Development of a stakeholder-driven spatial modeling framework for strategic landscape planning using Bayesian networks across two urban-rural gradients in Maine, USA

Land use change results from frequent, independent actions by decision-makers working in isolation, often with a focus on a single land use. In order to develop integrated land use policies that encourage sustainable outcomes, scientists and practitioners must understand the specific drivers of land use change across mixed land use types and ownerships, and must consider the combined influences of biophysical, economic, and social factors that affect land use decisions. In this analysis of two large watersheds covering a total of 1.9 million hectares in Maine, USA, we co-developed with groups of stakeholders land use suitability models that integrated four land uses: economic development, ecosystem protection, forestry, and agriculture. We elicited stakeholder knowledge to: (1) identify generalized drivers of land use change; (2) construct Bayesian network models of suitability for each of the four land uses based on site-level factors that affect land use decisions; and (3) identify thresholds of suitability for each factor and give relative weights to each factor. We then applied 12 distinct Bayesian models using 99 spatially explicit, empirical socio-economic and biophysical datasets to predict spatially the suitability for each of our four land uses on a 30m×30m pixel basis across 1.9 million hectares. We evaluated both the stakeholder engagement process and the land use suitability maps. Results demonstrated the potential efficacy of these models for strategic land use planning, but also revealed that trade-offs occur when stakeholder knowledge is used to augment limited empirical data. First, stakeholder-derived Bayesian land use models can provide decision-makers with relevant insights about the factors affecting land use change. Unfortunately, these models are not easily validated for predictive purposes. Second, integrating stakeholders throughout different phases of the modeling process provides a flexible framework for developing localized or generalizable land use models depending on the scope of stakeholder knowledge and available empirical data. The potential downside is that this can lead to more complex models than anticipated. The trade-offs between model rigor and relevance suggest an adaptive management approach to modeling is needed to improve the integration of stakeholder knowledge into robust land use models.

[1]  Adrienne Grêt-Regamey,et al.  Participatory Land Use Modeling with Bayesian Networks: a Focus on Subjective Validation , 2012 .

[2]  Dan Clark,et al.  Modeling the integration of stakeholder knowledge in social–ecological decision-making: Benefits and limitations to knowledge diversity , 2012 .

[3]  Richard M Cowling,et al.  Knowing But Not Doing: Selecting Priority Conservation Areas and the Research–Implementation Gap , 2008, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[4]  Robert J. Lilieholm,et al.  Using Bayesian belief networks to identify potential compatibilities and conflicts between development and landscape conservation , 2011 .

[5]  K. Kok,et al.  Evaluating impact of spatial scales on land use pattern analysis in Central America , 2001 .

[6]  Anthony O'Hagan,et al.  Probabilistic uncertainty specification: Overview, elaboration techniques and their application to a mechanistic model of carbon flux , 2012, Environ. Model. Softw..

[7]  Finn Verner Jensen,et al.  Public participation modelling using Bayesian networks in management of groundwater contamination , 2007, Environ. Model. Softw..

[8]  A. Scott Focussing in on focus groups: Effective participative tools or cheap fixes for land use policy? , 2011 .

[9]  Eric M. White,et al.  A sensitivity analysis of "Forests on the edge: housing development on America's private forests". , 2005 .

[10]  Bronwyn Price,et al.  Using a Bayesian belief network to predict suitable habitat of an endangered mammal – The Julia Creek dunnart (Sminthopsis douglasi) , 2007 .

[11]  B. Marcot,et al.  Guidelines for developing and updating Bayesian belief networks applied to ecological modeling and conservation , 2006 .

[12]  Laura Uusitalo,et al.  Advantages and challenges of Bayesian networks in environmental modelling , 2007 .

[13]  Denis White,et al.  ALTERNATIVE FUTURES FOR THE WILLAMETTE RIVER BASIN, OREGON , 2004 .

[14]  S. Sarkar,et al.  Systematic conservation planning , 2000, Nature.

