(1999) and Bettinger and Boston (2001) described four systems—society, database
development, technology—and the organizational commitment to implement these
in a competent way, but this would be ideal for the simple situation to evaluate
outcome of projects but lacks the ability to handle the complex natural environment. Likewise, for several other issues, every model has its own advantages as
well its own limitations.
We have evaluated methods for model development considering our own
requirements in terms of potential (model description) and limitations (where
methods do not cover the specific obligation in view of our theoretical approach), as
shown in Table 1.
7 Baseline for Conceptual Model Development
Based on the literature survey we noticed that at present there is no such model fits
in a way that we can copy 1:1 in view of the complexity of our research area.
Therefore, we have to develop a new model but wish to follow the approach
developed for the model system MODAM. The methodological approaches
developed by Kaechele and Dabbert (2002) and Zander (2003) for the development
of the model system MODAM (Multiple Objectives Decision Support Tools for
Agroecosystem Management) fit best in view of solving the mountain complexities
in the Himalayas of India. However, this approach has a few limitations but these
might be standardized in our new version of the Himalaya. The main issues which
the model system (MODAM) emphasizes are field knowledge, empirical evidences,
and real-world analysis, and underpinning of theory and concept in an integrated
interdisciplinary approach; hence, it is suitable for ex post analysis and significant
for ex ante planning problems. The outcomes need to be presented in such a way
that addresses the needs of stakeholders into an indefinite future. Thus the strategy
must satisfy social, economic, and ecological needs and the fact that these outcomes
should continue into the future and imply the need to support sustainable landscape
management (Kaechele and Dabbert 2002; Hillman et al. 2005). For handling the
complexity of the mountain environment (Nautiyal et al. 2007), it is necessary to
demonstrate the framework in view of its multi-objective system function. Long
research experience with his endeavor suggests that a single objective goal would
be inadequate to address the problem and prospects of the whole landscape study in
the Himalayas. Concurrently, the bases for integrated interdisciplinary research
were designed in MODAM framework. The major limitations of model system
MODAM are (i) it cannot control the risk/uncertainty, (ii) it faces the problems in
cases of additional external variables, and (iii) it does not have much efficiency in
the dynamic aspects of the model. Besides these few limitations, the model system
MODAM offers us immense opportunity to follow the approach developed, as this
could be helpful to contribute feasible solutions for sustainable landscape management. The problem related to risk/uncertainty could be handled during the
process of development as, in our conceptual model, flexibility is one of the
Socioeconomic and Ecological Modeling for Sustainable …
615
development, technology—and the organizational commitment to implement these
in a competent way, but this would be ideal for the simple situation to evaluate
outcome of projects but lacks the ability to handle the complex natural environment. Likewise, for several other issues, every model has its own advantages as
well its own limitations.
We have evaluated methods for model development considering our own
requirements in terms of potential (model description) and limitations (where
methods do not cover the specific obligation in view of our theoretical approach), as
shown in Table 1.
7 Baseline for Conceptual Model Development
Based on the literature survey we noticed that at present there is no such model fits
in a way that we can copy 1:1 in view of the complexity of our research area.
Therefore, we have to develop a new model but wish to follow the approach
developed for the model system MODAM. The methodological approaches
developed by Kaechele and Dabbert (2002) and Zander (2003) for the development
of the model system MODAM (Multiple Objectives Decision Support Tools for
Agroecosystem Management) fit best in view of solving the mountain complexities
in the Himalayas of India. However, this approach has a few limitations but these
might be standardized in our new version of the Himalaya. The main issues which
the model system (MODAM) emphasizes are field knowledge, empirical evidences,
and real-world analysis, and underpinning of theory and concept in an integrated
interdisciplinary approach; hence, it is suitable for ex post analysis and significant
for ex ante planning problems. The outcomes need to be presented in such a way
that addresses the needs of stakeholders into an indefinite future. Thus the strategy
must satisfy social, economic, and ecological needs and the fact that these outcomes
should continue into the future and imply the need to support sustainable landscape
management (Kaechele and Dabbert 2002; Hillman et al. 2005). For handling the
complexity of the mountain environment (Nautiyal et al. 2007), it is necessary to
demonstrate the framework in view of its multi-objective system function. Long
research experience with his endeavor suggests that a single objective goal would
be inadequate to address the problem and prospects of the whole landscape study in
the Himalayas. Concurrently, the bases for integrated interdisciplinary research
were designed in MODAM framework. The major limitations of model system
MODAM are (i) it cannot control the risk/uncertainty, (ii) it faces the problems in
cases of additional external variables, and (iii) it does not have much efficiency in
the dynamic aspects of the model. Besides these few limitations, the model system
MODAM offers us immense opportunity to follow the approach developed, as this
could be helpful to contribute feasible solutions for sustainable landscape management. The problem related to risk/uncertainty could be handled during the
process of development as, in our conceptual model, flexibility is one of the
Socioeconomic and Ecological Modeling for Sustainable …
615