Cost-efficiency assessments of marine monitoring methods lack rigor—a systematic mapping of literature and an end-user view on optimal cost-efficiency analysis

Author:

Hyvärinen HeiniORCID,Skyttä Annaliina,Jernberg Susanna,Meissner Kristian,Kuosa Harri,Uusitalo Laura

Abstract

AbstractGlobal deterioration of marine ecosystems, together with increasing pressure to use them, has created a demand for new, more efficient and cost-efficient monitoring tools that enable assessing changes in the status of marine ecosystems. However, demonstrating the cost-efficiency of a monitoring method is not straightforward as there are no generally applicable guidelines. Our study provides a systematic literature mapping of methods and criteria that have been proposed or used since the year 2000 to evaluate the cost-efficiency of marine monitoring methods. We aimed to investigate these methods but discovered that examples of actual cost-efficiency assessments in literature were rare, contradicting the prevalent use of the term “cost-efficiency.” We identified five different ways to compare the cost-efficiency of a marine monitoring method: (1) the cost–benefit ratio, (2) comparative studies based on an experiment, (3) comparative studies based on a literature review, (4) comparisons with other methods based on literature, and (5) subjective comparisons with other methods based on experience or intuition. Because of the observed high frequency of insufficient cost–benefit assessments, we strongly advise that more attention is paid to the coverage of both cost and efficiency parameters when evaluating the actual cost-efficiency of novel methods. Our results emphasize the need to improve the reliability and comparability of cost-efficiency assessments. We provide guidelines for future initiatives to develop a cost-efficiency assessment framework and suggestions for more unified cost-efficiency criteria.

Funder

Finnish Environment Institute

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law,Pollution,General Environmental Science,General Medicine

Reference30 articles.

1. Andersen, J. H., Halpern, B. S., Korpinen, S., Murray, C., & Reker, J. (2015). Baltic Sea biodiversity status vs. cumulative human pressures. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 161, 88–92.

2. Bennett, K., Wilson, S. K., Shedrawi, G., McLean, D. L., & Langlois, T. J. (2016). Can diver operated stereo-video surveys for fish be used to collect meaningful data on benthic coral reef communities? Limnology and Oceanography, 14, 874–885. https://doi.org/10.1002/lom3.10141

3. Brodin, Y., Ejdung, G., Strandberg, J., & Lyrholm, T. (2013). Improving environmental and biodiversity monitoring in the Baltic Sea using DNA barcoding of Chironomidae (Diptera). Molecular Ecology Resources, 13(6), 996–1004.

4. Cadima.info. (2019). CADIMA. [online] Available at: https://www.cadima.info/ [Accessed 22 Aug 2019].

5. Clapton, J., Rutter, D., & Sharif, N. (2009). SCIE systematic mapping guidance. http://www.scie.org.uk/publications/researchresources/rr03.pdf. Accessed 31 Jan 2019.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3