Human-nature relationship in mediterranean streams: Integrating different types of knowledge to improve water management

Ecology and Society

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2009, Pages

  Gonzalez, Carla ^a,b   Clemente, Adelaide ^b   Nielsen, Kurt Aagaard ^c   Branquinho, Cristina ^b   dos Santos, Rui Ferreira ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDADE NOVA DE LISBOA   (Portugal)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LISBON   (Portugal)

^c ROSKILDE UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Co evolution; Ecological indicators; Interdisciplinary; Local knowledge; Natural resource management; Portugal; Social ecological systems; Transdisciplinary

Indexed keywords

BIOINDICATOR; BIOMONITORING; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; ECOLOGICAL IMPACT; EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; FARMING SYSTEM; INDEX OF BIOTIC INTEGRITY; INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH; LAND USE; NATURE-SOCIETY RELATIONS; SOCIAL CHANGE; SOCIAL IMPACT; STREAMWATER; TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE; WATER MANAGEMENT;

PORTUGAL;

EID: 73849093643     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17083087     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Antunes, P., and R. Santos. 1999. Integrated environmental management of the oceans. Ecological Economics 31:215-226.
2. Argent, R., R. Grayson, and S. Ewing. 1999. Integrated models for environmental management: issues of process and design. Environment International 25(6-7):693-699.
3. Ballard, H. L., M. E. Fernandez-Gimenez, and V. E. Sturtevant. 2008. Integration of local ecological knowledge and conventional science: a study of seven community-based forestry organizations in the USA. Ecology and Society 13 (2): 37. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss2/art37/.
4. Blondel, J. 2006. The "design" of mediterranean landscapes: a millennial story of humans and ecological systems during the historic period. Human Ecology 34(5):713-729.
5. Branquinho, C., D. H. Brown, C. Máguas, and F. Catarino. 1997. Pb uptake and its effects on membrane integrity and chlorophyll fluorescence in different lichen species. Environmental and Experimental Botany 37:95-105.
6. Branquinho, C., C. Gonzalez, and M. A. Martins-Loução. 2007. Relatório Final GAPS-Gestão Activa e Participada do Sítio de Monfurado (LIFE03/NAT/P/000008) CEBV-FCUL / Acção D4. Centro de Ecologia e Biologia Vegetal, Faculty of Science, University of Lisbon, Lison, Portugal. [online] URL: http://www.cm-montemornovo.pt/wwwGAPS/RF-D4.pdf.
7. Cenci, R. M. 2000. The use of aquatic moss (Fontinalis antipyretica) as monitor of contamination in standing and running waters: limits and advantages. Journal of Limnology 60(Suppl. 1):53-61.
8. Donovan, D. G., and R. K. Puri. 2004. Learning from traditional knowledge of non-timber forest products: Penan Benalui and the autecology of Aquilaria in Indonesian Borneo. Ecology and Society 9(3): 3. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss3/art3.
9. Duraiappah, A. 2002. Sectoral dynamics and natural resource management. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 26:1481-1498.
10. Ferreira, M. T., P. M. Rodríguez-González, F. C. Aguiar, and A. Albuquerque. 2005. Assessing biotic integrity in Iberian rivers: development of a multimetric plant index. Ecological Indicators 5:137-149.
11. Fielding, K. S., D. J. Terry, B. M. Masser, P. Bordia, and M. A. Hogg. 2005. Explaining landholders' decisions about riparian zone management: the role of behavioural, normative, and control beliefs. Journal of Environmental Management 77:12-21.
12. Figueira, R. 2002. Desenvolvimento de um sistema de biomonitorização ambiental. Dissertation, Faculty of Science, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.
13. Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group (FISRWG), editors. 1998. Stream corridor restoration: principles, processes and practices. Vol. GPO Item No. 0120-A; SuDocs No. A 57.6/2: EN 3/PT.653. FISRWG (15 federal agencies of the U.S. government). [online] URL: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/stream_restoration/.
14. Gasith, A., and V. H. Resh. 1999. Streams in Mediterranean climate regions: abiotic influences and biotic responses to predictable seasonal events. Annual Review of Ecological Systems 30:51-81.
15. International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). 1998. Economic values of protected areas: guidelines for protected area managers. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
16. Kallis, G. 2007. When is it coevolution? Ecological Economics 62:1-6.
17. Kenwick, R. A., M. R. Shammin, and W. C. Sullivan. 2009. Preferences for riparian buffers. Landscape and Urban Planning, in press.
18. Kessler, C. A. 2007. Motivating farmers for soil and water conservation: a promising strategy from the Bolivian mountain valleys. Land Use Policy 24:118-128.
