Alicja Najwer | Adam Mickiewicz University (Poznań, Poland) (original) (raw)

Papers by Alicja Najwer

LA. Landform Analysis/Landform Analysis, 2021

Zarys treści: Artykuł przedstawia analizę porównawczą metody przestrzennej analizy wielokryterial... more Zarys treści: Artykuł przedstawia analizę porównawczą metody przestrzennej analizy wielokryterialnej w dwóch technikach do oceny georóżnorodności wybranych parków narodowych reprezentujących zróżnicowane typy krajobrazu Polski: obszar górski, wyżynny i nizinny. Pierwsza technika dotyczy globalnie ważonej kombinacji liniowej (G-WLC), natomiast druga -lokalnie ważonej kombinacji liniowej (L-WLC). Oceny georóżnorodności zlewni elementarnych wykonano w oparciu o siedem komponentów środowiska geograficznego wybranych parków narodowych. Do analizy porównawczej uzyskanych wyników ocen georóżnorodności obydwoma technikami wykorzystano indykator georóżnorodności. W artykule wykazano, że technika globalnie ważonej kombinacji liniowej (G-WLC) jest bardziej czuła na georóżnorodność obszarów jednorodnych środowiskowo, np. wyżynnych i nizinnych, natomiast technika lokalnie ważonej kombinacji liniowej (L-WLC) powinna być przeznaczona do badania obszarów heterogenicznych, bardzo zróżnicowanych, szczególnie hipsometrycznie, np. do obszarów górskich.

EGUGA, May 1, 2014

ABSTRACT The concept of geodiversity was created relatively recently and, therefore, little progr... more ABSTRACT The concept of geodiversity was created relatively recently and, therefore, little progress has been made in its objective assessment and mapping. In order to ensure clarity and coherency, it is recommended that the evaluation process to be rigorous. Multi-criteria evaluation meets these criteria well. The main objective of this presentation is to demonstrate a new methodology for the assessment of the selected natural environment components in response to the definition of geodiversity, as well as visualization of the landforms geodiversity, using the opportunities offered by the geoinformation environment.

EGUGA, Apr 1, 2013

ABSTRACT The concept of geodiversity was created relatively recently and has been accepted by geo... more ABSTRACT The concept of geodiversity was created relatively recently and has been accepted by geomorphologists and geologists worldwide. Nevertheless, despite the widespread use of the term, little progress has been made in its evaluation. Until now, only a few authors have undertaken, directly or indirectly, methodological issues related to the geodiversity estimation. In some studies, geodiversity maps were applied to investigate the spatial or genetic relationships with the richness of particular environmental elements like geosites, geomorphosites, geoarchaeological and palaeontological sites, etc. However, so far, the spatial differentiation of geodiversity values in areas already accepted as large geomorphosites has not been undertaken. This poster presents a new methodology developed to assess the geodiversity in geoinformation environments and tested in two geomorphosites located in the Swiss Alps: Derborence and Illgraben. Derborence is a quite isolated valley, where some big rockslides occurred in the past; the sharp rockslide landforms, high limestone cliffs and a lake dammed by the rockslide deposits attract tourists in summer. A part of the valley is a natural reserve managed by Pronatura (a national environmental association). Illgraben is a steep torrential system on the left bank of the Rhone River valley, characterized by high erosion rates and frequent occurrence of rockfalls and debris flows. The site is the largest active torrential system in Switzerland and is part of a Regional Nature Park. Both geomorphosites are recognized as geosites of national importance. The basis of the assessment is the selection of features of the geographical environment, which on one hand describe landforms, and on the other indicate geomorphometric differences. Firstly, seven factor maps were processed for each area: landform energy derived from a 25-meter digital elevation model, landform fragmentation generated from the Topographic Position Index (TPI), contemporary landform preservation derived from land use classification using high resolution ortho images, geological settings, geomorphological features, soils and hydrology elements. Input maps were then standardized by attributing grid geodiversity values in five classes to each raster map: very low geodiversity, low geodiversity, medium geodiversity, high geodiversity and very high geodiversity. Obtained maps result from map algebra operations carried out by multi criteria evaluation (MCE) with GIS-based Weighted Linear Combination (WLC) technique. The final geodiversity maps for each of the two geomorphosites were then compared with existing tourist trails and panoramic points to verify if there are any dependencies. Geosite inventories are a more or less qualitative selection of sites considered as important by the scientific community for their contribution to Earth history knowledge and more in general for the society. Some geosites, in particular geomorphosites, can be quite large (several sq. km), and sometimes heterogeneous. The proposed methodology, tested on two Swiss geomorphosites, allows the intrinsic geodiversity differentiation of large geosites to be assessed and the results could be used for other purposes such as the preservation of specific features within the geosite perimeter, spatial planning or tourist management.

