A multi-model approach to stakeholder engagement in complex environmental problems

We describe the different types of models we used as part of an effort to inform policy-making aiming at the management of the Ningaloo coast in the Gascoyne region, Western Australia. This provides an overview of how these models interact, the different roles they cover, how they fit into a full decision making process and what we learnt about the stakeholders involved in our project via their use. When modelling is explicitly used to address socio-ecological issues, the key determinant of success is whether the models, their results and recommendations are taken up by stakeholders; such uptake in turn depends on addressing stakeholders’ concerns, on engaging them in the project, on ensuring they feel ownership of the decision process at large, and that they understand and trust the modelling effort. This observation has guided our approach and has resulted in treating ‘building a model’ as the catalyst, rather than the final aim, of the process. In other words, extensive interactions in order to introduce, showcase, discuss and tune the model used for final decision making have represented both a requirement and an opportunity to ensure (i) model relevance, (ii) its acceptance, (iii) that all information available in the stakeholder team was accounted for and (iv) that stakeholders holding different levels of understanding of modelling, what it does and what it can provide to decision-making could develop an informed opinion on its use. To fulfil these roles we developed five broad classes of models: conceptual models, toy-models, singlesystem models, shuttle-models and a full-system model. In conceptual models the main drivers of a system are highlighted for subsequent representation as components of the full-system model. This usually results in a diagram summarising our understanding of how the system works. In toy-models a problem is simplified in such a way that only a handful of components are included. The purpose of these models is mostly educational: we want to understand how each component affects the problem and in order to achieve this, we temporarily renounce a satisfactory understanding of the overall problem. In single-system models we include a fairly detailed representation of a single component of the system (in our case recreational fishing and tourism); these models can be used to introduce stakeholders to modelling, provide temporary results from the study of a single activity, which will feed into the development of the final full-system model, or address sector-specific issues. In shuttle-models, we include the minimum number of processes we believe are crucial for a basic understanding of the overall problem. We know these models are still too simple for full system description, but they provide a sufficient understanding to enable us to contemplate, build and use the more complex models needed for full problem description. The term ‘shuttle’ refers to taking us from a minimum to a full description of the problem, a journey which is necessary both to developers in model definition and parameterisation and to stakeholders in the interpretation of the final full-system model results. Finally, the full-system model includes all information collected through the project and addresses all scenarios of stakeholders concern, and whose definition has been greatly eased by use of the ‘simpler’ models. As an example, a conceptual model may identify fishing and tourism as the main drivers of a region; a toymodel may describe how catches affect fish stocks; a single-system model may include the effect of gear, regulations and other processes affecting recreational fishing; a shuttle-model may include a simplified representation of the interaction between fishing, tourism, and infrastructure development on the overall health of the local ecosystem; this will gradually ‘take’ us to comprehend the ‘full’ model which may include tourism pressure, fish market values, climate effect, larger food-webs, etc

Effectiveness of harvest strategies in achieving multiple management objectives in a multispecies fishery

Fisheries management is characterised by multiple objectives, some of which may be complementary, while others may require trade‐offs between outcomes. Balancing these objectives is made more complex in the case of multispecies and multigear fisheries. In this paper, we develop a bioeconomic model that captures the key elements of such a fishery to test a range of potential harvest strategies to provide insights into how economic target reference points could lead to both desirable and undesirable management outcomes (e.g. discards). The model is developed as a long‐run optimisation model to identify target reference points to achieve multispecies maximum economic yield, and a dynamic recursive optimisation model, which includes more realistic representation of fishers’ behaviour, such as discards and trading of under‐caught species quotas. The potential economic, social and ecological impacts are evaluated using data envelopment analysis (DEA). The results suggest that the use of proxy target reference points can result in short‐term economic benefits at the cost of slower stock recovery and higher discarding. Limiting the number of species subject to quota controls may also prove beneficial in multispecies fisheries, while ensuring quota markets are efficient is likely to produce benefits irrespective of the harvest strategy adopted

A Multi-Model Approach to Engaging Stakeholder and Modellers in Complex Environmental Problems

Models are increasingly used to support decision-making in the management of natural resources. They can provide system understanding, learning, a platform for stakeholder engagement, projections of system behaviour and an environment for virtual testing of alternative management strategies. However, rarely is a single numerical model suitable for all these purposes. Our experience is that a suite of models of different size, complexity and scope can be more effective and can better address the needs of environmental management projects. Models of different complexity can address different needs, but can also be combined as a flexibly sculpted tool kit – as they require very different development effort they can be deployed at different stages during a project. Using rapidly deployed qualitative, or simple quantitative, models stakeholders can be exposed to models very early in the project, eliciting feedback on appropriate model content and familiarity with the modelling process without affecting the development of more complex, resource intensive, models aimed at answering core management questions. This early and continuous stakeholder exposure to models provides flexibility in addressing specific novel questions as they arise during project development, as well as an opportunity for developing skills and changing both modellers and stakeholders’ attitudes, as is often needed when facing complex problems. Using an example where we used five different model types in an effort to inform policy-making around regional multiple use management in north-western Australia, we describe (i) how each model type can be used, (ii) the different roles the models cover, and (iii) how they fit into a full decision making process and stakeholder engagement. We conclude by summarising the lessons we learnt

Artemisia vulgaris pollen allergoids digestibility in the simulated conditions of the gastrointestinal tract

Chemically modified allergens (allergoids) have found use in both traditional and novel forms of immunotherapy of allergic disorders. Novel forms of immunotherapy include local allergen delivery, via the gastrointestinal tract. This study conveys the gastrointestinal stability of three types ofmugwort pollen allergoids under simulated conditions of the gut. Allergoids of the pollen extract of Artemisia vulgaris were obtained by means of potassium cyanate, succinic and maleic anhydride. Gastrointestinal tract conditions (saliva, and gastric fluid) were simulated in accordance with the EU Pharmacopoeia. The biochemical and immunochemical properties of the derivatives following exposure to different conditions were monitored by determining the number of residual amino groups with 2,4,6-trinitrobenzenesulfonic acid, SDS PAGE, immunoblotting and inhibition of mugwort-specific IgE. Exposure to saliva fluid for 2 min did not influence the biochemical and immunochemical properties of the derivatives. In the very acidic conditions of the simulated gastric fluid, the degree of demaleylation and desuccinylation, even after 4 h exposure, was low, ranging from 10 to 30 %. The digestion patterns with pepsin proceeded rapidly in both the unmodified and modified samples. In all four cases, a highly resistant IgE-binding protein theMwof which was about 28 – 35 kD, was present. Within the physiological conditions, no new IgE binding epitopes were revealed, as demonstrated by immunoblot and CAP inhibition of the mugwort specific IgE binding. An important conclusion of this study is the stability of the modified derivatives in the gastrointestinal tract of patients, within physiological conditions. The means that they are suitable for use inmuch higher concentrations in local forms of immunotherapy than unmodified ones