Geology topics

Ferdinando Villa

Publications and source records attributed to Ferdinando Villa.

16 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2025

Interoperability for ecosystem service assessments: Why, how, who, and for whom?

Despite continued, rapid growth in the literature, the fragmentation of information is a major barrier to more timely and credible ecosystem services (ES) assessments. A major reason for this fragmentation is the currently limited state of interoperability of ES data, models, and software. The FAIR Principles, a recent reformulation of long-standing open science goals, highlight the importance of making scientific knowledge Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable . Critically, FAIR aims to make science more transparent and transferable by both people and computers . However, it is easier to make data and models findable and accessible through data and code repositories than to achieve interoperability and reusability. Achieving interoperability will require more consistent adherence to current technical best practices and, more critically, to build consensus about and consistently use semantics that can represent ES-relevant phenomena. Building on recent examples from major international initiatives for ES (IPBES, SEEA, GEO BON), we illustrate strategies to address interoperability, discuss their importance, and describe potential gains for individual researchers and practitioners and the field of ES. Although interoperability comes with many challenges, including greater scientific coordination than today’s status quo, it is technically achievable and offers potentially transformative advantages to ES assessments needed to mainstream their use by decision makers. Individuals and organizations active in ES research and practice can play critical roles in creating widespread interoperability and reusability of ES science. A representative community of practice targeting interoperability for ES would help advance these goals.

Ecosystem Services↗

USGS2023

An interoperability strategy for the next generation of SEEA accounting

The System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA) is a set of international environmental-economic standards, adopted by the UN Statistical Commission in 2012 (SEEA Central Framework) and 2021 (SEEA Ecosystem Accounting); the latter in particular requires the integration of large and diverse data streams. These include geospatial and other data sources, which have proven challenging for some National Statistical Offices (NSOs) to implement. Although a variety of ecosystem service modelling platforms have been built over the last 15 years to meet various user demands, they often duplicate efforts, rely on data that are siloed, and rarely effectively reuse the knowledge gained from past modelling efforts. By making the data and models that underlie SEEA interoperable, NSOs and the scientific community can advance the accessibility, speed, quality, and transparency of SEEA accounts by making it possible to rapidly integrate and share new scientific data and models. Doing so requires an understanding of the benefits of interoperability, the costs of the status quo, and concrete pathways toward community-endorsed approaches for interoperability. The ARIES Network, which powers the ARIES for SEEA Explorer web application, offers such a path toward interoperability, providing substantial benefits to NSOs and scientific and policy communities.

Report↗

USGS2022

The global environmental agenda urgently needs a semantic web of knowledge

Progress in key social-ecological challenges of the global environmental agenda (e.g., climate change, biodiversity conservation, Sustainable Development Goals) is hampered by a lack of integration and synthesis of existing scientific evidence. Facing a fast-increasing volume of data, information remains compartmentalized to pre-defined scales and fields, rarely building its way up to collective knowledge. Today's distributed corpus of human intelligence, including the scientific publication system, cannot be exploited with the efficiency needed to meet current evidence synthesis challenges; computer-based intelligence could assist this task. Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based approaches underlain by semantics and machine reasoning offer a constructive way forward, but depend on greater understanding of these technologies by the science and policy communities and coordination of their use. By labelling web-based scientific information to become readable by both humans and computers, machines can search, organize, reuse, combine and synthesize information quickly and in novel ways. Modern open science infrastructure—i.e., public data and model repositories—is a useful starting point, but without shared semantics and common standards for machine actionable data and models, our collective ability to build, grow, and share a collective knowledge base will remain limited. The application of semantic and machine reasoning technologies by a broad community of scientists and decision makers will favour open synthesis to contribute and reuse knowledge and apply it toward decision making.

