Acts in what Hutchinson (1965) has called the 'ecological theatre' are played out on various scales of space and time. To understand the drama, we must view it on the appropriate scale. Plant ecologists long ago recognized the importance of sampling scale in their descriptions of the dispersion or distribution of species (e.g. Greig-Smith, 1952). However, many ecologists have behaved as if patterns and the processes that produce them are insensitive to differences in scale and have designed their studies with little explicit attention to scale. Kareiva & Andersen (1988) surveyed nearly 100 field experiments in community ecology and found that half were conducted on plots no larger than 1 m in diameter, despite considerable differences in the sizes and types of organisms studied. Investigators addressing the same questions have often conducted their studies on quite different scales. Not surprisingly, their findings have not always matched, and arguments have ensued. The disagreements among conservation biologists over the optimal design of nature reserves (see Simberloff, 1988) are at least partly due to a failure to appreciate scaling differences among organisms. Controversies about the role of competition in structuring animal communities (Schoener, 1982; Wiens, 1983, 1989) or about the degree of coevolution in communities (Connell, 1980; Roughgarden, 1983) may reflect the

https://www.jstor.org/stable/info/2389612

Spatial Scaling in Ecology

Landscape ecologists often deal with aggregated data and multiscaled spatial phenomena. Recognizing the sensitivity of the results of spatial analyses to the definition of units for which data are collected is critical to characterizing landscapes with minimal bias and avoidance of spurious relationships. We introduce and examine the effect of data aggregation on analysis of landscape structure as exemplified through what has become known, in the statistical and geographical literature, as the Modifiable Areal Unit Problem (MAUP). The MAUP applies to two separate, but interrelated, problems with spatial data analysis. The first is the “scale problem”, where the same set of areal data is aggregated into several sets of larger areal units, with each combination leading to different data values and inferences. The second aspect of the MAUP is the “zoning problem”, where a given set of areal units is recombined into zones that are of the same size but located differently, again resulting in variation in data values and, consequently, different conclusions. We conduct a series of spatial autocorrelation analyses based on NDVI (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index) to demonstrate how the MAUP may affect the results of landscape analysis. We conclude with a discussion of the broaderscale implications for the MAUP in landscape ecology and suggest approaches for dealing with this issue.

/pdf/the-modifiable-areal-unit-problem-and-implications-for-1qgrp1by92.pdf

The modifiable areal unit problem and implications for landscape ecology

This paper identi"es challenges inherent in addressing multi-scale environmental problems, and outlines tentative guidelines for addressing such challenges and linking science and policy across scales. The study and practice of environmental assessment and management increasingly recognize the importance of scale and cross-scale dynamics in understanding and addressing global environmental change. These ongoing e!orts, however, lack a systematic way of thinking about and addressing the challenges involved in integrating science and policy across multiple scales, for example, in the design of policy-relevant, scienti"c assessments of problems such as climate change. These challenges include matching scales of biogeophysical systems with scales of management systems, avoiding scale discordance (matching the scale of the assessment with the scale of management), and accounting for cross-scale dynamics. In this paper we propose tentative guidelines for meeting such challenges for both assessors and decisionmakers: (1) utilize boundary organizations* institutions which serve to mediate between scientists and decision-makers, and between these actors at di!erent scales; (2) utilize scale-dependent comparative advantages * coordinating the allocation of resources, technical expertise, and decision-making authority to best capitalize on scale-speci"c capabilities; and (3) employ adaptive assessment and management strategies * constructing long-term, iterative, experiment-based processes of integrated assessment and management. ( 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

/pdf/linking-global-and-local-scales-designing-dynamic-assessment-nnmfsuridy.pdf

Linking global and local scales: designing dynamic assessment and management processes

Anastomosing rivers: a review of their classification, origin and sedimentary products

The present paper provides a classification and description of methods for designing environmental studies, with emphasis on techniques as yet little used in ecology. Eight categories of techniques for field studies are defined in terms of the nature of control exerted by the observer, by the presence or absence of a perturbation, and by the domain of study. The first two categories include classical experimental approaches, replicated an unreplicated. Sampling for modeling provides efficient designs for estimating parameters in a specified model. Intervention analysis measures the effect of a known perturbation in a time series. Observational studies contrast selected groups from a population, while analytical sampling provides comparisons over the entire population. Descriptive survey sampling estimates means or totals over an entire population, while sampling for pattern deals with spatial patterns over a selected region. The authors propose that the statistical concept of a superpopulation may be useful in ecology, and that it may be desirable to approach community and ecosystem studies in a sampling framework, with experimentation used for a fairly narrow range of subsidiary investigations. Much more attention to processes for drawing inferences about cause and effect is needed, in any case.

Designing Environmental Field Studies

Scales and Global Change.

Spatial and Temporal Variability of Biospheric and Geospheric Processes: A Summary Ecosystem Processes and Global Change Hierarchy Theory and Global Change Statistical and Mathematical Approaches to Issues of Scales in Ecology Atmospheric Systems and Global Change Variability in Atmospheric-Chemical Systems Linking Terrestrial Ecosystem Process Models to Climate Models Simulation Models of Forest Succession Processes in Soils - From Pedon to Landscape Scale and the Measurement of Nitrogen-Gas Fluxes from Terrestrial Ecosystems Spatial and Temporal Scales in Groundwater Modelling Variability of the Fluvial System in Space and Time Estuaries - Their Natural and Anthropogenic Changes Use of Satellite Ocean Colour Observation to Refine Understanding of Global Geochemical Cycles The Ocean System - Ocean/Climate and Ocean/CO2 Interactions.

T. Rosswall

Papers

Scales and Global Change.

Scales and global change : spatial and temporal variability in biospheric and geospheric processes

Spatial and temporal variability of biospheric and geospheric processes: a summary.