Thesis (Ph. D.)--Colorado State University, 2004. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2004. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 251-306).

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Wyoming, 2008. / Title from PDF title page (viewed on June 25, 2009). Includes bibliographical references (p. 52-55).

Thesis (M. Phil.)--University of Hong Kong, 2001. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 162-186).

Thesis (M. Sc.)--University of Hong Kong, 2001. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 92-100).

Thesis (M.S.)--Missouri University of Science and Technology, 2008. / Vita. The entire thesis text is included in file. Title from title screen of thesis/dissertation PDF file (viewed April 18, 2008) Degree granted by Missouri University of Science and Technology, formerly known as University of Missouri-Rolla. Includes bibliographical references (p. 67-73).

Thesis (M.S.)--Michigan State University, Dept. of Fisheries and Wildlife, 2006. / Title from PDF t.p. (viewed on Nov. 20, 2008) Includes bibliographical references (p. 89-95). Also issued in print.

The goal of planning is to use knowledge to determine action. Planning theory has focused specifically on how the process of achieving this occurs. Two dominant theories prevail: rational comprehensive and communicative planning theory. The former relies heavily on the scientific method as a model for acquiring knowledge from which the correct action can be determined. The latter suggests that collaborative processes that engage stakeholders in decision-making offer distinct advantages to achieving both knowledge and action through consensus processes. This study looks at how knowledge is developed in collaborative planning processes used in ecosystem management. Knowledge is defined as more than simply data and information. It includes the tacit elements that underlie and give meaning to the data and information. As such, it requires processes that are more communicative in nature. At the same time, ecosystem management practices are rooted in the natural sciences and rely heavily on rational, instrumental reasoning to determine management plans. This combination of rational and communicative approaches provides for an interesting setting in which to understand the interaction of the two and to determine if there are advantages to conceptualizing planning in one way or the other. The study targets the remedial action planning done in the Great Lakes since 1987. Forty-three Areas of Concern were established throughout the basin, and in each, a stakeholder planning committee established. The committee was charged with developing a plan for remediating the water quality of the area. Over the past fourteen years, they have struggled through many circumstances to accomplish this with varying degrees of success. As each utilized slightly different procedural approaches and faced different obstacles, they provide an excellent laboratory for comparison. The study offers an analysis of the elements of the process and the implications of the different ways of approaching the various steps and stages. The analysis focuses on revealing what needs to be intact prior to collaborating, how information is collected, shared, and utilized, and how decisions are made and formalized in these processes. It focuses specifically on the information itself, communication issues, structural elements, and factors outside the process and how these all work together to enhance or inhibit collaboration. Following a detailed analysis of the process, a model for doing ecosystem management based on knowledge is developed and the basic principles of the model suggested. Collaboration is often theorized to accomplish far more than simply improved knowledge for decision-making. Some believe it will improve democracy, equality, and accountability. The study concludes with a brief reflection on these possibilities. / Ph. D.

No description available.

Buffer strips alongside watercourses are now a widely accepted method of reducing nutrient and sediment run-off from agricultural land thereby improving water quality and meeting policy goals. However, this change in land use may have consequences for riparian biodiversity which have yet to be fully understood. This study investigated the impact of buffering on various aspects of biodiversity by comparing three types of margins in three river catchments in north east Scotland. Margins were categorised as unbuffered (open and unfenced), buffered (fenced-off vegetated) and wooded (long established woody vegetation - fenced and unfenced). Components of biodiversity studied included vegetation patterns, and the abundance, diversity, movement and assemblage composition of ground-dwelling arthropods focussing primarily, though not exclusively, on ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae). This study further considered management options which may improve or enhance biodiversity. Evidenced changes in vegetation were associated with soil parameters (including decreasing pH), channel morphology, decreasing light availability and tree canopy cover, and bryophyte abundance along a successional gradient from unbuffered-buffered-wooded sites. Buffered and wooded sites showed lower activity density and species richness of ground beetles, but while one measure of functional diversity was high for wooded sites, buffered sites were found to have significantly lower values. Both species and trait assemblage structure of ground beetles were influenced by soil and vegetation, but also by features of buffer strip design such as width, length and age. Active management of sites through grazing or cutting increased ground beetle abundance, particularly hygrophilous species, but did not affect diversity. Radiotracking showed increased movement of ground beetles was correlated with intensity of grazing. Few truly riparian plant or arthropod species were identified indicating the process of buffering essentially 'terrestrialises' the riparian margins. The presence of a tree canopy layer appears to be the key instigator of change in soil conditions with vegetation and arthropods responding accordingly. Therefore planting and maintaining trees in buffer strips could be crucial to ensuring that functional diversity and associated ecosystem services are maintained. Active management through grazing or cutting could help in this regard. The results from this study suggest that rather than buffering all riparian margins within catchments, it is fundamentally important for biodiversity to maintain a mosaic of different successional stages and a diversity of habitats.