19. Martins, R. J. E., R. Pardo, and R. A. R. Boaventura. 2004. Cadmium (II) and zinc (II) adsorption by the aquatic moss Fontinalis antipyretica: effect of temperature, pH and water hardness. Water Research 38:693-699.
20. Mersch, J., and M. Reichard. 1997. In situ investigation of trace metal availability in industrial effluents using transplanted aquatic mosses. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 34:336-342.
21. Miller, S. J., D. H. Wardrop, W. M. Mahaney, and R. P. Brooks. 2006. A plant-based index of biological integrity (IBI) for headwater wetlands in central Pennsylvania. Ecological Indicators 6 (2):290-312.
22. Moller, H., F. Berkes, P. O. B. Lyver, and M. Kislalioglu. 2004. Combining science and traditional ecological knowledge: monitoring populations for co-management. Ecology and Society 9(3): 2. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss3/art2.
23. Munné, A., N. Prat, C. Solà, N. Bonada, and M. Rieradevall. 2003. A simple field method for assessing the ecological quality of riparian habitat in rivers and streams: QBR index. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 13:147-163.
24. Nielsen, K. A., and B. S. Nielsen. 2006. Methodologies in action research. Pages 63-88 in K. Aagaard Nielsen, and L. Svensson, editors. Action research and interactive research. Shaker Publishing, Maasstricht, The Netherlands.
25. Nkhata, A. B., C. M. Breen, and W. A. Freimund. 2008. Resilient social relationships and collaboration in the management of social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society 13(1): 2. [online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss1/art2/.
26. Pereira, H. M., T. Domingos, and L. Vicente. 2004. Portugal millennium ecosystem assessment: state of the assessment report. Centro de Biologia Ambiental, Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal. [online] URL: http://www.millenniumassessment.org/documents_sga/Portugal%20MA_State_of_the_Assessment.pdf.
27. Pope, J., D. Annandale, and A. Morrison-Saunders. 2004. Conceptualising sustainability assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 24:595-616.
28. Pratschke, J. 2003. Realistic models? Critical realism and statistical models in the social sciences. Philosophica 71:13-38.
29. QSR. 2008. QSR NVivo Version 8.0.264.0 SP3. QSR International Pty Ltd. 1999-2008.
30. Rammel, C., S. Stagl, and H. Wilfing. 2007. Managing complex adaptive systems-a co-evolutionary perspective on natural resource management. Ecological Economics 63:9-21.
31. Reiss, K. C. 2006. Florida wetland condition index for depressional forested wetlands. Ecological Indicators 6(2):337-352.
32. Rietbergen-McCracken, J., and H. Abaza. 2000. Environmental valuation. First edition. Earthscan Publications, London, UK.
33. Rotmans, J., and M. B. A. V. Asselt. 2001. Uncertainty management in integrated assessment modeling: towards a pluralistic approach. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 69:101-130.
34. Salinas, M. J., G. Blanca, and A. T. Romero. 2000. Riparian vegetation and water chemistry in a basin under semiarid Mediterranean climate, Andarax River, Spain. Environmental Management 26 (5):539-552.
35. Settle, C., T. D. Crocker, and J. F. Shogren. 2002. On the joint determination of biological and economic systems. Ecological Economics 42(1-2):301-311.
36. Silvano, R. A. M., S. Udvardy, M. Ceroni, and J. Farley. 2005. An ecological integrity assessment of a Brazilian Atlantic forest watershed based on surveys of stream health and local farmers' perceptions: implications for management. Ecological Economics 53(3):269-385.
37. Smith, E., J. Smith, L. Smith, T. Biswas, R. Correll, and R. Naidu. 2003. Arsenic in Australian environment: an overview. Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part A 38(1):223-239. [online] URL: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/section?content=a713630171&fulltext=713240928.
38. SNIRH. 2008. National system of information on water resources. [online] URL: http://snirh.pt/snirh.php?main_id=1.
39. Spash, C. L., K. Urama, R. Burton, W. Kenyon, P. Shannon, and G. Hill. 2009. Motives behind willingness to pay for improving biodiversity in a water ecosystem: economics, ethics and social psychology. Ecological Economics 68(4):955-964.
40. van den Bergh, J., and P. Nijkamp. 1991. Operationalizing sustainable development: dynamic ecological economic models. Ecological Economics 4(1):11-33.
41. van der Ploeg, S., L. Braat, and W. van Lierop. 1987. Integration of resource economics and ecology. Ecological Modelling 38(1-2):171-190.
42. Vázquez, M. D., J. López, and A. Carballeira. 1999. Uptake of heavy metals to the extracellular and intracellular compartments in three species of aquatic bryophyte. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 44:12-24.
43. Xu, J., L. Chen, Y. Lu, and B. Fu. 2006. Local people's perceptions as decision support for protected area management in Wolong Biosphere Reserve, China. Journal of Environmental Management 78:362-372.