Environmental Evidence↗

USGS2020

Linking land and sea through an ecological-economic model of coral reef recreation

Coastal zones are popular recreational areas that substantially contribute to social welfare. Managers can use information about specific environmental features that people value, and how these might change under different management scenarios, to spatially target actions to areas of high current or potential value. We explored how snorkelers’ experience would be affected by separate and combined land and marine management actions in West Maui, Hawaiʻi, using a Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) and a spatially explicit ecosystem services model. The BBN simulates the attractiveness of a site for recreation by combining snorkeler preferences for coastal features with expert opinions on ecological dynamics, snorkeler behavior, and management actions. A choice experiment with snorkelers elucidated their preferences for sites with better ecological and water-quality conditions. Linking the economic elicitation to the spatially explicit BBN to evaluate land-sea management scenarios provides specific guidance on where and how to act in West Maui to maximize ecosystem service returns. Improving coastal water quality through sediment runoff and cesspool effluent reductions (land management), and enhancing coral reef ecosystem conditions (marine management) positively affected overall snorkeling attractiveness across the study area, but with differential results at specific sites. The highest improvements were attained through joint land-sea management, driven by strong efforts to increase fish abundance and reduced sediment; however, the effects of management at individual beaches varied.

Hawaii↗

USGS2020

Testing ecosystem accounting in the United States: A case study for the Southeast

Ecosystem accounts, as formalized by the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting Experimental Ecosystem Accounts (SEEA EEA), have been compiled in a number of countries, yet there have been few attempts to develop them for the U.S. We explore the potential for U.S. ecosystem accounting by compiling ecosystem extent, condition, and ecosystem services supply and use accounts for a ten-state region in the Southeast. The pilot accounts address air quality, water quality, biodiversity, carbon storage, recreation, and pollination for selected years from 2001 to 2015. Results illustrate how information from ecosystem accounts can contribute to policy and decision-making. Using an example from Atlanta, we also show how ecosystem accounts can be considered alongside other SEEA accounts to give a more complete picture of a local area’s environmental-economic trends. The process by which we determined where to place metrics within the accounting framework, which was strongly informed by the National Ecosystem Services Classification System (NESCS), can provide guidance for future ecosystem accounts in the U.S. and other countries. Finally, we identify knowledge gaps that limit the inclusion of certain ecosystem services in the accounts and suggest future research that can close these gaps and improve future U.S. ecosystem accounts.

Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee, Mississi↗

USGS2019

Towards globally customizable ecosystem service models

Scientists, stakeholders and decision makers face trade-offs between adopting simple or complex approaches when modeling ecosystem services (ES). Complex approaches may be time- and data-intensive, making them more challenging to implement and difficult to scale, but can produce more accurate and locally specific results. In contrast, simple approaches allow for faster assessments but may sacrifice accuracy and credibility. The ARtificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services (ARIES) modeling platform has endeavored to provide a spectrum of simple to complex ES models that are readily accessible to a broad range of users. In this paper, we describe a series of five “Tier 1” ES models that users can run anywhere in the world with no user input, while offering the option to easily customize models with context-specific data and parameters. This approach enables rapid ES quantification, as models are automatically adapted to the application context. We provide examples of customized ES assessments at three locations on different continents and demonstrate the use of ARIES' spatial multi-criteria analysis module, which enables spatial prioritization of ES for different beneficiary groups. The models described here use publicly available global- and continental-scale data as defaults. Advanced users can modify data input requirements, model parameters or entire model structures to capitalize on high-resolution data and context-specific model formulations. Data and methods contributed by the research community become part of a growing knowledge base, enabling faster and better ES assessment for users worldwide. By engaging with the ES modeling community to further develop and customize these models based on user needs, spatiotemporal contexts, and scale(s) of analysis, we aim to cover the full arc from simple to complex assessments, minimizing the additional cost to the user when increased complexity and accuracy are needed.

Science of the Total Environment↗

USGS2019

Identification of conservation and restoration priority areas in the Danube River based on the multi-functionality of river-floodplain systems

Large river-floodplain systems are hotspots of biodiversity and ecosystem services but are also used for multiple human activities, making them one of the most threatened ecosystems worldwide. There is wide evidence that reconnecting river channels with their floodplains is an effective measure to increase their multi-functionality, i.e., ecological integrity, habitats for multiple species and the multiple functions and services of river-floodplain systems, although, the selection of promising sites for restoration projects can be a demanding task. In the case of the Danube River in Europe, planning and implementation of restoration projects is substantially hampered by the complexity and heterogeneity of the environmental problems, lack of data and strong differences in socio-economic conditions as well as inconsistencies in legislation related to river management. We take a quantitative approach based on best-available data to assess biodiversity using selected species and three ecosystem services (flood regulation, crop pollination , and recreation), focused on the navigable main stem of the Danube River and its floodplains. We spatially prioritize river-floodplain segments for conservation and restoration based on (1) multi-functionality related to biodiversity and ecosystem services, (2) availability of remaining semi-natural areas and (3) reversibility as it relates to multiple human activities (e.g. flood protection, hydropowerand navigation). Our approach can thus serve as a strategic planning tool for the Danube and provide a method for similar analyses in other large river-floodplain systems.