[15]  M. Janssen,et al.  Multi-Agent Systems for the Simulation of Land-Use and Land-Cover Change: A Review , 2003 .

[16]  Richard Aspinall,et al.  Modelling land use change with generalized linear models--a multi-model analysis of change between 1860 and 2000 in Gallatin Valley, Montana. , 2004, Journal of environmental management.

[17]  Paul Beier,et al.  Toward Best Practices for Developing Regional Connectivity Maps , 2011, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[18]  Marco te Brömmelstroet The Relevance of Research in Planning Support Systems: A Response to Janssen Et Al: , 2009 .

[19]  R. Haight,et al.  Prioritizing conservation targets in a rapidly urbanizing landscape , 2009 .

[20]  Rafael Rumí,et al.  Bayesian networks in environmental modelling , 2011, Environ. Model. Softw..

[21]  David J. Spiegelhalter,et al.  Bayesian analysis in expert systems , 1993 .

[22]  Eugene Charniak,et al.  Bayesian Networks without Tears , 1991, AI Mag..

[23]  Laurence Smith,et al.  The role of expert opinion in environmental modelling , 2012, Environ. Model. Softw..

[24]  R. McDonald The promise and pitfalls of systematic conservation planning , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[25]  David A. Newburn,et al.  Economics and Land‐Use Change in Prioritizing Private Land Conservation , 2005 .

[26]  Robert J. Lilieholm,et al.  Changing Socio-economic Conditions for Private Woodland Protection , 2010 .

[27]  David W. Cash,et al.  Knowledge systems for sustainable development , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[28]  David Hulse,et al.  ENVISIONING ALTERNATIVES: USING CITIZEN GUIDANCE TO MAP FUTURE LAND AND WATER USE , 2004 .

[29]  Christopher A. Barnes,et al.  Completion of the 2006 National Land Cover Database for the conterminous United States. , 2011 .

[30]  Janet Silbernagel,et al.  Eliciting expert knowledge to inform landscape modeling of conservation scenarios. , 2012 .

[31]  E. Lambin,et al.  The emergence of land change science for global environmental change and sustainability , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[32]  K. Mengersen,et al.  Eliciting Expert Knowledge in Conservation Science , 2012, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[33]  Suzana Dragicevic,et al.  Enhancing a GIS Cellular Automata Model of Land Use Change: Bayesian Networks, Influence Diagrams and Causality , 2007, Trans. GIS.

[34]  PETER H. VERBURG,et al.  Modeling the Spatial Dynamics of Regional Land Use: The CLUE-S Model , 2002, Environmental management.

[35]  Martine Maron,et al.  Bayesian networks and adaptive management of wildlife habitat. , 2010, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[36]  Frederick Steiner,et al.  The living landscape : an ecological approach to landscape planning , 2000 .

[37]  Bruce G. Marcot,et al.  Metrics for evaluating performance and uncertainty of Bayesian network models , 2012 .

[38]  Steve Harrison,et al.  Validation of multicriteria analysis models , 1999 .

[39]  Robert G. Sargent,et al.  Simulation model verification and validation , 1991, 1991 Winter Simulation Conference Proceedings..

[40]  A. Marshall,et al.  Mapping socio-economic scenarios of land cover change: a GIS method to enable ecosystem service modelling. , 2011, Journal of environmental management.

[41]  Divya A. Varkey,et al.  Bayesian Decision‐Network Modeling of Multiple Stakeholders for Reef Ecosystem Restoration in the Coral Triangle , 2013, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[42]  Roy Haines-Young,et al.  Belief Networks Exploring ecosystem service issues across diverse knowledge domains using Bayesian , 2011 .

[43]  Sandra Johnson,et al.  Bayesian networks in environmental and resource management , 2012, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[44]  A. Downs Smart Growth: Why We Discuss It More than We Do It , 2005 .

[45]  Jacek Malczewski,et al.  GIS-based land-use suitability analysis: a critical overview , 2004 .

[46]  François Bousquet,et al.  Modelling with stakeholders , 2010, Environ. Model. Softw..