Näytä suppeat kuvailutiedot

dc.contributor.authorHyvärinen, Heini
dc.contributor.authorSkyttä, Annaliina
dc.contributor.authorJernberg, Susanna
dc.contributor.authorMeissner, Kristian
dc.contributor.authorKuosa, Harri
dc.contributor.authorUusitalo, Laura
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-18T05:03:18Z
dc.date.available2021-06-18T05:03:18Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.citationHyvärinen, H., Skyttä, A., Jernberg, S., Meissner, K., Kuosa, H., & Uusitalo, L. (2021). Cost-efficiency assessments of marine monitoring methods lack rigor : a systematic mapping of literature and an end-user view on optimal cost-efficiency analysis. <i>Environmental Monitoring and Assessment</i>, <i>193</i>(7), Article 400. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-021-09159-y" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-021-09159-y</a>
dc.identifier.otherCONVID_97869932
dc.identifier.urihttps://jyx.jyu.fi/handle/123456789/76659
dc.description.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.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherSpringer
dc.relation.ispartofseriesEnvironmental Monitoring and Assessment
dc.rightsCC BY 4.0
dc.subject.othercost-efficiency analysis
dc.subject.othercost of monitoring
dc.subject.othermarine monitoring tool
dc.subject.othermethod performance
dc.subject.othermethod standardization
dc.titleCost-efficiency assessments of marine monitoring methods lack rigor : a systematic mapping of literature and an end-user view on optimal cost-efficiency analysis
dc.typearticle
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:fi:jyu-202106183856
dc.contributor.laitosBio- ja ympäristötieteiden laitosfi
dc.contributor.laitosDepartment of Biological and Environmental Scienceen
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticle
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bc
dc.description.reviewstatuspeerReviewed
dc.relation.issn0167-6369
dc.relation.numberinseries7
dc.relation.volume193
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion
dc.rights.copyright© The Author(s) 2021
dc.rights.accesslevelopenAccessfi
dc.subject.ysovesiekosysteemit
dc.subject.ysomeret
dc.subject.ysoekologinen tila
dc.subject.ysomonitorointi
dc.subject.ysokustannustehokkuus
dc.subject.ysomittausmenetelmät
dc.format.contentfulltext
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p11000
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p8444
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p21528
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p3628
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p20596
jyx.subject.urihttp://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p20083
dc.rights.urlhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.relation.doi10.1007/s10661-021-09159-y
jyx.fundinginformationOpen access funding provided by Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE). This study is part of BONUS FUMARI project, which receives funds from BONUS (Art. 185). BONUS is jointly funded by the EU, the Academy of Finland, and the Swedish Research Council Formas.
dc.type.okmA2


Aineistoon kuuluvat tiedostot

Thumbnail

Aineisto kuuluu seuraaviin kokoelmiin

Näytä suppeat kuvailutiedot

CC BY 4.0
Ellei muuten mainita, aineiston lisenssi on CC BY 4.0