Danube River↗

USGS2019

Social equity shapes zone-selection: Balancing aquatic biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services delivery in the transboundary Danube River Basin

Freshwater biodiversity is declining, despite national and international efforts to manage and protect freshwater ecosystems. Ecosystem-based management (EBM) has been proposed as an approach that could more efficiently and adaptively balance ecological and societal needs. However, this raises the question of how social and ecological objectives can be included in an integrated management plan. Here, we present a generic model-coupling framework tailored to address this question for freshwater ecosystems, using three components: biodiversity, ecosystem services (ESS), and a spatial prioritisation that aims to balance the spatial representation of biodiversity and ESS supply and demand. We illustrate this model-coupling approach within the Danube River Basin using the spatially explicit, potential distribution of (i) 85 fish species as a surrogate for biodiversity as modelled using hierarchical Bayesian models, and (ii) four estimated ESS layers produced by the Artificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services (ARIES) platform (with ESS supply defined as carbon storage and flood regulation, and demand specified as recreation and water use). These are then used for (iii) a joint spatial prioritisation of biodiversity and ESS employing Marxan with Zones, laying out the spatial representation of multiple management zones. Given the transboundary setting of the Danube River Basin, we also run comparative analyses including the country-level purchasing power parity (PPP)-adjusted gross domestic product (GDP) and each country's percent cover of the total basin area as potential cost factors, illustrating a scheme for balancing the share of establishing specific zones among countries. We demonstrate how emphasizing various biodiversity or ESS targets in an EBM model-coupling framework can be used to cost-effectively test various spatially explicit management options across a multi-national case study. We further discuss possible limitations, future developments, and requirements for effectively managing a balance between biodiversity and ESS supply and demand in freshwater ecosystems.

Science of the Total Environment↗

USGS2018

The natural capital accounting opportunity: Let's really do the numbers

The nation’s economic accounts provide objective, regular, and standardized information routinely relied upon by public and private decision makers. But they are incomplete. The U.S. and many other nations currently do not account for the natural capital — such as the wildlife, forests, grasslands, soils, and water bodies—upon which all other economic activity rests. By creating formal natural capital accounts (NCA) and ecosystem goods and services (EGS) accounts, governments and businesses can better understand the past, peer into the future, innovate, conserve, and plan for environmental shocks. They would standardize, regularly repeat, and aggregate diverse natural resource, environmental, and social and economic data and could thereby play a significant role in advancing the science of coupled biophysical and social systems.

BioScience↗

USGS2018

Machine learning for ecosystem services

Recent developments in machine learning have expanded data-driven modelling (DDM) capabilities, allowing artificial intelligence to infer the behaviour of a system by computing and exploiting correlations between observed variables within it. Machine learning algorithms may enable the use of increasingly available ‘big data’ and assist applying ecosystem service models across scales, analysing and predicting the flows of these services to disaggregated beneficiaries. We use the Weka and ARIES software to produce two examples of DDM: firewood use in South Africa and biodiversity value in Sicily, respectively. Our South African example demonstrates that DDM (64–91% accuracy) can identify the areas where firewood use is within the top quartile with comparable accuracy as conventional modelling techniques (54–77% accuracy). The Sicilian example highlights how DDM can be made more accessible to decision makers, who show both capacity and willingness to engage with uncertainty information. Uncertainty estimates, produced as part of the DDM process, allow decision makers to determine what level of uncertainty is acceptable to them and to use their own expertise for potentially contentious decisions. We conclude that DDM has a clear role to play when modelling ecosystem services, helping produce interdisciplinary models and holistic solutions to complex socio-ecological issues.

Ecosystem Services↗

USGS2016

Modeling the effects of urban expansion on natural capital stocks and ecosystem service flows: A case study in the Puget Sound, Washington, USA

Urban expansion and its associated landscape modifications are important drivers of changes in ecosystem service (ES). This study examined the effects of two alternative land use-change development scenarios in the Puget Sound region of Washington State on natural capital stocks and ES flows. Land-use change model outputs served as inputs to five ES models developed using the Artificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services (ARIES) platform. While natural capital stocks declined under managed (1.3–5.8%) and unmanaged (2.8–11.8%) development scenarios, ES flows increased by 18.5–56% and 23.2–55.7%, respectively. Human development of natural landscapes reduced their capacity for service provision, while simultaneously adding beneficiaries, particularly along the urban fringe. Using global and local Moran’s I, we identified three distinct patterns of change in ES due to projected landuse change. For services with location-dependent beneficiaries – open space proximity, viewsheds, and flood regulation – urbanization led to increased clustering and hot-spot intensities. ES flows were greatest in the managed land-use change scenario for open space proximity and flood regulation, and in the unmanaged land-use change scenario for viewsheds—a consequence of the differing ES flow mechanisms underpinning these services. We observed a third pattern – general declines in service provision – for carbon storage and sediment retention, where beneficiaries in our analysis were not location dependent. Contrary to past authors’ finding of ES declines under urbanization, a more nuanced analysis that maps and quantifies ES provision, beneficiaries, and flows better identifies gains and losses for specific ES beneficiaries as urban areas expand.

Washington↗

USGS2014

A methodology for adaptable and robust ecosystem services assessment

Ecosystem Services (ES) are an established conceptual framework for attributing value to the benefits that nature provides to humans. As the promise of robust ES-driven management is put to the test, shortcomings in our ability to accurately measure, map, and value ES have surfaced. On the research side, mainstream methods for ES assessment still fall short of addressing the complex, multi-scale biophysical and socioeconomic dynamics inherent in ES provision, flow, and use. On the practitioner side, application of methods remains onerous due to data and model parameterization requirements. Further, it is increasingly clear that the dominant “one model fits all” paradigm is often ill-suited to address the diversity of real-world management situations that exist across the broad spectrum of coupled human-natural systems. This article introduces an integrated ES modeling methodology, named ARIES (ARtificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services), which aims to introduce improvements on these fronts. To improve conceptual detail and representation of ES dynamics, it adopts a uniform conceptualization of ES that gives equal emphasis to their production, flow and use by society, while keeping model complexity low enough to enable rapid and inexpensive assessment in many contexts and for multiple services. To improve fit to diverse application contexts, the methodology is assisted by model integration technologies that allow assembly of customized models from a growing model base. By using computer learning and reasoning, model structure may be specialized for each application context without requiring costly expertise. In this article we discuss the founding principles of ARIES - both its innovative aspects for ES science and as an example of a new strategy to support more accurate decision making in diverse application contexts.

PLoS ONE↗

USGS2014

Quantifying and valuing ecosystem services: An application of ARIES to the San Pedro River basin, USA

A large body of research exists that identifies and values ecosystem services - the benefits that ecosystems provide to humans (MA, 2005) - and their underlying ecological processes. However, the development of software decision support tools that integrate ecology, economics and geography that can be independently used within the public, private, academic and NGO sectors is a more recent phenomenon (Ruhl et al., 2007; Daily et al., 2009). Spurred by growing demand for more sophisticated analysis of the social and economic consequences of land management decisions, the US Department of Interior - Bureau of Land Management (BLM) launched a pilot project with the US Geological Survey (USGS) to assess the usefulness and feasibility of ecosystem service assessment and valuation tools to provide inputs to decision-making. The project analysed ecosystem services in the US portion of the San Pedro River watershed, which includes the BLM-managed San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area (SPRNCA), to improve the understanding of complex social and ecological relationships that transcend administrative divisions. The BLM manages some 99 million hectares, primarily in the western United States, and 283 million hectares of sub-surface mineral estate. BLM's multiple-use mission requires that it appropriately balance non-extractive uses such as habitat conservation, recreation and archaeological heritage protection and the extractive use of resources such as timber, oil and gas, coal, uranium, and other minerals.

Arizona↗

USGS2014

From theoretical to actual ecosystem services: mapping beneficiaries and spatial flows in ecosystem service assessments

Ecosystem services mapping and modeling has focused more on supply than demand, until recently. Whereas the potential provision of economic benefits from ecosystems to people is often quantified through ecological production functions, the use of and demand for ecosystem services has received less attention, as have the spatial flows of services from ecosystems to people. However, new modeling approaches that map and quantify service-specific sources (ecosystem capacity to provide a service), sinks (biophysical or anthropogenic features that deplete or alter service flows), users (user locations and level of demand), and spatial flows can provide a more complete understanding of ecosystem services. Through a case study in Puget Sound, Washington State, USA, we quantify and differentiate between the theoretical or in situ provision of services, i.e., ecosystems’ capacity to supply services, and their actual provision when accounting for the location of beneficiaries and the spatial connections that mediate service flows between people and ecosystems. Our analysis includes five ecosystem services: carbon sequestration and storage, riverine flood regulation, sediment regulation for reservoirs, open space proximity, and scenic viewsheds. Each ecosystem service is characterized by different beneficiary groups and means of service flow. Using the ARtificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services (ARIES) methodology we map service supply, demand, and flow, extending on simpler approaches used by past studies to map service provision and use. With the exception of the carbon sequestration service, regions that actually provided services to people, i.e., connected to beneficiaries via flow paths, amounted to 16-66% of those theoretically capable of supplying services, i.e., all ecosystems across the landscape. These results offer a more complete understanding of the spatial dynamics of ecosystem services and their effects, and may provide a sounder basis for economic valuation and policy applications than studies that consider only theoretical service provision and/or use.

Washington↗

USGS2013

Spatial dynamics of ecosystem service flows: a comprehensive approach to quantifying actual services

Recent ecosystem services research has highlighted the importance of spatial connectivity between ecosystems and their beneficiaries. Despite this need, a systematic approach to ecosystem service flow quantification has not yet emerged. In this article, we present such an approach, which we formalize as a class of agent-based models termed “Service Path Attribution Networks” (SPANs). These models, developed as part of the Artificial Intelligence for Ecosystem Services (ARIES) project, expand on ecosystem services classification terminology introduced by other authors. Conceptual elements needed to support flow modeling include a service's rivalness, its flow routing type (e.g., through hydrologic or transportation networks, lines of sight, or other approaches), and whether the benefit is supplied by an ecosystem's provision of a beneficial flow to people or by absorption of a detrimental flow before it reaches them. We describe our implementation of the SPAN framework for five ecosystem services and discuss how to generalize the approach to additional services. SPAN model outputs include maps of ecosystem service provision, use, depletion, and flows under theoretical, possible, actual, inaccessible, and blocked conditions. We highlight how these different ecosystem service flow maps could be used to support various types of decision making for conservation and resource management planning.

Ecosystem Services↗

USGS2012

Modelling ecosystem service flows under uncertainty with stochiastic SPAN

Ecosystem service models are increasingly in demand for decision making. However, the data required to run these models are often patchy, missing, outdated, or untrustworthy. Further, communication of data and model uncertainty to decision makers is often either absent or unintuitive. In this work, we introduce a systematic approach to addressing both the data gap and the difﬁculty in communicating uncertainty through a stochastic adaptation of the Service Path Attribution Networks (SPAN) framework. The SPAN formalism assesses ecosystem services through a set of up to 16 maps, which characterize the services in a study area in terms of ﬂow pathways between ecosystems and human beneﬁciaries. Although the SPAN algorithms were originally deﬁned deterministically, we present them here in a stochastic framework which combines probabilistic input data with a stochastic transport model in order to generate probabilistic spatial outputs. This enables a novel feature among ecosystem service models: the ability to spatially visualize uncertainty in the model results. The stochastic SPAN model can analyze areas where data limitations are prohibitive for deterministic models. Greater uncertainty in the model inputs (including missing data) should lead to greater uncertainty expressed in the model’s output distributions. By using Bayesian belief networks to ﬁll data gaps and expert-provided trust assignments to augment untrustworthy or outdated information, we can account for uncertainty in input data, producing a model that is still able to run and provide information where strictly deterministic models could not. Taken together, these attributes enable more robust and intuitive modelling of ecosystem services under uncertainty.

Conference Paper↗