Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Testing management scenarios for the North Sea ecosystem using qualitative and quantitative models 
Stockholm University, Faculty of Science, Stockholm University Baltic Sea Centre. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5956-0115
Show others and affiliations
Number of Authors: 52023 (English)In: ICES Journal of Marine Science, ISSN 1054-3139, E-ISSN 1095-9289, Vol. 80, no 1, p. 218-234Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The complexities of ecosystem-based management require stepwise approaches, ideally involving stakeholders, to scope key processes, pressures, and impact in relation to sustainability and management objectives. Use of qualitative methods like Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping (FCM) with a lower skill and data threshold than traditional quantitative models afford opportunity for even untrained stakeholders to evaluate the present and future status of the marine ecosystems under varying impacts. Here, we present the results applying FCM models for subregions of the North Sea. Models for the southern North Sea, Skagerrak, Kattegat, and the Norwegian Trench were developed with varying level of stakeholder involvement. Future scenarios of increased and decreased fishing, and increased seal biomass in the Kattegat, were compared with similar scenarios run on two quantitative ecosystem model. Correspondence in response by the models to the same scenarios was lowest in the southern North Sea, which had the simplest FCM model, and highest in Norwegian Trench. The results show the potential of combining FCM and quantitative modelling approaches in integrated ecosystem assessments (IEAs) and in future ecosystem-based management advice, but to facilitate such comparisons and allow them to complement and enhance our IEAs, it is important that their components are aligned and comparable.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2023. Vol. 80, no 1, p. 218-234
Keywords [en]
ecosystem model, Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping, North Sea, qualitative modelling, stakeholders
National Category
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Biological Sciences Earth and Related Environmental Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-214524DOI: 10.1093/icesjms/fsac231ISI: 000905780300001Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85177976740OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-214524DiVA, id: diva2:1735918
Available from: 2023-02-10 Created: 2023-02-10 Last updated: 2025-01-31Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Tomczak, Maciej T.

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Tomczak, Maciej T.
By organisation
Stockholm University Baltic Sea Centre
In the same journal
ICES Journal of Marine Science
Agriculture, Forestry and FisheriesBiological SciencesEarth and Related Environmental Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 42 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf