EcoService Models Library (ESML)
Home
Search EMs
My
EMs 
Learn about
ESML
View ESML Data Maploading
Compare EMs
Which comparison is best for me?EM Variables by Variable Role
One quick way to compare ecological models (EMs) is by comparing their variables. Predictor variables show what kinds of influences a model is able to account for, and what kinds of data it requires. Response variables show what information a model is capable of estimating.
This first comparison shows the names (and units) of each EM’s variables, side-by-side, sorted by variable role. Variable roles in ESML are as follows:
- Predictor Variables
- Time- or Space-Varying Variables
- Constants and Parameters
- Intermediate (Computed) Variables
- Response Variables
- Computed Response Variables
- Measured Response Variables
EM Variables by Category
A second way to use variables to compare EMs is by focusing on the kind of information each variable represents. The top-level categories in the ESML Variable Classification Hierarchy are as follows:
- Policy Regarding Use or Management of Ecosystem Resources
- Land Surface (or Water Body Bed) Cover, Use or Substrate
- Human Demographic Data
- Human-Produced Stressor or Enhancer of Ecosystem Goods and Services Production
- Ecosystem Attributes and Potential Supply of Ecosystem Goods and Services
- Non-monetary Indicators of Human Demand, Use or Benefit of Ecosystem Goods and Services
- Monetary Values
Besides understanding model similarities, sorting the variables for each EM by these 7 categories makes it easier to see if the compared models can be linked using similar variables. For example, if one model estimates an ecosystem attribute (in Category 5), such as water clarity, as a response variable, and a second model uses a similar attribute (also in Category 5) as a predictor of recreational use, the two models can potentially be used in tandem. This comparison makes it easier to spot potential model linkages.
All EM Descriptors
This selection allows a more detailed comparison of EMs by model characteristics other than their variables. The 50-or-so EM descriptors for each model are presented, side-by-side, in the following categories:
- EM Identity and Description
- EM Modeling Approach
- EM Locations, Environments, Ecology
- EM Ecosystem Goods and Services (EGS) potentially modeled, by classification system
EM Descriptors by Modeling Concepts
This feature guides the user through the use of the following seven concepts for comparing and selecting EMs:
- Conceptual Model
- Modeling Objective
- Modeling Context
- Potential for Model Linkage
- Feasibility of Model Use
- Model Certainty
- Model Structural Information
Though presented separately, these concepts are interdependent, and information presented under one concept may have relevance to other concepts as well.
Compare Criteria:
Show Criteria
Hide CriteriaEM Identity and Description
EM Identification
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-99 |
EM-333 
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
|
EM Short Name
em.detail.shortNameHelp
?
|
Landscape importance for crops, Europe | Evoland v3.5 (unbounded growth), Eugene, OR, USA | InVEST habitat quality, Puli Township, Taiwan | i-Tree species selector v. 4.0 |
|
EM Full Name
em.detail.fullNameHelp
?
|
Landscape importance for crop-based production, Europe | Evoland v3.5 (without urban growth boundaries), Eugene, OR, USA | InVEST (Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs) habitat quality, Puli Township, Taiwan | i-Tree species selector v. 4.0 |
|
EM Source or Collection
em.detail.emSourceOrCollectionHelp
?
|
EU Biodiversity Action 5 | Envision | InVEST | i-Tree |
|
EM Source Document ID
|
228 |
47 ?Comment:Doc 183 is a secondary source for the Evoland model. |
308 |
426 ?Comment:Doc# 427 is an additional source for this EM. |
|
Document Author
em.detail.documentAuthorHelp
?
|
Haines-Young, R., Potschin, M. and Kienast, F. | Guzy, M. R., Smith, C. L. , Bolte, J. P., Hulse, D. W. and Gregory, S. V. | Wu, C.-F., Lin, Y.-P., Chiang, L.-C. and Huang, T. | i-Tree |
|
Document Year
em.detail.documentYearHelp
?
|
2012 | 2008 | 2014 | None |
|
Document Title
em.detail.sourceIdHelp
?
