The role of digital data entry in participatory environmental monitoring

Many argue that monitoring conducted exclusively by scientists is insufficient to address ongoing environmental challenges. One solution entails the use of mobile digital devices in participatory monitoring (PM) programs. But how digital data entry affects programs with varying levels of stakeholder participation, from nonscientists collecting field data to nonscientists administering every step of a monitoring program, remains unclear. We reviewed the successes, in terms of management interventions and sustainability, of 107 monitoring programs described in the literature (hereafter programs) and compared these with case studies from our PM experiences in Australia, Canada, Ethiopia, Ghana, Greenland, and Vietnam (hereafter cases). Our literature review showed that participatory programs were less likely to use digital devices, and 2 of our 3 more participatory cases were also slow to adopt digital data entry. Programs that were participatory and used digital devices were more likely to report management actions, which was consistent with cases in Ethiopia, Greenland, and Australia. Programs engaging volunteers were more frequently reported as ongoing, but those involving digital data entry were less often sustained when data collectors were volunteers. For the Vietnamese and Canadian cases, sustainability was undermined by a mismatch in stakeholder objectives. In the Ghanaian case, complex field protocols diminished monitoring sustainability. Innovative technologies attract interest, but the foundation of effective participatory adaptive monitoring depends more on collaboratively defined questions, objectives, conceptual models, and monitoring approaches. When this foundation is built through effective partnerships, digital data entry can enable the collection of more data of higher quality. Without this foundation, or when implemented ineffectively or unnecessarily, digital data entry can be an additional expense that distracts from core monitoring objectives and undermines project sustainability. The appropriate role of digital data entry in PM likely depends more on the context in which it is used and less on the technology itself.     

Economic and environmental value stream map (E2VSM) simulation for multi-product manufacturing systems

Value stream mapping (VSM) is a well-accepted tool within lean manufacturing concept which is often used for analysing and designing the flow of materials and information required to manufacture a product. However, the analysis is static and single product oriented, which fails to cope with either the variation of production plan or a multi-product environment. In addition, the environmental impact of a manufacturing system is highly associated with the dynamic consumption of energy and resources. Despite the recent integration of VSM with simulation or environmental studies (in the domain of energy efficiency), still neglected is the dynamic assessment of all the resources involved in a multi-product production environment. This paper presents a methodology for modelling multi-product manufacturing systems with dynamic material, energy and information flows with the aim to generate economic and environmental value stream maps (E²VSM). The proposed methodology is validated with an industrial case.     

Monoterpene emissions and carbonyl compound air concentrations during the blooming period of rape (Brassica napus)

An increasing percentage of agricultural land in Germany is used for oil seed plants. Hence, rape has become an important agricultural plant (in Saxony 1998: 12% of the farmland) in the recent years. During flowering of rape along with intensive radiation and high temperatures, a higher production and emission of biogenic VOC was observed. The emissions of terpenes were determined and more importantly, high concentrations of organic carbonyl compounds were observed during this field experiment. All measurements of interest have been carried out during two selected days with optimal weather conditions. It is found that the origin or the mechanism of formation of different group of compounds had strong influence on the day to day variation of their concentrations. The emission flux of terpenes from flowering rape plants was determined to be 16–32 μg h⁻¹ m⁻² (30–60 ng h⁻¹ per g dry plant––540–1080 ng h⁻¹ per plant), in total. Limonene, -thujene and sabinene were the most important compounds (about 60% of total terpenes). For limonene and sabinene reference emission rates (M_S) and temperature coefficients were determined: β_limonene=0.108 K⁻¹ and M_S=14.57 μg h⁻¹ m⁻²; β_sabinene=0.095 K⁻¹ and M_S=5.39 μg h⁻¹ m⁻².

The detected carbonyl compound concentrations were unexpectedly high (maximum formaldehyde concentration was 18.1 ppbv and 3.4 ppbv for butyraldehyde) for an open field. Possible reasons for these concentrations are the combination of primary emission from the plants induced by high temperature and high ozone stress, the secondary formation from biogenically and advected anthropogenically emitted VOC at high radiation intensities and furthered by the low wind speeds at this time.     

