A methodology for validation of integrated systems models with an application to coastal-zone management in south-west sulawesi

To the memory of my father
























































































Contents



Preface…….………………………………………………………………………

1. Introduction………………………………………………… ….…………

1.1. General introduction……………………………………………….……
1.2. Background………………………………………………………….…….
1.2.1. Systems approach…………………………………………………
1.2.2. Integrated approach and Integrated Assessment……………………
1.2.3. Integrated management and policy analysis……………… …
1.3. The problem of validating Integrated Systems Models…………………
1.4. Research aim and research questions……………………………
1.5. Case study description……………………………………………………
1.5.1. RaMCo……………………………………………………………
1.5.2. Study area…………………………………………………………
1.6. Outline of the thesis………………………………………………………

2. Methodology……….… ……… …………………………………………….

2.1. Introduction …………… ……………………………………………
2.2. Literature review………………………………………………………….
2.3. Concept definition.……………………… …………………………
2.4. Conceptual framework of analysis…………………………………
2.5. Procedure for validation…………………………………………
2.6. Conclusion………………………………………………………………

3. Validation of an integrated systems model for coastal-zone management
using sensitivity and uncertainty analyses……………………………………

3.1. Introduction ……… …………………………………………………
3.2. Methodology….…………………………………………… ……………
3.2.1. Basics for the method………………………………………………
3.2.2. The testing procedure………………………………………………
3.2.3. The sensitivity analysis………………………………………
3.2.4. The elicitation of expert opinions……………………………
3.2.5. The uncertainty propagation……………………………………
3.2.6. The validation tests…………………………………………………
3.3. Results…………………………………………………………………….
3.3.1. Sensitivity analysis………………………………………………….
3.3.2. Elicitation of expert opinions……………………………………….

11

13

13
14
14
19
21
23
25
26
26
27
31

33

33
34
36
38
40
42


45

45
46
46
47
47
49
50
51
51
51
51
Contents 8
3.3.3. Uncertainty analysis………………………………………………
3.3.4. Parameter-Verification test………………………………………….
3.3.5. Behaviour-Anomaly test…………………………………………….
3.3.6. Policy-Sensitivity test……………………………………………….
3.4. Discussion and conclusions……………………………………………….
3.5. Appendices…………………………………………

4. A new approach to testing an integrated water systems model using
qualitative scenarios……………………………………………………

4.1. Introduction…………………………………………… ………
4.2. Validation methodology.… ……………………………… ……………
4.2.1. Overview of the new approach…………………………………
4.2.2. The detail procedure………………………………………………
4.3. The RaMCo model…………………………………………………
4.3.1. Land-use/land-cover change model…………………………………
4.3.2. Soil loss computation……………………………………………….
4.3.3. Sediment yield………………………………………………………
4.4. Formulation of scenarios for testing………………………………………
4.4.1. Structuring scenarios………………………………………………
4.4.2. Developing qualitative scenarios for testing………………
4.5. Translation of qualitative scenarios……………………………………….
4.5.1. Fuzzification………………………………………………………
4.5.2. Formulation of inference rules……………………………………
4.5.3. Application of the inference rules………………………………
4.5.4. Calculation of the output value…………………………………
4.5.5. Testing the consistency of the scenarios……………………………
4.6. Results…………………………………………………………………….
4.7. Discussion and conclusions………………………………………………

5. Validation of a fisheries model for coastal-zone management in
Spermonde Archipelago using observed data………………………………….

5.1. Introduction………………………………………………… ……
5.2. Case study.…………………… ………………… ….…………………
5.2.1. Fisheries in the Spermonde Archipelago, Southwest Sulawesi……
5.2.2. Fisheries modelling in RaMCo…………………………………
5.2.3. Data source and data processing…………………………………….
5.3. Validation methodology………………………………………
5.3.1. Sate of the art………………………………………………………
5.3.2. The proposed method……………………………………………….
5.3.3. Fishery production models………………………………………….
5.4. Results…………………………………………………………………….
5.4.1. Calibration…………………………………………………
5.4.2. The pattern test……………………………………………………
5.4.3. The accuracy test…………………………………………
5.4.4. The extreme condition test………………………………………….
5.5. Discussion and conclusions……………………………………………….

57
59
59
60
60
62


65

65
66
66
67
69
70
72
73
73
74
75
77
77
78
81
81
81
82
84


87

87
88
88
89
90
91
91
93
94
95
95
97
100
100
100

Contents 9
6. Discussions, conclusions and recommendations……………………

6.1. Introduction……………………………………… ……………………
6.2. Discussions.……… ……………………… ….………………………….
6.2.1. Innovative aspects……………………………….…… …………
6.2.2. Generic applicability of the methodology…………………………
6.2.3. Limitations………………………………………………………….
6.3. Conclusions……………………………………………………………….
6.3.1. Concept definition………………………………………………….
6.3.2. Methodology………………………………………………………
6.4. Recommendations………………………………………………………
6.4.1. Other directions for the validation of integrated systems models…
6.4.2. Proper use of integrated systems models…………………………

References………………………………………………………………………

Symbols……………………………………………………………………………

Acronyms and abbreviations……………………

Summary………………………………………………………………………….

Samenvatting……………………………………………………………………

About the author………………………………………………………


103

103
103
103
104
104
105
105
106
109
109
110

111

123

127

129

133

139




















Contents 10




























Preface



Words are easily borrowed, but the emotional meaning from one’s heart is difficult to
describe. Therefore, I would like to ask for the forgiveness from those whose assistance
cannot be appreciated in words and from those who, by any chance, I forgot to mention.

First of all I would like to thank prof. dr.ir. Herman Wind and his wife - Joke. The
interviews prof. Wind held in Bangkok and the decision he made enabled me to be here,
at Twente University, to fulfil my PhD research. Herman and Joke, I will never forget
the first meeting we had in Bangkok in April, 2001. Khap khun ma khap.

The next person I want to thank is dr. Jean-Luc de Kok, my daily supervisor. His
cleverness and intellectual skills have convinced me that I would be able to complete
this thesis with his regular guidance. His tireless support during the four-year period of
the research, in every aspect, made ‘my wish’ to come true. Jean-Luc, I am very happy
to be your first PhD student. The contents of the thesis belong to both you and me.

Importantly, I would like to thank my two promoters, prof. dr. Suzanne Hulscher and
prof. dr. Pieter Augustinus and my former promoter, prof. dr. Kees Vreugdenhil. Their
outstanding knowledge and experience in both science and management resulted in this
thesis. I would like to thank you all for that. Specifically, thank you, Pieter, for your
kindness, patience and useful comments during the preparation of the manuscript.

I would like to thank the Netherlands Foundation for the Advancement of Tropical
Research (WOTRO). The funding given to both the original Buginesia project and the
resulting project, which is presented in this thesis, has been provided by this
organisation.

It is also necessary to mention in particular a number of people from different
institutions in the Netherlands and in Indonesia, who have been actively involved in the
Buginesia project and contributed to this research. From Utrecht University, dr. Milan
Titus, prof. dr. Steven De Jong, prof. dr. Piet Hoekstra; From ITC, dr. A. Sharifi and dr.
Tjeerd Hobma; From UNESCO-IHE, prof. dr. ir. Arthur Mynett; From other Dutch
institutions: dr. Lida Pet-Soede, dr. Maya Borel Best, dr. Wim van Densen and prof. dr.
Leontine Visser; From the University Hasanuddin (UNHAS), prof. dr. Dadang Ahmad,
prof. dr. Alfian Noor and mr. Mushta;. I have learnt a lot from you all. Thank you very
much for your fruitful cooperation.

Social interaction plays an important role in one’s research career. Therefore, I want to
thank all colleagues inside and outside of the WEM group for making my working years
here lively. Particularly, Huong Thi Thuy Phan; two pretty office-mates: Saskia and
Preface 12
Schretlen; people in the soccer team of the WEM group: Jan, Daniel, Martijn Booij,
Maarten, Pieter Roos, Jebbe, Pieter Oel, Andrei, Freak, Judith, Daniella, Steven,…and
their partners; Roos, Rolnan, Cornelie, Judith and Wendy from the Construction and
Transport groups; Our secretaries: Anke, Joke and Ellen; Yan, Dong, Ping, Chang Wei
and Jan from the ‘Chinese community’. Dank je wel and Xie xie.

The work of preparing, distributing, and collecting the questionnaires from the end-
users of RaMCo (Chapter 3) was done by Tessa Hofman. Arif Wismadi collected the
socio-economic data for validating the model of land-use and land-cover changes
(Chapter 4). Christian Loris collected the data and processed a part of them for
validating the fisheries model (Chapter 5). Gay Howells checked the English of the final
manuscript. Thank the four of you for what you have done to make this thesis complete.

My gratefulness goes to all of my Vietnamese friends living in the Netherlands, but
particularly to Hien-Nhu, Hieu-Lam, Kim-V.Anh, Phuong-Ha, Tu-An, Duy-Chi, Thang-
Mai, Trung-Thanh, Ha-Huong, Nhung, Hanh, Long, Kien, Hoa and Cuong. Dear
friends, to be your friends in Twente makes me feel like being at home.

Hoang Tu and Jebbe van der Werf deserve the special thanks for what makes me ask
them to be my ‘paranimfen’. Dank je wel, Jebbe, you are my closest Dutch friend. Tu,
many thanks for the daily-life things we have been sharing.

Almost the last person I want to thank here is my beloved girlfriend - Hue Chi. She is
always with me when I need her most. The four-year period of doing research would
have been much more difficult without her. Darling, I love you so very much.

Lastly but most importantly, I would like to express my deepest gratefulness to my
family, including my father, Nguyen Dinh Thinh, my mother, Ly Thi Nguyet and my
little sister, Nguyen Thanh Thuy. They are the people that support me the most. Father!
One paragraph of thankful words is absolutely far from enough for what you had done
for me. The whole spirit of this thesis is devoted to you. In Heaven, you would be
smiling….



Nguyen Tien Giang

Enschede, July, 2005.




Chapter 1

Introduction



1.1. General introduction

Systems approach and integrated approach towards the planning and management of
natural resources and environment are considered as promising approaches to achieve
the sustainable development of a region, of a country, and of our common world.
Consequently, an increasing number of Integrated Systems Models (ISMs) have been
developed (e.g. Hoekstra, 1998; Turner, 2000; De Kok and Wind, 2002). However, the
scarcity of field data for both model development and model validation, the lack of
knowledge about the relevant internal and external factors of the real system and the
model high aggregation levels (increase in scope but decrease in detail) create a number
of critical questions such as: to what extent can such models contribute to our
knowledge and ability to manage our environment? Are they useful and do they have an
added value in comparison with conventional process models? Centred in these
questions are the two questions: What is the validity of an ISM? How can this validity
be determined and established? This thesis is aimed at addressing these two questions.

Rapid Assessment Model for Coastal-zone Management (RaMCo), which was
developed by a Dutch-Indonesian multidisciplinary team (De Kok and Wind, 1999),
serves as a case study to achieve the objective of the thesis. The theoretical justification
for this choice is that RaMCo contains the typical characteristics of an Integrated
Systems Model. The first characteristic is reflected in the RaMCo’s ability to take into
account the interactions of socio-economic developments, biophysical conditions and
policy options. The second characteristic is the inclusion of the linkages between many
processes pertaining to different scientific fields, such as marine pollution, land-use
change, catchment hydrology, coastal hydrodynamics, fisheries and regional economic
development. Practically, the model was chosen since its validation had not been carried
out in the original project. In addition, the availability of the measured data (from 1996
until now) allows for the application of quantitative techniques which are suitable for
the validation of ISMs. It is aware that, despite the typicality of RaMCo, other ISMs
may differ in some aspects from the model considered. Therefore, the generality of the
validation methodology established is discussed in the final chapter of the thesis.

The introductory chapter is organised as follows. Section 1.2 describes the concepts of
systems approach, integrated approach and how they fit into the framework of the
natural resources and environmental management. The role of ISMs as tools to facilitate
this integrated management is explained. Difficulties involved with validation of these
models are elaborated in Section 1.3. The research questions and sub-questions of the
thesis are formulated in Section 1.4. A description of the case study is given in Section
1.5. The outline of the thesis is included in Section 1.6.
Chapter1 14
1.2. Background


1.2.1. Systems approach

Systems approach or systemic approach was born from the cross-fertilization of several
disciplines: information theory (Shannon, 1948), cybernetics (Wiener, 1948), and
general systems theory (Von Bertalanffy, 1968) more than half a century ago. As
described by Rosnay (1979), it is not to be considered a "science," a "theory," or a
"discipline," but a new methodology that makes possible the collection and organization
of accumulated knowledge in order to increase the efficiency of our actions.

The systemic approach, as opposed to the analytical approach, includes the totality of
the elements in the system under study, as well as their interaction and interdependence.
It is based on the conception of systems. The systems approach got its well-known
status after the two publications related to the depletion of world’s natural resources
(Forrester, 1971; Meadows et al., 1972). To clarify the concept of systems approach,
others approaches, with which it is often confused, are briefly mentioned.

- The systemic approach goes beyond the cybernetics approach (Wiener, 1948), whose
main objective is the study of control in living organisms and machines.

- It must be distinguished from General Systems Theory (Von Bertalanffy, 1968),
whose purpose is to describe in mathematical language the totality of systems found in
nature.

- It is not the same as systems analysis (Miser and Quade, 1985), a method that
represents only one tool of the systemic approach. The system analysis is elaborated
later in Section 1.2.3.

- The systemic approach has nothing to do with a systematic approach that confronts a
problem or sets up a series of actions in sequential manner, in a detailed way, forgetting
no element and leaving nothing to chance.

The analytic approach seeks to reduce a system to its elementary elements in order to
study them in detail and understand the types of interaction that exist between them. By
modifying one variable at a time, it tries to infer general laws that will enable to predict
the properties of a system under very different conditions. To make this prediction
possible, the laws of the additivity of elementary properties must be invoked. This is the
case in homogeneous systems, those composed of similar elements and having weak
interactions among them. Here the laws of statistics readily apply, enabling to
understand the behaviour of the disorganized complexity. The laws of the additivity of
elementary properties do not apply in highly complex systems composed of a large
diversity of elements linked together by strong interactions. These systems must be
approached by new methods such as those that the systemic approach groups together.
The purpose of the new methods is to consider a system in its totality, its complexity,
and its own dynamics. Through simulation one can "animate" a system and observe in
real time the effects of the different kinds of interactions among its elements. The study
of this behaviour leads in time to the determination of rules that can modify the system
or design other systems.

Xem chi tiết: A methodology for validation of integrated systems models with an application to coastal-zone management in south-west sulawesi