Bibliography - A. P. Kinzig

1. Kinzig, A. P., D. Starrett, K. Arrow, S. Aniyar, B. Bolin, P. Dasgupta, P. Ehrlich, C. Folke, M. Hanemann, G. Heal, M. Hoel, and A. Jansson, et al., 2003: Coping with Uncertainty: A Call for a New Science-Policy Forum. Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, http://ambio.allenpress.com/archive/0044-7447/32/5/pdf/i0044-7447-32-5-330.pdf, Ambio 32(5), 330-335
   [ Abstract ]

   The scientific and policy worlds have different goals, which can lead to different standards for what constitutes “proof” of a change or phenomena, and different approaches for characterizing and conveying uncertainty and risk. These differences can compromise effective communication among scientists, policymakers, and the public, and constrain the types of socially compelling questions scientists are willing to address. In this paper, we review a set of approaches for dealing with uncertainty, and illustrate some of the errors that arise when science and policy fail to coordinate correctly. We offer a set of recommendations, including restructuring of science curricula and establishment of science-policy forums populated by leaders in both arenas, and specifically constituted to address problems of uncertainty.

2. Kinzig, A. P., Stephen W. Pacala, and G. D. Tilman, 2002: Looking Back, Peering Forward (editors. The Functional Consequences of Biodiversity: Experimental Progress and Theoretical Extensions, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 314-329
   [ Abstract ]

   Does biodiversity influence how ecosystems function? Might diversity loss affect the ability of ecosystems to deliver services of benefit to humankind? Ecosystems provide food, fuel, fiber, and drinkable water, regulate local and regional climate, and recycle needed nutrients, among other things. An ecosystem's ability to sustain functioning may depend on the number of species residing in the ecosystem--its biological diversity--but this has been a controversial hypothesis. There are many unanswered questions about how and why changes in biodiversity could alter ecosystem functioning. This volume, written by top researchers, synthesizes empirical studies on the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning and extends that knowledge using a novel and coordinated set of models and theoretical approaches. These experimental and theoretical analyses demonstrate that functioning usually increases with biodiversity, but also reveals when and under what circumstances other relationships between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning might occur. It also accounts for apparent changes in diversity-functioning relationships that emerge over time in disturbed ecosystems, thereby addressing a major controversy in the field. The volume concludes with a blueprint for moving beyond small-scale studies to regional ones--a move of enormous significance for policy and conservation but one that will entail tackling some of the most fundamental challenges in ecology. In addition to the editors, the contributors are Juan Armesto, Claudia Neuhauser, Andy Hector, Clarence Lehman, Peter Kareiva, Sharon Lawler, Peter Chesson, Teri Balser, Mary K. Firestone, Robert Holt, Michel Loreau, Johannes Knops, David Wedin, Peter Reich, Shahid Naeem, Bernhard Schmid, Jasmin Joshi, and Felix Schläpfer.

3. Pacala, Stephen W., and A. P. Kinzig, 2002: Introduction to Theory and the Common Ecosystem Model. The Functional Consequences of Biodiversity: Experimental Progress and Theoretical Extensions, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 169-174
   [ Abstract ]

   Does biodiversity influence how ecosystems function? Might diversity loss affect the ability of ecosystems to deliver services of benefit to humankind? Ecosystems provide food, fuel, fiber, and drinkable water, regulate local and regional climate, and recycle needed nutrients, among other things. An ecosyste's ability to sustain functioning may depend on the number of species residing in the ecosystem--its biological diversity--but this has been a controversial hypothesis. There are many unanswered questions about how and why changes in biodiversity could alter ecosystem functioning. This volume, written by top researchers, synthesizes empirical studies on the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning and extends that knowledge using a novel and coordinated set of models and theoretical approaches. These experimental and theoretical analyses demonstrate that functioning usually increases with biodiversity, but also reveals when and under what circumstances other relationships between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning might occur. It also accounts for apparent changes in diversity-functioning relationships that emerge over time in disturbed ecosystems, thereby addressing a major controversy in the field. The volume concludes with a blueprint for moving beyond small-scale studies to regional ones--a move of enormous significance for policy and conservation but one that will entail tackling some of the most fundamental challenges in ecology. In addition to the editors, the contributors are Juan Armesto, Claudia Neuhauser, Andy Hector, Clarence Lehman, Peter Kareiva, Sharon Lawler, Peter Chesson, Teri Balser, Mary K. Firestone, Robert Holt, Michel Loreau, Johannes Knops, David Wedin, Peter Reich, Shahid Naeem, Bernhard Schmid, Jasmin Joshi, and Felix Schläpfer.

4. Pacala, Stephen W., A. P. Kinzig, and G. D. Tilman, 2002: The Transition from Sampling to Complementarity. The Functional Consequences of Biodiversity: Experimental Progress and Theoretical Extensions, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 151-166
   [ Abstract ]

   Does biodiversity influence how ecosystems function? Might diversity loss affect the ability of ecosystems to deliver services of benefit to humankind? Ecosystems provide food, fuel, fiber, and drinkable water, regulate local and regional climate, and recycle needed nutrients, among other things. An ecosyste's ability to sustain functioning may depend on the number of species residing in the ecosystem--its biological diversity--but this has been a controversial hypothesis. There are many unanswered questions about how and why changes in biodiversity could alter ecosystem functioning. This volume, written by top researchers, synthesizes empirical studies on the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning and extends that knowledge using a novel and coordinated set of models and theoretical approaches. These experimental and theoretical analyses demonstrate that functioning usually increases with biodiversity, but also reveals when and under what circumstances other relationships between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning might occur. It also accounts for apparent changes in diversity-functioning relationships that emerge over time in disturbed ecosystems, thereby addressing a major controversy in the field. The volume concludes with a blueprint for moving beyond small-scale studies to regional ones--a move of enormous significance for policy and conservation but one that will entail tackling some of the most fundamental challenges in ecology. In addition to the editors, the contributors are Juan Armesto, Claudia Neuhauser, Andy Hector, Clarence Lehman, Peter Kareiva, Sharon Lawler, Peter Chesson, Teri Balser, Mary K. Firestone, Robert Holt, Michel Loreau, Johannes Knops, David Wedin, Peter Reich, Shahid Naeem, Bernhard Schmid, Jasmin Joshi, and Felix Schläpfer.

5. Schneider, L. C., A. P. Kinzig, Eric Larson, and L. A. Solarzano, 2001: Method for Spatially-Explicit Calculations of Potential Biomass Yields and Assessment of Land Availability for Biomass Energy Production in Northeastern Brazil. Agriculture, Ecosystems, and Environment, 84(3), doi:10.1016/S0167-8809(00)00242-5 207-226
   [ Abstract ]

   The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has suggested that large-scale use of carbon-neutral or low-carbon biomass-derived energy will be essential in order to limit carbon emissions from the world’s energy sector in the future. The IPCC envisions as much as 400 million ha being devoted to biomass energy plantations by 2050. To realize production of biomass energy at such levels—in a manner that would be both biogeophysically sustainable and socially beneficial—will require planning and policy development at sub-national levels, taking into account biogeophysical, social, cultural, economic, institutional, and other factors. This paper presents amethod for spatially explicit calculations for estimating potential biomass yields over relatively large geographic regions. The calculations use geo-referenced data inputs that include rainfall, insolation, temperature, soil quality, and soil depth. The methodology is applied to the Northeast region of Brazil, which accounts for 10% of the area of South America. Northeast Brazil is an interesting site for illustrative purposes in part because it is biologically, geologically, and socio-economically diverse and in part because the main electric utility serving the region is exploring the development of biomass-based electricity generation to meet future increases in electricity demand. Results from a spatially explicit, biogeophysical model like that presented here could be combined with other spatially explicit information such as road layouts, existing land uses, population densities and growth rates, distributions of endangered species, archeologically significant areas, etc. to inform planning and policy development related to biomass energy at a regional or national level. One illustration of such an analysis is included here. For on-the-ground implementation of biomass production systems, finer-resolution analysis and intimate local participation is essential.

Direct link to page: http://cmi.princeton.edu/bibliography/results.php?author=4340