When experts disagree: the need to rethink indicator selection for assessing sustainability of agriculture

Sustainability indicators are well recognized for their potential to assess and monitor sustainable development of agricultural systems. A large number of indicators are proposed in various sustainability assessment frameworks, which raises concerns regarding the validity of approaches, usefulness and trust in such frameworks. Selecting indicators requires transparent and well-defined procedures to ensure the relevance and validity of sustainability assessments. The objective of this study, therefore, was to determine whether experts agree on which criteria are most important in the selection of indicators and indicator sets for robust sustainability assessments. Two groups of experts (Temperate Agriculture Research Network and New Zealand Sustainability Dashboard) were asked to rank the relative importance of eleven criteria for selecting individual indicators and of nine criteria for balancing a collective set of indicators. Both ranking surveys reveal a startling lack of consensus amongst experts about how best to measure agricultural sustainability and call for a radical rethink about how complementary approaches to sustainability assessments are used alongside each other to ensure a plurality of views and maximum collaboration and trust amongst stakeholders. To improve the transparency, relevance and robustness of sustainable assessments, the context of the sustainability assessment, including prioritizations of selection criteria for indicator selection, must be accounted for. A collaborative design process will enhance the acceptance of diverse values and prioritizations embedded in sustainability assessments. The process by which indicators and sustainability frameworks are established may be a much more important determinant of their success than the final shape of the assessment tools. Such an emphasis on process would make assessments more transparent, transformative and enduring.     

Can we take the pulse of environmental governance the way we take the pulse of nature? Applying the Freshwater Health Index in Latin America

Quantitative assessments have long been used to evaluate the condition of the natural environment, providing information for standard setting, adaptive management, and monitoring. Similar approaches have been developed to measure environmental governance, however, the end result (e.g., numeric indicators) belies the subjective and normative judgments that are involved in evaluating governance. We demonstrate a framework that makes this information transparent, through an application of the Freshwater Health Index in three different river basins in Latin America. Water Governance is measured on a 0–100 scale, using data derived from perception-based surveys administered to stakeholders. Results suggest that water governance is a primary area of concern in all three places, with low overall scores (Guandu-26, Alto Mayo-38, Bogotá-43). We conclude that this approach to measuring governance at the river basin scale provides valuable information to support monitoring and decision making, and we offer suggestions on how it can be improved.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s13280-020-01407-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.     

Development and implementation of eco-genomic tools for aquatic ecosystem biomonitoring: the SYNAQUA French-Swiss program

The effectiveness of environmental protection measures is based on the early identification and diagnosis of anthropogenic pressures. Similarly, restoration actions require precise monitoring of changes in the ecological quality of ecosystems, in order to highlight their effectiveness. Monitoring the ecological quality relies on bioindicators, which are organisms revealing the pressures exerted on the environment through the composition of their communities. Their implementation, based on the morphological identification of species, is expensive because it requires time and experts in taxonomy. Recent genomic tools should provide access to reliable and high-throughput environmental monitoring by directly inferring the composition of bioindicators’ communities from their DNA (metabarcoding). The French-Swiss program SYNAQUA (INTERREG France-Switzerland 2017–2019) proposes to use and validate the tools of environmental genomic for biomonitoring and aims ultimately at their implementation in the regulatory bio-surveillance. SYNAQUA will test the metabarcoding approach focusing on two bioindicators, diatoms, and aquatic oligochaetes, which are used in freshwater biomonitoring in France and Switzerland. To go towards the renewal of current biomonitoring practices, SYNAQUA will (1) bring together different actors: scientists, environmental managers, consulting firms, and biotechnological companies, (2) apply this approach on a large scale to demonstrate its relevance, (3) propose robust and reliable tools, and (4) raise public awareness and train the various actors likely to use these new tools. Biomonitoring approaches based on such environmental genomic tools should address the European need for reliable, higher-throughput monitoring to improve the protection of aquatic environments under multiple pressures, guide their restoration, and follow their evolution.