↓ Skip to main content

A Methodology for Evaluating and Ranking Water Quantity Indicators in Support of Ecosystem-Based Management

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Management, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A Methodology for Evaluating and Ranking Water Quantity Indicators in Support of Ecosystem-Based Management
Published in
Environmental Management, February 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00267-012-9808-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

C. Andrew James, Jessi Kershner, Jameal Samhouri, Sandra O’Neill, Phillip S. Levin

Abstract

Ecosystem-based Management (EBM) is an approach that includes different management priorities and requires a balance between anthropogenic and ecological resource demands. Indicators can be used to monitor ecosystem status and trends, and assess whether projects and/or programs are leading to the achievement of management goals. As such, the careful selection of a suite of indicators is a crucial exercise. In this paper we describe an indicator evaluation and selection process designed to support the EBM approach in Puget Sound. The first step in this process was the development of a general framework for selecting indicators. The framework, designed to transparently include both scientific and policy considerations into the selection and evaluation process, was developed and then utilized in the organization and determination of a preliminary set of indicators. Next, the indicators were assessed against a set of nineteen distinct criteria that describe the model characteristics of an indicator. A literature review was performed for each indicator to determine the extent to which it satisfied each of the evaluation criteria. The result of each literature review was summarized in a numerical matrix, allowing comparison, and demonstrating the extent of scientific reliability. Finally, an approach for ranking indicators was developed to explore the effects of intended purpose on indicator selection. We identified several sets of scientifically valid and policy-relevant indicators that included metrics such as annual-7 day low flow and water system reliability, which are supportive of the EBM approach in the Puget Sound.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 7 8%
Germany 3 4%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Indonesia 1 1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 70 83%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 26%
Student > Master 16 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 15%
Professor 5 6%
Other 5 6%
Other 14 17%
Unknown 9 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 34 40%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 17%
Engineering 5 6%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 16 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 August 2022.
All research outputs
#7,960,052
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Management
#667
of 1,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,841
of 253,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Management
#4
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 253,850 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.