|
Indicators of ecosystem service potential at European scales: Mapping marginal changes and trade-offs | Policy research using agent-based modeling to assess future impacts of urban expansion into farmlands and forests | Assessing highway's impacts on landscape patterns and ecosystem services: A case study in Puli Township, Taiwan | i-Tree Species Selector User's Manual v. 4.0 |
|
Document Status
em.detail.statusCategoryHelp
?
|
Peer reviewed and published | Peer reviewed and published | Peer reviewed and published | Peer reviewed and published |
|
Comments on Status
em.detail.commentsOnStatusHelp
?
|
Published journal manuscript | Published journal manuscript | Published journal manuscript | Webpage |
Software and Access
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-99 |
EM-333
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
| Not applicable | http://evoland.bioe.orst.edu/ | https://www.naturalcapitalproject.org/invest/ | https://species.itreetools.org/ | |
|
Contact Name
em.detail.contactNameHelp
?
|
Marion Potschin | Michael R. Guzy |
Yu-Pin Lin ?Comment:Tel.: +886 2 3366 3467; fax: +866 2 2368 6980 |
Not reported ?Comment:send comments through any of the means listed on the i-Tree support page: http://www.itreetools.org/support/. |
|
Contact Address
|
Centre for Environmental Management, School of Geography, University of Nottingham, NG7 2RD, United Kingdom | Oregon State University, Dept. of Biological and Ecological Engineering | Not reported | Not reported |
|
Contact Email
|
marion.potschin@nottingham.ac.uk | Not reported | yplin@ntu.edu.tw | info@itreetools.org |
EM Description
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-99 |
EM-333
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
|
Summary Description
em.detail.summaryDescriptionHelp
?
|
ABSTRACT: "The study focuses on the EU-25 plus Switzerland and Norway, and develops the methodology proposed by Kienast et al. (2009), which uses expert-and literature-driven modelling methods. The methods are explored in relation to mapping and assessing … “Crop-based production” . . . The potential to deliver services is assumed to be influenced by (a) land-use, (b) net primary production, and (c) bioclimatic and landscape properties such as mountainous terrain." AUTHOR'S DESCRIPTION: "The analysis for "Crop-based production" maps all the areas that are important for food crops produced through commercial agriculture." | **Note: A more recent version of this model exists. See Related EMs below for links to related models/applications.** ABSTRACT: "Spatially explicit agent-based models can represent the changes in resilience and ecological services that result from different land-use policies…This type of analysis generates ensembles of alternate plausible representations of future system conditions. User expertise steers interactive, stepwise system exploration toward inductive reasoning about potential changes to the system. In this study, we develop understanding of the potential alternative futures for a social-ecological system by way of successive simulations that test variations in the types and numbers of policies. The model addresses the agricultural-urban interface and the preservation of ecosystem services. The landscape analyzed is at the junction of the McKenzie and Willamette Rivers adjacent to the cities of Eugene and Springfield in Lane County, Oregon." AUTHOR'S DESCRIPTION: "Two general scenarios for urban expansion were created to set the bounds on what might be possible for the McKenzie-Willamette study area. One scenario, fish conservation, tried to accommodate urban expansion, but gave the most weight to policies that would produce resilience and ecosystem services to restore threatened fish populations. The other scenario, unconstrained development, reversed the weighting. The 35 policies in the fish conservation scenario are designed to maintain urban growth boundaries (UGB), accommodate human population growth through increased urban densities, promote land conservation through best-conservation practices on agricultural and forest lands, and make rural land-use conversions that benefit fish. In the unconstrained development scenario, 13 policies are mainly concerned with allowing urban expansion in locations desired by landowners. Urban expansion in this scenario was not constrained by the extent of the UGB, and the policies are not intended to create conservation land uses." | Please note: This ESML entry describes a specific, published application of an InVEST model. Different versions (e.g. different tiers) or more recent versions of this model may be available at the InVEST website. ABSTRACT: "...To assess the effects of different land-use scenarios under various agricultural and environmental conservation policy regimes, this study applies an integrated approach to analyze the effects of Highway 6 construction on Puli Township...A habitat quality assessment using the InVEST model indicates that the conservation of agricultural and forested lands improves habitat quality and preserves rare habitats…" AUTHOR'S DESCRIPTION: "In total, three land-use planning scenarios were simulated based on government policies in Taiwan’s Hillside Protection Act and Regulations on Non-Urban Land Utilization Control. The baseline planning scenario, Scenario A, allows land-use development with-out land-use controls (Appendix Fig. S2), meaning that land-use changes can occur anywhere. Scenario B is based on the Regulations on Non-Urban Land Utilization Control and the maintenance of agricultural areas, such that land-use changes cannot occur in agricultural areas. Scenario C protects agricultural land, hillsides, and naturally forested areas from development...The biodiversity evaluation module in the InVEST model assessed the degree of change in habitat quality and habitat rarity under three scenarios. In the InVEST model, habitat quality is primarily threatened by four factors: the relative impact of each threat; the relative sensitivity of each habitat type to each threat; the distance between habitats and sources of threats; as well as the relative degree to which land is legally protected..." Use of other models in conjunction with this model: Land use data for future scenarios modeled in InVEST were derived from a linear regression model of land use change, and the CLUE-S (Conversion of Land Use and its Effects at Small regional extent) model for apportioning those changes to the landscape. | ABSTRACT: "The Species Selector is a free-standing i-Tree utility that ranks tree species based on their environmental benefits at maturity. As such, it complements existing tree selection programs that rank species based on esthetics or other features. Species are selected based on three types of information. First, hardiness is considered. The hardiness zone is determined based on state and city, and all species that are not sufficiently hardy are eliminated from consideration. Second, mature height is considered. Users are asked to specify minimum and maximum heights, and species outside of that range are eliminated. Finally, eight environmental factors are considered in the rankings created by the Species Selector: • Air pollution removal • Air temperature reduction • Ultraviolet radiation reduction • Carbon storage • Pollen allergenicity • Building energy conservation • Wind reduction • Stream flow reduction (stormwater management). Users are asked to rank the importance of each of these factors on a scale of 0 to 10. The combination of hardiness, mature height, and desired functionality produces a ranked list of appropriate species from an initial database of about 1,600 species. The large species database covers a broad range of native, naturalized and exotic trees, some of which are commonly planted in urban areas. Since only city hardiness zone, tree height and user functional preferences are used to produce the list, there may well be many species on the list that are unsuitable to the local context for a variety of reasons. A species may have particular structural, drainage, sun, pest, or soil pH limitations that should exclude it from use. Furthermore, since many native and exotic species are included, items may appear that are simply not available in the local trade. For these reasons, the list should be considered a beginning rather than an end. The list will need to be whittled down to meet local needs and limitations. Relevant cultural needs should be taken into account as well. The result will be a list of recommended species suited for local use that maximizes environmental services." |
|
Specific Policy or Decision Context Cited
em.detail.policyDecisionContextHelp
?
|
None identified | Authors Description: " By policy, we mean land management options that span the domains of zoning, agricultural and forest production, environmental protection, and urban development, including the associated regulations, laws, and practices. The policies we used in our SES simulations include urban containment policies…We also used policies modeled on agricultural practices that affect ecoystem services and capital…" | Environmental effects of Highway 6 construction on Puli Township, Taiwan | None identified |
|
Biophysical Context
|
No additional description provided | No additional description provided | 26% of the land area is categorized as plain and the remaining 74% is categorized as hilly with elevations of 380-700 m. Predominant land classes are forested (47.4%), cultivated (31.8%), and built-up (14.5%). Average annual rainfall is 2120 mm, and average annual temperature is 21°C. The soil in the eastern portion of the basin is primarily clay, and primarily loess elsewhere. | No additional description provided |
|
EM Scenario Drivers
em.detail.scenarioDriverHelp
?
|
No scenarios presented | Three scenarios without urban growth boundaries, and with various combinations of unconstrainted development, fish conservation, and agriculture and forest reserves. | Three scenarios; baseline planning (A, without land-use controls), scenario B based on maintenance of agriculture, scenario C protects agriculture, hillsides and naturally forested areas. | No scenarios presented |
EM Relationship to Other EMs or Applications
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-99 |
EM-333
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
|
Method Only, Application of Method or Model Run
em.detail.methodOrAppHelp
?
|
Method + Application | Method + Application (multiple runs exist) View EM Runs | Method + Application (multiple runs exist) View EM Runs | Method Only |
|
New or Pre-existing EM?
em.detail.newOrExistHelp
?
|
New or revised model | New or revised model | Application of existing model | New or revised model |
Related EMs (for example, other versions or derivations of this EM) described in ESML
em.detail.relatedEmHelp
?
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-99 |
EM-333
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
|
Document ID for related EM
em.detail.relatedEmDocumentIdHelp
?
|
Doc-231 | Doc-228 |
Doc-183 | Doc-47 | Doc-313 | Doc-314 ?Comment:Doc 183 is a secondary source for the Evoland model. |
Doc-278 | Doc-427 |
|
EM ID for related EM
em.detail.relatedEmEmIdHelp
?
|
EM-119 | EM-120 | EM-121 | EM-162 | EM-164 | EM-165 | EM-122 | EM-123 | EM-124 | EM-125 | EM-166 | EM-170 | EM-171 | EM-12 | EM-369 | EM-143 | None |
EM Modeling Approach
EM Relationship to Time
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-99 |
EM-333
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
|
EM Temporal Extent
em.detail.tempExtentHelp
?
|
2000 | 1990-2050 | 2010-2025 | Not applicable |
|
EM Time Dependence
em.detail.timeDependencyHelp
?
|
time-stationary | time-dependent | time-stationary | Not applicable |
|
EM Time Reference (Future/Past)
em.detail.futurePastHelp
?
|
Not applicable | future time | Not applicable | Not applicable |
|
EM Time Continuity
em.detail.continueDiscreteHelp
?
|
Not applicable | discrete | Not applicable | Not applicable |
|
EM Temporal Grain Size Value
em.detail.tempGrainSizeHelp
?
|
Not applicable | 2 | Not applicable | Not applicable |
|
EM Temporal Grain Size Unit
em.detail.tempGrainSizeUnitHelp
?
|
Not applicable | Year | Not applicable | Not applicable |
EM Spatial Extent
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-99 |
EM-333
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
|
Bounding Type
em.detail.boundingTypeHelp
?
|
Geopolitical | Geopolitical | Geopolitical | Not applicable |
|
Spatial Extent Name
em.detail.extentNameHelp
?
|
The EU-25 plus Switzerland and Norway | Junction of McKenzie and Willamette Rivers, adjacent to the cities of Eugene and Springfield, Lane Co., Oregon, USA | Puli Township, Nantou County | Not applicable |
|
Spatial Extent Area (Magnitude)
em.detail.extentAreaHelp
?
|
>1,000,000 km^2 | 10-100 km^2 | 100-1000 km^2 | Not applicable |
Spatial Distribution of Computations
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-99 |
EM-333
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
|
EM Spatial Distribution
em.detail.distributeLumpHelp
?
|
spatially distributed (in at least some cases) | spatially distributed (in at least some cases) | spatially distributed (in at least some cases) | Not applicable |
|
Spatial Grain Type
em.detail.spGrainTypeHelp
?
|
area, for pixel or radial feature | area, for pixel or radial feature | area, for pixel or radial feature | Not applicable |
|
Spatial Grain Size
em.detail.spGrainSizeHelp
?
|
1 km x 1 km | varies | 40 m x 40 m | Not applicable |
EM Structure and Computation Approach
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-99 |
EM-333
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
|
EM Computational Approach
em.detail.emComputationalApproachHelp
?
|
Logic- or rule-based | Numeric | Analytic | Analytic |
|
EM Determinism
em.detail.deterStochHelp
?
|
deterministic | stochastic | deterministic | deterministic |
|
Statistical Estimation of EM
em.detail.statisticalEstimationHelp
?
|
|
|
|
|
Model Checking Procedures Used
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-99 |
EM-333
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
|
Model Calibration Reported?
em.detail.calibrationHelp
?
|
No | Unclear | Unclear | Not applicable |
|
Model Goodness of Fit Reported?
em.detail.goodnessFitHelp
?
|
No | No | Not applicable | Not applicable |
|
Goodness of Fit (metric| value | unit)
em.detail.goodnessFitValuesHelp
?
|
None | None | None | None |
|
Model Operational Validation Reported?
em.detail.validationHelp
?
|
Yes | No | Not applicable | Not applicable |
|
Model Uncertainty Analysis Reported?
em.detail.uncertaintyAnalysisHelp
?
|
No | No | No | Not applicable |
|
Model Sensitivity Analysis Reported?
em.detail.sensAnalysisHelp
?
|
No | No | No | Not applicable |
|
Model Sensitivity Analysis Include Interactions?
em.detail.interactionConsiderHelp
?
|
Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable |
EM Locations, Environments, Ecology
Location of EM Application
Terrestrial location (Classification hierarchy: Continent > Country > U.S. State [United States only])
em.detail.relationToSpaceTerrestrialHelp
?
| EM-99 |
EM-333
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
|
|
Comment:Taiwan |
|
Marine location (Classification hierarchy: Realm > Region > Province > Ecoregion)
em.detail.relationToSpaceMarineHelp
?
| EM-99 |
EM-333
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
| None | None | None | None |
Centroid Lat/Long (Decimal Degree)
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-99 |
EM-333
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
|
Centroid Latitude
em.detail.ddLatHelp
?
|
50.53 | 44.11 | 23.98 | Not applicable |
|
Centroid Longitude
em.detail.ddLongHelp
?
|
7.6 | -123.09 | 120.96 | Not applicable |
|
Centroid Datum
em.detail.datumHelp
?
|
WGS84 | WGS84 | WGS84 | Not applicable |
|
Centroid Coordinates Status
em.detail.coordinateStatusHelp
?
|
Estimated | Estimated | Estimated | Not applicable |
Environments and Scales Modeled
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-99 |
EM-333
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
|
EM Environmental Sub-Class
em.detail.emEnvironmentalSubclassHelp
?
|
Terrestrial Environment (sub-classes not fully specified) | Rivers and Streams | Forests | Agroecosystems | Created Greenspace | Rivers and Streams | Lakes and Ponds | Forests | Agroecosystems | Created Greenspace | Grasslands | Created Greenspace |
|
Specific Environment Type
em.detail.specificEnvTypeHelp
?
|
Not applicable | Agricultural-urban interface at river junction | Predominantly an agricultural area with associated forest land | Urban greenspace |
|
EM Ecological Scale
em.detail.ecoScaleHelp
?
|
Ecological scale is finer than that of the Environmental Sub-class | Ecological scale is finer than that of the Environmental Sub-class | Ecological scale corresponds to the Environmental Sub-class | Ecological scale corresponds to the Environmental Sub-class |
Scale and taxa of organisms modeled
Scale of differentiation of organisms modeled
em.detail.nameOfOrgsOrGroupsHelp
?
|
EM ID
em.detail.idHelp
?
|
EM-99 |
EM-333
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
|
EM Organismal Scale
em.detail.orgScaleHelp
?
|
Not applicable | Not applicable | Community | Species |
Taxonomic level and name of organisms or groups identified
taxonomyHelp
?
| EM-99 |
EM-333
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
| None Available |
|
None Available | None Available |
EnviroAtlas URL
EM Ecosystem Goods and Services (EGS) potentially modeled, by classification system
CICES v 4.3 - Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (Section > Division > Group > Class)
em.detail.cicesHelp
?
| EM-99 |
EM-333
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
|
|
|
|
<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://www.epa.gov/eco-research/national-ecosystem-services-classification-system-nescs-plus">National Ecosystem Services Classification System (NESCS) Plus</a>
fegs1Help
?
(Environmental Subclass > Ecological End-Product (EEP) > EEP Subclass > EEP Modifier)
fegs2Help
?
| EM-99 |
EM-333
|
EM-345
|
EM-936 |
|
|
|
None |