How2QnD: Design and Construction of a Game-Style, Environmental Simulation Engine and Interface Using UML, XML, and Java

  • Gregory A. Kiker
  • Rohit Thummalapalli
Part of the Springer Optimization and Its Applications book series (SOIA, volume 25)


Within wicked environmental challenges, problems that exist in the nexus of environmental science and environmental values, neatly and elegantly optimized solutions are difficult to find and rarely accepted by stakeholders. Different role players must explore the challenge adaptively and through viewpoints to contribute to their understanding of the situation and to learn about the dynamics and values of other relevant stakeholders. The Questions and Decisions (QnD) system (Kiker, G.A., et al., Springer Science, 2006, 11, 151–186) was created to provide an effective and efficient tool to integrate ecosystem, management, economics, and sociopolitical factors into a user-friendly game/model framework. QnD is written in object-oriented Java and can be deployed in stand-alone or Web-based (browser-accessed) modes. The QnD model links spatial components within geographic information system (GIS) files to the abiotic (climatic) and biotic interactions that exist in an environmental system. QnD can be used in a rigorous modeling role to mimic system elements obtained from scientific data or it can be used to create a “cartoon” style depiction of the system to promote greater learning and discussion from decision participants. Elephant and vegetation dynamics in Africa provide an excellent example of a wicked environmental challenge as conservation objectives and societal values (both local and international) often have conflicting goals concerning appropriate elephant densities and population control options in protected areas. In attempting to capture many dynamic aspects of elephant–vegetation relationships, previous models depicting the savanna ecosystem of the Kruger National Park (KNP), South Africa, can become quite complex and demanding in terms of detailed parameter inputs. Therefore, the purpose of this modeling project was to create a simplified, management-focused, visual simulation of the KNP in order to chart future elephant, tree, and grass scenarios. QnD:EleSim has been designed to spatially simulate elephant–vegetation dynamics in 195 areas at 10-km resolution at a monthly time-step. As the effects of elephant populations on the tree–grass equilibrium of the savanna are documented, future management decisions can be advised after analysis of potential scenarios.


Geographic Information System Unify Modeling Language Elephant Grass Grass Biomass Kruger National Park 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Special thanks to the following people/organizations that allowed for the development of this model to be made possible: Dr. Judith Kruger, Dr. Rina Grant, and Dr Harry Biggs of the South Africa National Parks for supplying climate, soils, vegetation, animal census, fire, and other KNP data sets. In addition, their guidance and friendship are truly appreciated. The KNP Elephant Modeling Group (chaired by Prof. Robert Slotow and Dr. Robert Scholes) for coordination of elephant modeling research activities. The South African Weather Bureau for provision of climate data. Prof. David Saah of the University of San Francisco for his input and comments. Finally, the University of Florida Center for Precollegiate Education and Training for organizing and supporting this research opportunity for Mr. Thummalapalli.


