowledge and information and apply it to explain, explore, and predict the behavior of environmental systems in response to human and natural sources of stress. During the past several years a number of workshops were held that brought IEM practitioners together to share experiences and discuss future needs and directions. In this paper we organize and present the results of these discussions. IEM is presented as a landscape containing four interdependent elements: applications, science, technology, and community. The elements are described from the perspective of their role in the landscape, current practices, and challenges that must be addressed. Workshop participants envision a global scale IEM community that leverages modern technologies to streamline the movement of science-based knowledge from its sources in research, through its organization into databases and models, to its integration and application for problem solving purposes. Achieving this vision will require that the global community of IEM stakeholders transcend social, and organizational boundaries and pursue greater levels of collaboration. Among the highest priorities for community action are the development of standards for publishing IEM data and models in forms suitable for automated discovery, access, and integration; education of the next generation of environmental stakeholders, with a focus on transdisciplinary research, development, and decision making; and providing a web-based platform for community interactions (e.g., continuous virtual workshops).

Environmental Modelling and Software↗
USGS2014

Understanding the value of imperfect science from national estimates of bird mortality from window collisions

The publication of a U.S. estimate of bird–window collisions by Loss et al. is an example of the somewhat contentious approach of using extrapolations to obtain large-scale estimates from small-scale studies. We review the approach by Loss et al. and other authors who have published papers on human-induced avian mortality and describe the drawbacks and advantages to publishing what could be considered imperfect science. The main drawback is the inherent and somewhat unquantifiable bias of using small-scale studies to scale up to a national estimate. The direct benefits include development of new methodologies for creating the estimates, an explicit treatment of known biases with acknowledged uncertainty in the final estimate, and the novel results. Other overarching benefits are that these types of papers are catalysts for improving all aspects of the science of estimates and for policies that must respond to the new information.

Condor↗
USGS2004

Geographic Information Office

The Geographic Information Office (GIO) is the principal information office for U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), focused on: Information Policy and Services, Information Technology, Science Information, Information Security, and the Federal Geographic Data Committee/Geospatial One Stop.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2009

Unearthing Secrets of the Forest

Forests are a defining feature for large areas of the Pacific northwestern United States from northern California to Alaska. Coniferous temperate rainforests in the western Cascade and coastal mountain ranges are appreciated for their aesthetic value and abundant natural resources. Few people recognize the riches beneath the forest floor; yet, soil is a key ecosystem component that makes each type of forest unique. Soils harbor immense biological diversity and control the release of water and nutrients that support life above ground. Understanding how carbon and nutrients cycle in forests, known as forest biogeochemistry, is crucial for evaluating forest productivity, composition, diversity, and change. At the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, research in the Terrestrial Ecosystems Laboratory focuses on nutrient cycling in five themes: climate change, nutrition and sustainability, fire effects, restoration, and forest-stream linkages. This research is essential to understand the entire forest ecosystem and to use the best science available to make informed policy and management decisions.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2022

When do climate services achieve societal impact? Evaluations of actionable climate adaptation science

To cope with complex environmental impacts in a changing climate, researchers are increasingly being asked to produce science that can directly support policy and decision making. To achieve such societal impact, scientists are using climate services to engage directly with stakeholders to better understand their needs and inform knowledge production. However, the wide variety of climate-services outcomes—ranging from establishing collegial relationships with stakeholders to obtaining specific information for inclusion into a pre-existing decision process—do not directly connect to traditional methods of measuring scientific impact (e.g., publication citations, journal impact factor). In this paper, we describe how concepts from the discipline of evaluation can be used to examine the societal impacts of climate services. We also present a case study from climate impacts and adaptation research to test a scalable evaluation approach. Those who conduct research for the purposes of climate services and those who fund applied climate research would benefit from evaluation from the beginning of project development. Doing so will help ensure that the approach, data collection, and data analysis are appropriately conceived and executed.

Sustainability↗
USGS2011

USGS global change science strategy: A framework for understanding and responding to climate and land-use change

This U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Global Change Science Strategy expands on the Climate Variability and Change science component of the USGS 2007 Science Strategy, “Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges: USGS Science in the Coming Decade” (U.S. Geological Survey, 2007). Here we embrace the broad definition of global change provided in the U.S. Global Change Research Act of 1990 (Public Law 101–606,104 Stat. 3096–3104)—“Changes in the global environment (including alterations in climate, land productivity, oceans or other water resources, atmospheric chemistry, and ecological systems) that may alter the capacity of the Earth to sustain life”—with a focus on climate and land-use change. There are three major characteristics of this science strategy. First, it addresses the science required to broadly inform global change policy, while emphasizing the needs of natural-resource managers and reflecting the role of the USGS as the science provider for the Department of the Interior and other resource-management agencies. Second, the strategy identifies core competencies, noting 10 critical capabilities and strengths the USGS uses to overcome key problem areas. We highlight those areas in which the USGS is a science leader, recognizing the strong partnerships and effective collaboration that are essential to address complex global environmental challenges. Third, it uses a query-based approach listing key research questions that need to be addressed to create an agenda for hypothesis-driven global change science organized under six strategic goals. Overall, the strategy starts from where we are, provides a vision for where we want to go, and then describes high-priority strategic actions, including outcomes, products, and partnerships that can get us there. Global change science is a well-defined research field with strong linkages to the ecosystems, water, energy and minerals, natural hazards, and environmental health components of the USGS Science Strategy (2007). When science strategies that cover these other components are developed, coordinated implementation will be necessary to achieve Bureau-level synergies and optimize capabilities and expertise. In October 2010, USGS realigned its management and budget structure to implement its 2007 Science Strategy. The new organizational structure, in which “Global Change” is one of seven key mission areas, lends itself to the advancement of the established six strategic goals. USGS global change science is formally represented by the “Climate and Land-Use Change” Mission Area in the FY 2012 budget (USGS, 2011). This plan was developed by the USGS Global Change Science Strategy Planning Team (SSPT) appointed by the USGS Director on March 4, 2010 and charged with developing a Global Change Science Strategy for the coming decade (McNutt, 2010). USGS managers and science staff are the main audience for this science strategy. This document is also intended to serve as the foundation for consistent USGS collaboration and communication with partners and stakeholders.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2007

Northern Gulf of Mexico: USGS science contributions to a resilient coast, 2006-2011

The devastating hurricane season of 2005 challenged U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to develop a science base for resource managers and policy makers that could provide an understanding of the multiple stressors and influence affecting the northern Gulf of Mexico coast and to rack changes in linked coastal systems. The complexity of the Gulf Coast requires a science strategy for data collection and data reporting that is consistent across regional ecosystems and that can be applied to both short-term and long-term responses to stressors.

Gulf Of Mexico↗
USGS1999

Herpetology in the federal government: a personal view

In late 1976, I received a phone call from an ichthyological colleague who asked if I would be willing to take a temporary position in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS) Office of Endangered Species (OES) in Washington. They had a backlog of proposed and final rules that needed to be finished, and they thought that a 30-day stint by a temporary herpetologist would clear the slate. Thus began a 23-year odyssey through the sometimes bizarre, sometimes rewarding, sometimes discouraging, but always different federal government. Fortunately, I have been able to stay involved with herpetology, both as a science and in terms of conservation policy. In my career, I have worked both in an administrative and in a research capacity. Many individuals with an interest in herpetology enter the federal government as field biologists and drift into administration as they become older and removed from the dynamically changing nature of their science. I moved in the other direction.

Herpetologists' League Communications↗