@misc{AyllonGrimmAttingeretal.2018,
  author    = {Ayllon, Daniel and Grimm, Volker and Attinger, Sabine and Hauhs, Michael and Simmer, Clemens and Vereecken, Harry and Lischeid, Gunnar},
  title     = {Cross-disciplinary links in environmental systems science},
  series = {The science of the total environment : an international journal for scientific research into the environment and its relationship with man},
  volume    = {622},
  journal   = {The science of the total environment : an international journal for scientific research into the environment and its relationship with man},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Amsterdam},
  issn      = {0048-9697},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.12.007},
  pages     = {954 -- 973},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Terrestrial environmental systems are characterised by numerous feedback links between their different compartments. However, scientific research is organized into disciplines that focus on processes within the respective compartments rather than on interdisciplinary links. Major feedback mechanisms between compartments might therefore have been systematically overlooked so far. Without identifying these gaps, initiatives on future comprehensive environmental monitoring schemes and experimental platforms might fail. We performed a comprehensive overview of feedbacks between compartments currently represented in environmental sciences and explores to what degree missing links have already been acknowledged in the literature. We focused on process models as they can be regarded as repositories of scientific knowledge that compile findings of numerous single studies. In total, 118 simulation models from 23 model types were analysed. Missing processes linking different environmental compartments were identified based on a meta-review of 346 published reviews, model inter-comparison studies, and model descriptions. Eight disciplines of environmental sciences were considered and 396 linking processes were identified and ascribed to the physical, chemical or biological domain. There were significant differences between model types and scientific disciplines regarding implemented interdisciplinary links. The most wide-spread interdisciplinary links were between physical processes in meteorology, hydrology and soil science that drive or set the boundary conditions for other processes (e.g., ecological processes). In contrast, most chemical and biological processes were restricted to links within the same compartment. Integration of multiple environmental compartments and interdisciplinary knowledge was scarce in most model types. There was a strong bias of suggested future research foci and model extensions towards reinforcing existing interdisciplinary knowledge rather than to open up new interdisciplinary pathways. No clear pattern across disciplines exists with respect to suggested future research efforts. There is no evidence that environmental research would clearly converge towards more integrated approaches or towards an overarching environmental systems theory. (c) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{EgliWeiseRadchuketal.2019,
  author    = {Egli, Lukas and Weise, Hanna and Radchuk, Viktoriia and Seppelt, Ralf and Grimm, Volker},
  title     = {Exploring resilience with agent-based models: State of the art, knowledge gaps and recommendations for coping with multidimensionality},
  series = {Ecological complexity},
  volume    = {40},
  journal   = {Ecological complexity},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Amsterdam},
  issn      = {1476-945X},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.ecocom.2018.06.008},
  pages     = {7},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Anthropogenic pressures increasingly alter natural systems. Therefore, understanding the resilience of agent-based complex systems such as ecosystems, i.e. their ability to absorb these pressures and sustain their functioning and services, is a major challenge. However, the mechanisms underlying resilience are still poorly understood. A main reason for this is the multidimensionality of both resilience, embracing the three fundamental stability properties recovery, resistance and persistence, and of the specific situations for which stability properties can be assessed. Agent-based models (ABM) complement empirical research which is, for logistic reasons, limited in coping with these multiple dimensions. Besides their ability to integrate multidimensionality through extensive manipulation in a fully controlled system, ABMs can capture the emergence of system resilience from individual interactions and feedbacks across different levels of organization. To assess the extent to which this potential of ABMs has already been exploited, we reviewed the state of the art in exploring resilience and its multidimensionality in ecological and socio-ecological systems with ABMs. We found that the potential of ABMs is not utilized in most models, as they typically focus on a single dimension of resilience by using variability as a proxy for persistence, and are limited to one reference state, disturbance type and scale. Moreover, only few studies explicitly test the ability of different mechanisms to support resilience. To overcome these limitations, we recommend to simultaneously assess multiple stability properties for different situations and under consideration of the mechanisms that are hypothesised to render a system resilient. This will help us to better exploit the potential of ABMs to understand and quantify resilience mechanisms, and hence support solving real-world problems related to the resilience of agent-based complex systems.},
  language  = {en}
}