&lt;p&gt;The term geodiversity was proposed in the 1990s, however there is still ... more &lt;p&gt;The term geodiversity was proposed in the 1990s, however there is still a noticeable lack of established conceptual and methodological framework for geodiversity assessment. In its absence, various geodiversity assessment methods have been proposed. They can be categorized, based on data sources, into direct and indirect, and based on the assessment procedure into qualitative, quantitative, and mixed (qualitative-quantitative). Each of these categories introduces an ambiguity by relying on expert judgment or interpreted geodata rather than on direct measurement. Despite the impressive number of different terrain-specific studies, there has been a conspicuous absence of comparative studies testing the efficacy of geodiversity assessment methods across different types of terrain characterized by differences in morphology, morphogenesis, and relief energy.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Therefore, we have selected three different national parks represent different landscape types: mountains (Karkonosze National Park), uplands (Roztocze National Park), and lowlands (Wolin National Park). Input datasets included 1 m DEM and thematic map layers: lithological, geomorphological, hydrographical and soils features as well as CORINE Land Cover. The presentation reports on geodiversity assessments performed independently by experts and volunteers as crowdsourcing analytical data. A potential strength of the crowdsourcing approach over the expert-based approach is that the former minimizes subjectivism, which is a common critique of expert-based environmental valuation, including the subject of our research - geodiversity assessment. Using the DEM data and r.watershed tool, the 1-order catchments were delineated for the national parks (KNP 212, RNP 403, WNP 289) and used as spatial units for geodiversity assessment. The use of catchments instead of squares, grid cells or arbitrary polygons is a new approach in geodiversity assessments. The expert and volunteer assessment data sets were separately processed with two spatial multicriteria methods: Weighted Linear Combination (WLC) - also referred to as the global version of WLC, and Local Weighted Linear Combination (L-WLC) resulting in two geodiversity maps for each of the parks. More over we used two scenarios. Under the first scenario, called the expert-based scenario, an expert familiar with the study area or a group of experts classifies the individual abiotic components of geodiversity and assigns them weights instrumental for computing a geodiversity score. In the second scenario, called the crowdsource-based scenario, multiple individual ratings concerning the abiotic components of geodiversity and their weights are collected and aggregated to yield a corresponding geodiversity score. The maps were qualitatively evaluated for their efficacy of capturing spatial heterogeneity and differentiating between high and low geodiversity of specific areas within the national parks. The expert-based maps were compared with the volunteer-based maps using statistical measures of association and similarity: Spearman&amp;#8217;s correlation coefficient, the Jaccard similarity index, also known as Tanimoto index, and the relative Manhattan similarity.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The results show that L-WLC is more suitable for geodiversity mapping of mountainous areas characterized by high morphogenetic and morphometric diversity whereas WLC yields better results in less diverse areas such as uplands and lowlands. The use of data originating from volunteer-based assessment requires meeting internal and external data quality standards and should be treated with caution.&lt;/p&gt;

The characteristics of spatial diversity of the annual precipitation distribution in the Stobrawa... more The characteristics of spatial diversity of the annual precipitation distribution in the Stobrawa River basin between 1956 and 1980 is presented in the article. The study was based on average monthly precipitation from 11 precipitation stations located in the research area, as well as from 6 precipitation stations and 1 meteorological station, in Opole, situated outside the basin's boundaries. The yearly progress of monthly precipitation was the subject of the analysis. Maps of its geographical distribution were drawn, which allowed the areas of the highest and the lowest average monthly precipitation to be indicated, as well as to specify the factors that influence this variation. It was also determined what the maximum and minimum amounts of precipitation in the examined period were.

The geodiversity assessment is particularly important in the case of areas belonging to critical ... more The geodiversity assessment is particularly important in the case of areas belonging to critical zones, especially in the mountain regions. Recognizing the parts of a territory that are the most diversified and vulnerable to changes is a crucial issue for management and planning of protected and conserved areas (PCAs). Karkonosze National Park (KNP) located in south-western Poland in the border area between Poland and the Czech Republic was chosen as a research area. KNP covers the northern slopes of the Karkonosze Mountains, the largest range of the Sudetes.The geodiversity assessment based on spatial multicriteria analysis (S-MCA) with crowdsourced data was conducted. The geodiversity of KPN was evaluated with weighted linear combination (WLC) technique basis on selected criteria: 1) lithology, 2) relief energy, 3) geomorphology, 4) land use/land cover, 5) soils, 6) mesoclimate, and 7) hydrography. The assessment input data comprised of seven environmental factor ratings and weights were obtained from 57 Earth science researchers worldwide. These data served as the bases for a joint assessment of geodiversity and then spatially explicit global sensitivity analysis (GSA). The Monte Carlo simulation was used to sweep through criteria weight space, where weights are expressed using probability distributions. Multiple output suitability maps were generated and summarized using: an average suitability map, a standard deviation uncertainty map, and a number of sensitivity maps. The results helped to identify highly geodiverse areas that are burdened by high uncertainty and then to investigate which specific abiotic component contribute to the uncertainty the most. This could be valuable in monitoring and management of PCAs and significantly contribute to improving the existing results of geodiversity assessments and some savings resulting from field work.In the case of the mountainous area - KNP, the geodiversity value is the most sensitive to the lithological and the geomorphological criteria map. None of the weightings proved influential, suggesting a high consensus in weighting the factors among the geo-questionnaire respondents. In the future, it is worth conducting further simulations, considering another S-MCA technique, such as Ordered Weighted Averaging (OWA).

EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts, Apr 1, 2018

Bulletin of the Maritime Institute in Gdańsk, Dec 19, 2018

The Słupsk Bank is a seascape area of high nature value, that consists of boulders related to gla... more The Słupsk Bank is a seascape area of high nature value, that consists of boulders related to glacial and post-glacial formation and a variety of underwater landforms, that form the habitat for numerous plants and animals. The aim of this paper was to evaluate geodiversity using geoinformation analysis consecutive steps, such as preparation of factor maps, map algebra etc. The resulting geodiversity map was based on a bathymetric relief energy map, a geomorphological map based on expert classification using the Bathymetric Position Index (BPI), and a lithological map showing average texture classes of sediments). Maps of geodiversity support the identification and delimitation of the geodiversity hotspots for nature protection, as well as the directions for management of valuable natural areas.

EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts, Apr 1, 2019

International journal of applied earth observation and geoinformation, Mar 1, 2022

Elsevier eBooks, 2018

Abstract The assessment of geodiversity can be made with qualitative, quantitative and qualitativ... more Abstract The assessment of geodiversity can be made with qualitative, quantitative and qualitative–quantitative methods. Qualitative methods have a descriptive character and are suitable for nominal and ordinal data. Quantitative methods are based on a set of parameters and indicators to determine a geodiversity index of a certain area. Qualitative–quantitative methods result in a combination of quantitative (i.e., digital) and cause-effect data (i.e., relational and explanatory). At the current stage of development, qualitative–quantitative methods are the most advanced and the ones offering more reliable results. Their main advantage is the integration of data from different sources and with different content and their wide use within geographic information systems, both at the stage of data collection and data integration, as well as during numerical processing and output presentation. The limitation of these methods is related to difficulties concerning the validation of results. The development of qualitative–quantitative methods associated with cognitive issues should be expected in the near future, oriented towards ontology and the Semantic Web.

Ecological Indicators, 2021

Geodiversity refers to the variety of abiotic elements and processes present at different scales ... more Geodiversity refers to the variety of abiotic elements and processes present at different scales and dimensions in an area. In this study, the combination of geological formations, structural lineaments and dikes, geomorphological compartments, soil classes, relief, hydrographic systems, and climatic aspects is considered as the geodiversity of the Marrecas River drainage basin in the southwestern region of the state of Paraná, southern Brazil. These components were superimposed on a regular 2 × 2 km grid map (1:250,000) and geodiversity indices were applied to quantify and assess the variation of their distribution along the Marrecas River drainage basin. The results indicate a lower geodiversity on some interfluves and in the river estuary area with a homogeneous relief. On the other hand, higher geodiversity rates were detected in several valleys, which contain a greater variation of abiotic elements because they are embedded and dissected. Common diversity indices, which are generally used in biodiversity studies, were used to determine the distribution of the geodiversity richness in the study area, such as: Shannon, Simpson's, E-Pielou, Margalef and Menhinick indices. Similar to the biodiversity, the assessment of the geodiversity should not be restricted to the richness but should also include the spatial distribution of environmental components in the study area according to frequency levels. The results show that geographic objects, which are continuous rather than discrete, are more useful and the absence of standards regarding the assessment of the geodiversity. Continuous data should be preferred as basic data for any area.

The geodiversity assessment is particularly important in the case of areas belon... more The geodiversity assessment is particularly important in the case of areas belonging to critical zones, especially in the mountain regions. Recognizing the parts of a territory that are the most diversified and vulnerable to changes is a crucial issue for management and planning of protected and conserved areas (PCAs). Karkonosze National Park (KNP) located in south-western Poland in the border area between Poland and the Czech Republic was chosen as a research area. KNP covers the northern slopes of the Karkonosze Mountains, the largest range of the Sudetes. The geodiversity assessment based on spatial multicriteria analysis (S-MCA) with crowdsourced data was conducted. The geodiversity of KPN was evaluated with weighted linear combination (WLC) technique basis on selected criteria: 1) lithology, 2) relief energy, 3) geomorphology, 4) land use/land cover, 5) soils, 6) mesoclimate, and 7) hydrography. The assessment input data comprised of seven environmental factor ratings and weights were obtained from 57 Earth science researchers worldwide. These data served as the bases for a joint assessment of geodiversity and then spatially explicit global sensitivity analysis (GSA). The Monte Carlo simulation was used to sweep through criteria weight space, where weights are expressed using probability distributions. Multiple output suitability maps were generated and summarized using: an average suitability map, a standard deviation uncertainty map, and a number of sensitivity maps. The results helped to identify highly geodiverse areas that are burdened by high uncertainty and then to investigate which specific abiotic component contribute to the uncertainty the most. This could be valuable in monitoring and management of PCAs and significantly contribute to improving the existing results of geodiversity assessments and some savings resulting from field work. In the case of the mountainous area - KNP, the geodiversity value is the most sensitive to the lithological and the geomorphological criteria map. None of the weightings proved influential, suggesting a high consensus in weighting the factors among the geo-questionnaire respondents. In the future, it is worth conducting further simulations, considering another S-MCA technique, such as Ordered Weighted Averaging (OWA).

Biuletyn Instytutu Morskiego, 2018

EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts, Apr 1, 2017