Advancing general ecosystem models ( <scp>GEMs</scp> ): Towards a mechanistic understanding of the biosphere in the light of the Anthropocene

Abstract General ecosystem models (GEMs) are process‐based simulations of ecosystems functioning worldwide. They represent all essential processes in an ecosystem, going beyond a focus on specific biomes or organismal groups. GEMs are a comparably young development, and currently, there is still only one GEM available: the Madingley model, which was first announced in 2013. GEMs allow studying ecosystem mechanisms that are difficult or impossible to investigate empirically, and to perform simulation experiments to assess impacts of human pressures on ecosystems. As such, GEMs can be seen as the nature equivalent to ‘climate models'. As managers and policymakers urgently need good information on nature values and human impacts on them for policy design and decision‐making, they have much to gain from GEMs, which allow understanding current and predicting future outcomes of human actions on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. To increase the applicability of GEMs for informing management and policy, we argue for an acceleration and diversification in model development, and we suggest a range of developments to propel GEMs forward not only towards both improved global representativeness but also towards applicability for more landscape‐level problems, a scale at which actual decision‐making often takes place. In addition, we argue for more accessible implementations and better documentation to increase both the transparency and credibility of GEMs, as well as the user basis applying GEMs. Practical implication . While some modelling developments target the global level, others are computationally only feasible for landscape‐level applications. We suggest that the development of GEMs should follow design principles employed in climate science and be structured so that they are modular and compatible in a standardized workflow.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Ecological Solutions and Evidence
Published
2025-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/2688-8319.70053
Primary Topic
Land Use and Ecosystem Services
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Advancing general ecosystem models ( GEMs ): Towards a mechanistic understanding of the biosphere in the light of the Anthropocene

Florian Härtig, Jesamine Bartlett, Marlee A. Tucker, Joachim Töpper et al.
Ecological Solutions and Evidence
Land Use and Ecosystem Services
article

Advancing general ecosystem models ( GEMs ): Towards a mechanistic understanding of the biosphere in the light of the Anthropocene

Florian Härtig, Jesamine Bartlett, Marlee A. Tucker, Joachim Töpper, Anders Lorentzen Kolstad, Kim Magnus Bærum, Joseph Chipperfield, Selwyn Hoeks, Michael Harfoot, Mark A. J. Huijbregts, Jens‐Christian Svenning
article en

Abstract

Abstract General ecosystem models (GEMs) are process‐based simulations of ecosystems functioning worldwide. They represent all essential processes in an ecosystem, going beyond a focus on specific biomes or organismal groups. GEMs are a comparably young development, and currently, there is still only one GEM available: the Madingley model, which was first announced in 2013. GEMs allow studying ecosystem mechanisms that are difficult or impossible to investigate empirically, and to perform simulation experiments to assess impacts of human pressures on ecosystems. As such, GEMs can be seen as the nature equivalent to ‘climate models'. As managers and policymakers urgently need good information on nature values and human impacts on them for policy design and decision‐making, they have much to gain from GEMs, which allow understanding current and predicting future outcomes of human actions on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. To increase the applicability of GEMs for informing management and policy, we argue for an acceleration and diversification in model development, and we suggest a range of developments to propel GEMs forward not only towards both improved global representativeness but also towards applicability for more landscape‐level problems, a scale at which actual decision‐making often takes place. In addition, we argue for more accessible implementations and better documentation to increase both the transparency and credibility of GEMs, as well as the user basis applying GEMs. Practical implication . While some modelling developments target the global level, others are computationally only feasible for landscape‐level applications. We suggest that the development of GEMs should follow design principles employed in climate science and be structured so that they are modular and compatible in a standardized workflow.

Ecological Solutions and EvidenceVol. 6(2)
Radboud University Nijmegen (NL), Aarhus University (DK), Radboud University Medical Center (NL), Radboud Institute for Molecular Life Sciences (NL), Vizzuality (Spain) (ES), Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NO), Equinor (Norway) (NO), University of Regensburg (DE)
Danmarks Grundforskningsfond, Norges Forskningsråd
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 86%
Land Use and Ecosystem Services
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.