  1. 1.
    Aldritch, C. (2005). Learning by Doing: A Comprehensive Guide to Simulations, Computer Games, and Pedagogy in e-Learning and Other Educational Experiences. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baxter, P.W.J. (2003). Modeling the Impact of the African Elephant, Loxodonta africana, on Woody Vegetation in Semi-Arid Savannas. PhD Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baxter, P.W.J. & Getz, W.M. (2005). A model-framed evaluation of elephant effects on tree and fire dynamics in African savannas. Ecological Applications 15, 1331–1341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baxter, P.W.J. & Getz, W.M. (2006). Development and parameterization of a rain- and fire-driven model for exploring elephant effects in African savannas. Springer Science 9, 2–23.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Buss, I.O., & Smith, N.S. (1966). Observations on reproduction and feeding behavior of the African elephant. The Journal of Wildlife Management 14, 375–388.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carpenter, S., Brock, W., & Hanson, P. (1999). Ecological and social dynamics in simple models of ecosystem management. Conservation Ecology 3(2), 4 [online].Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Checkland, P.B. (1999) Soft Systems Methodology in Action. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cook, J.G., & Irwin, L.L. (1985). Validation and modification of a habitat suitability model for pronghorns. The Wildlife Society Bulletin 13, 440–448.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cukier, R.I., Levine, H.B., & Schuler, K.E. (1978). Nonlinear sensitivity analysis of multiparameter model systems. Journal of Computational Physics 26, 1–42.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Du Toit, J.T., Rogers, K.H., & Biggs, H.C. (2003). The Kruger Experience: Ecology and Management of Savanna Heterogeneity. Island Press.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dorai-Raj, S. (2000). Java Random Number Generator.˜dsv/compbio/ppstuff/ppinteraction/ [Last Accessed Dec. 4, 2007].
  12. 12.
    Estes, R. (2004). The Safari Companion: A Guide to Watching African Mammals. Chelsea Green Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Holling, C.S., Gunderson, L.H., & Peterson, G. (2002). Sustainability and panarchies. In Gunderson, L.H. and Holling, C.S. (Eds), Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems. Island Press. pp. 63–102.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Holdo, R.M. (2003). Woody plant damage by African elephants in relation to leaf nutrients in western Zimbabwe. Journal of Tropical Ecology 19, 189–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jeppesen, E.I., & Iversen, T.M. (1987). Two simple models for estimating daily mean water temperatures and diel variations in a Danish low gradient stream. Oikos 49, 149–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Justice, L.C., Kiker, G.A., & Kiker, M.K. (2007, in press). Jamaican food security in a dynamic world: collaborative methods to envision food system models. Caribbean Journal of Geography.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kiker, G.A., Rivers-Moore, N.A., Kiker, M.K., & Linkov, I. (2006). QnD: A scenario based gaming system for modeling environmental processes and management decisions. Springer Science 11, 151–186.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kiker, G.A., & Linkov, I. (2006). The QnD model/game system: Integrating questions and decisions for multiple stressors. In Arapis, G., Goncharova, N., & Baveye, P. (Eds), Ecotoxicology, Ecological Risk Assessment and Multiple Stressors. Springer. pp. 203–225.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kiker, G.A., Muñoz-Carpena, R.. Wolski, P., Cathey, A., Gaughn, A., & Kim, J. (2007, in press). Incorporating uncertainty into adaptive, transboundary water challenges: a conceptual design for the Okavango River Basin. International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Koda, M., McRae, G.J., & Seinfeld. J.H. (1979). Automatic sensitivity analysis of kinetic mechanisms. International Journal of Chemical Kinetics 11, 427–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kruger National Park (KNP). (2006). KNP Park Management Plan Version 1 (31 October 2006). [Online: Last accessed Dec 5, 2007].
  22. 22.
    Laursen, L., & Bekoff, M. (1978). Loxodonta Africana. Mammalian Species 92, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Matsumoto, M., & Nishimura, T. (1998). Mersenne twister: A 623-dimensionally equidistributed uniform pseudo-random number generator. ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation 8(1), 3–30.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Morgan, M.G., Fischhoff, B., Bostrom, A., & Atman, C.J. (2002) Risk Communication: A Mental Models Approach. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Morris, M.D. (1991). Factorial sampling plans for preliminary computational experiments. Technometric 33, 161–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    NRC. (1991). Opportunities in the Hydrologic Sciences. National Academy Press, 348 pp.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Papajorgji , P.J., & Pardalos, M. (2005). Software Engineering Techniques Applied to Agricultural Systems: An Object-Oriented and UML Approach. Springer-Verlag. 247 pp.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences 4, 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., Campolongo, F., & Ratto, M. (2004). Sensitivity Analysis in Practice: A Guide to Assessing Scientific Models. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schamberger, M., Farmer, A.H., & Terrel, J.W. (1982). Habitat suitability index models: introduction. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-82/10. 2 pp.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Starfield, A.M., & Bleloch, A.L. (1991). Building Models for Conservation and Wildlife Management. Burgess International Group.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Van der Heijden, K. (1996) The Art of Strategic Conversation. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Walters, C., Korman, J., Stevens, L.E., & Gold, B. (2000). Ecosystem modeling for evaluation of adaptive management policies in the Grand Canyon. Conservation Ecology 4(2), 1 [online].Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wu, J., & David, J.L. (2002). A spatially explicit hierarchical approach to modeling complex ecological systems: theory and applications. Ecological Modelling 153, 7–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wu, J., & Loucks, O.L. (1995). From balance of nature to hierarchical patch dynamics: a paradigm shift in ecology. The Quarterly Review of Biology 70(4), 439–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yoe, C. (2002). Tradeoff Analysis Planning and Procedures Guidebook. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute of Water Resources Report (IWR 02-R-2). Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute of Water Resources by of Planning and Management Consultants, Ltd. Contract # DACW72-00-D-0001.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gregory A. Kiker
    • 1
  • Rohit Thummalapalli
  1. 1.Department of Agricultural and Biological EngineeringUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations