Ref ID. | Parent Document | |
Data Management Planning Overview | ||
1 | USEPA 2006 |
|
Data Governance | ||
3 | DAMA 2017 |
DAMA International. 2017a. DAMA-DMBOK: Data Management Book of Knowledge, 2nd ed. The Data Management Association. New Jersey: Technics Publications, LLC. |
4 | Eryurek et al. 2021 |
Eryurek, E., U. Gilad, V. Lakshmanan, A. Kibunguchy-Grant, and J. Ashdown. 2021. Data Governance: The Definitive Guide. California: O’Reilly Media. |
Data Lifecycle | ||
5 | Faundeen et al. 2013 |
Faundeen, J.L., T. E. Burley, J.A. Carlino, D.L. Govoni, H.S. Henkel, S.L. Holl, V.B. Hutchison, E. Martín, E.T. Montgomery, C.C. Ladino, S. Tessler, and L.S. Zolly. 2013. The United States Geological Survey Science Data Lifecycle Model: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2013–1265, http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20131265 |
6 | USEPA 2018 |
USEPA. 2018. Best Practices for Data Management Technical Guide. November. https://semspub.epa.gov/work/HQ/100001798.pdf |
Data Access, Sharing, and Security | ||
8 | CDC 2018 |
Centers for Disease Control (CDC). 2018. “Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.” September 14. https://www.cdc.gov/phlp/publications/topic/hipaa.html#:~:text=The%20Health%20Insurance%20Portability%20and,the%20patient’s%20consent%20or%20knowledge |
9 | DAMA 2016 |
DAMA International. 2016. The DAMA Dictionary of Data Management, 2nd ed. The Data Management Association. New Jersey: Technics Publications, LLC. |
10 | DHS 2021 |
DHS. 2021. “What is Personally Identifiable Information?” U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Last modified December 8, 2021. https://www.dhs.gov/privacy-training/what-personally-identifiable-information |
11 | IBM 2021 |
IBM. 2021. “What is data security?” https://www.ibm.com/topics/data-security |
12 | Steneck 2007 |
Steneck, Nicolas H. 2007. Introduction to the Responsible Conduct of Research. Office of Research Integrity, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://ori.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/2018-04/rcrintro.pdf |
13 | USEPA 2021 |
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2021. Information Security Policy. |
14 | USGS Undated |
United States Geological Survey (USGS). Undated. “Data Management: Backup & Secure.” Accessed May 2022. https://www.usgs.gov/products/data-and-tools/data-management/backup-secure |
Data Storage, Documentation, and Discovery | ||
DAMA 2017 | Reference ID 3 | |
15 | FGDC Undated |
FGDC. Undated. “Geospatial Metadata Standards and Guidelines.” Federal Geographic Data Committee. https://www.fgdc.gov/metadata/geospatial-metadata-standards |
16 | NISO 2008 |
NISO. 2008. “Metadata.” National Information Standard Organization (NISO). http://framework.niso.org/24.html |
17 | Open Data DC 2021 |
Open Data DC. 2021. “Metadata Submission Guide.” City of Washington, DC. https://opendata.dc.gov/documents/DCGIS::metadata-submission-guide/about |
18 | OGC Undated |
Open Geospatial Consortium. Undated. OGC Standards Open Geospatial Consortium. https://www.ogc.org/docs/is |
19 | USEPA 2022 |
USEPA. 2022. “USEPA Data Standards.” United States Environmental Protection Agency. https://www.epa.gov/data-standards. Last accessed 8/26/22. |
20 | USGS Undated |
USGS. Undated. “Data Dictionaries.” United States Geological Survey. https://www.usgs.gov/data-management/data-dictionaries. Last accessed 8/26/22. |
21 | USGS 2021 |
USGS. 2021. “USGS Metadata Creation.” United States Geological Survey. Updated 6/21/21. https://www.usgs.gov/data-management/metadata-creation |
TEK Case Study: Improving Coastal Resilience in Point Hope, Alaska | ||
22 | EA 2021 |
EA. 2021. Community Involvement Plan: Identifying Priority Restoration Sites for Resilience. Point Hope, Alaska. EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc., PBC (EA), Anchorage, AK. June 2021. |
23 | Lane 2021 |
Lane, Russel. 2021. Point Hope resident and village services supervisor. Informal discussion. July. |
24 | Oomittuk 2021 |
Oomittuk, Steve. 2021. Native Village of Point Hope President. Formal interview. July. |
25 | North Slope Borough 2017 |
North Slope Borough. 2017. Point Hope Comprehensive Plan 2017–2037. May. https://www.north-slope.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/PHO_Adopted_Comprehensive_Plan.pdf. |
26 | O’Neill 1994 |
O’Neill, Dan. 1994. The Firecracker Boys. New York: St. Martin’s Press. |
27 | Whiting 2022 |
Whiting, Alex. 2022. Appendix 1: Native Village of Kotzebue Research Protocol. In: Native Village of Kotzebue Environmental Program 1997-2022. Kotzebue IRA. |
TEK Case Study: Use of TEK to Support Revegetation at a Former Legacy Uranium Mill Site, Saskatchewan, Canada | ||
28 | Saskatchewan Energy and Resources Undated |
Saskatchewan Energy and Resources. Undated. Government of Saskatchewan Archives. |
29 | Saskatchewan Research Council Undated |
Saskatchewan Research Council. Undated. Saskatchewan Research Council Archives. |
30 | Woodland Aerial Photography Undated. |
Woodland Aerial Photography. Undated. Ownership Saskatchewan Research Council. Woodland Aerial Photography & Doug Chisholm. http://woodlandaerialphoto.com/aboutus.htm |
LEK Case Study: Local Ecological Knowledge of Historic Anthrax in a Natural Gas Field | ||
32 | Skirrow 2019 |
Skirrow, Sue. 2019. “Anthrax.” Government of Western Australia, Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development. April 12, 2019. https://www.agric.wa.gov.au/livestock-biosecurity/anthrax. |
33 | USDA-FSA 2021 |
USDA-FSA. 2021. Disaster Assistance: Livestock Indemnity Program Fact Sheet. United States Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency. April 2021. https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Assets/USDA-FSA-Public/usdafiles/FactSheets/livestock_indemnity_program_lip-fact_sheet.pdf. |
34 | US Energy Information Administration 2015 |
US Energy Information Administration. 2015. Top 100 U.S. Oil and Gas Fields. U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. March 2015. https://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/crudeoilreserves/top100/pdf/top100.pdf. |
TEK Case Study: Rest in Peace? | ||
35 | Ford 2016 |
Ford, Emily. 2016. The Year in Cemetery Vandalism: 2016. December. http://www.oakandlaurel.com/blog/the-year-in-cemetery-vandalism-2016#_ftn1 |
TEK Case Study: Integration of Traditional Ecological Knowledge to the Remediation of Abandoned Uranium Sites | ||
36 | CanNorth 2011 |
CanNorth. 2011. Country Foods Study, Uranium City, Saskatchewan Year 1–and Former Eldorado Beaverlodge Properties. Canada North Environmental Services Limited Partnership. February 2011. |
37 | CanNorth 2012 (NOTE: Also, referenced as “CanNorth 2011 and 2012)” |
CanNorth. 2012. Uranium City Country Foods Study Year 2. Canada North Environmental Services Limited Partnership. June 2012. |
38 | PAGC 2022 |
PAGC. 2022. “Welcome to the Prince Albert Grand Council Website!” Prince Albert Grand Council. Last modified February 11, 2022. https://www.pagc.sk.ca/. |
39 | PAGC 2011 |
PAGC. 2011. Gunnar Mine and Lorado Mill Sites Remediation: Traditional and Local Knowledge Contributions to the Environmental Impacts Assessment. Prince Albert Grand Council. January 18, 2011. |
40 | SENES 2015 |
SENES. 2015. 2014 Uranium City Consultation on Land Use. SENES Consultants and Kingsmere Resources Services. January 2015. |
41 | SRC 2008 (Also SRC 2008 in figure reference) |
SRC. 2008. SRC Geospatial Geodatabase. Saskatchewan Research Council. June 2008. |
42 | SRC 2021 (Also SRC 2021 in figure reference) |
SRC. 2021. SRC Geospatial Geodatabase. Saskatchewan Research Council. June 2021. |
43 | YNEC 2017 |
YNEC. 2017. Fond du Lac Denesuline First Nation Public Consultation on Land Use. Yutthe Nene Engineering Consultants Inc. April 2017. |
LEK Case Study: Collection and Application of Local Knowledge to Local Environmental Management in Duluth, Minnesota USEPA Office of Research and Development Great Lakes Toxicology and Ecology Division | ||
44 | City of Duluth 2021 |
City of Duluth. 2021. “St. Louis River Corridor.” City of Duluth, Minnesota. Accessed August 27, 2022. https://duluthmn.gov/parks/parks-planning/st-louis-river-corridor/. |
45 | City of Duluth and Barr Engineering 2019 |
City of Duluth and Barr Engineering. 2019. Mud Lake Causeway Alternatives Analysis. May 1, 2019. https://duluthmn.gov/media/7954/may-1-2019-mud-lake-final-causeway-alternatives-report.pdf. |
46 | USEPA 2019 |
USEPA. 2019. Mud Lake Future Alternatives Community Values and Health Impact Analysis. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. EPA/600/F19/054. https://duluthmn.gov/media/8009/mudlakecommvaluestechmemo-final.pdf. |
47 | USEPA 2021 |
USEPA. 2021. Kingsbury Bay-Grassy Point Habitat Restoration: A Health Impact Assessment. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. EPA/600/R-21/130. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2021-09/kingsbury-bay-grassy-point-hia-report.pdf. |
Historical Data Migration Case Study: Filling Minnesota’s Superfund Groundwater Data Accessibility Gap | ||
48 | MPCA Undated |
MPCA. Undated. “Minnesota Groundwater Contamination Atlas.” Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Accessed August 26, 2022. https://www.pca.state.mn.us/data/minnesota-groundwater-contamination-atlas. |
49 | MGS Undated |
MGS. Undated. “County Well Index.” Minnesota Geological Survey. Accessed August 26, 2022. https://cse.umn.edu/mgs/cwi. |
Case Study: USGS Challenges with Secondary Use of Multi-source Water Quality Monitoring Data | ||
50 | Sprague, Oelsner, Argue 2017 |
Sprague, Lori A., Gretchen P. Oelsner, and Denise M. Argue. 2017. “Challenges with Secondary Use of Multi-source Water-Quality Data in the United States.” Water Research 110 (March 2017): 252-261. doi:10.1016/j.watres.2016.12.024. |
51 | Neumiller and Shumway 2017 |
Neumiller, Christine, and Laura Shumway. 2017. “Nutrient Data Management Best Practices.” Presented at the International Conference on Data Management. May 10-11, 2017. http://www.icedm.net/previous-conference-agendas. |
52 | USEPA 2017 |
USEPA. 2017. Best Practices for Submitting Nutrient Data to the Water Quality eXchange (WQX). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. June 2, 2017. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2017-06/documents/wqx_nutrient_best_practices_guide.pdf. |
Valid Values | ||
53 | ICEDM 2017 |
ICEDM. 2017. “Valid Values Best Management Practices in an Environmental Data Management System.” International Conference on Environmental Data Management. http://www.icedm.net/s/ICEDM-Valid-Values-BMP-Final-7jnk.pdf |
54 | USEPA 2022 |
USEPA. 2022. “Substance Registry Services.” US Environmental Protection Agency. https://sor.epa.gov/sor_internet/registry/substreg/LandingPage.do. Last accessed 8/27/22. |
Electronic Data Deliverables and Data Exchange | ||
55 | ICEDM 2017 |
ICEDM. 2017. “Minimum Requirements for a Global Standardized EDD Structure for Environmental Laboratory Data.” International Conference Environmental Data Management. http://www.icedm.net/s/ICEDM-Analytical-EDD-Requirements-Final.pdf |
ICEDM 2017 | Reference ID 53 | |
Data Migration Best Practices | ||
56 | ICEDM 2017 |
ICEDM. 2017. “Environmental Data Quality Audit: Foundation and Framework.” International Conference on Environmental Data Management. http://www.icedm.net/s/ICEDM-Historical-Data-Migration-Audit-Final.pdf |
Data Quality Overview | ||
57 | DAMA UK Working Group 2013 |
DAMA UK Working Group. 2013. The Six Primary Dimensions for Data Quality Assessment: Defining Data Quality Dimensions. DAMA United Kingdom, Bristol, UK. October 2013. |
58 | Bansal 2021 |
Bansal, M. 2021. “Flying Blind: How Bad Data Undermines Business.” Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2021/10/14/flying-blind-how-bad-data-undermines-business/?sh=1677b02729e8. October 14, 2021. |
USEPA 2006 |
Reference ID 1 |
|
Using Data Quality Dimensions to Assess and Manage Data Quality | ||
USEPA 2006 |
Reference ID 1 | |
Analytical Data Quality Review: Verification, Validation, and Usability | ||
59 | DOD, 2019 |
DOD. 2019. General Data Validation Guidelines. US Department of Defense. November 2019. |
60 | USEPA, 2002 |
USEPA. 2002. Guidance on Environmental Data Verification and Data Validation. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D.C. November 2002. |
61 | USEPA, 2009 |
USEPA. 2009. Guidance for Labeling Externally Validated Laboratory Analytical Data for Superfund Use. US Environmental Protection Agency. January 2009. |
62 | USEPA, 2011 |
USEPA. 2011. Data Quality Screening Using Trend Charts. US Environmental Protection Agency Quality Assurance Office Region 9, San Francisco, CA. October 2011. |
63 | USEPA, 2020 |
USEPA. 2020. National Functional Guidelines for Organic Superfund Methods Data Review. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D.C. November 2020. |
Environmental Data Management Systems | ||
64 | Broman and Woo 2018 (Also, “Broman and Woo (2018)) |
Broman, Karl W., and Kara H. Woo. 2018. “Data Organization in Spreadsheets.” The American Statistician 72 (1): 2-10. |
65 | Dunn 2010 (Also, “Dunn (2010)) |
Dunn, Angus. 2010. “Spreadsheets—The Good, the Bad, and the Downright Ugly.” In Proceedings of the EuSpRIG 2015 Conference, Practical Steps to Protect Organizations from Out-of-Control Spreadsheets.” European Spreadsheet Risks Interest Group. |
66 | Panko 2005 |
Panko, Raymond R. 2005. “What We Know About Spreadsheet Errors.” Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, Special Issue on Scaling Up End User Development, 10(2):15-21. DOI: 10.4018/joeuc.1998040102 |
67 | Powell, Baker, and Lawson 2009 |
Powell, S.G., K.R. Baker, and B. Lawson. 2009. “Errors in Operational Spreadsheets.” J. Org. and End User Computing 21(3):24-36. |
68 | USEPA 2014 |
USEPA. 2014. Sampling and Analysis Plan—Guidance and Template v.4—General Projects—04/2014. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. https://www.epa.gov/quality/sampling-and-analysis-plan-guidance-and-template-v4-general-projects-042014 |
Overview of Best Practices for Management of Environmental Geospatial Data | ||
69 | Federal Geographic Data Committee, Undated. |
Federal Geographic Data Committee. Undated. Lexicon of Geospatial Terminology. Federal Geographic Data Committee, Reston, VA. https://www.fgdc.gov/policyandplanning/a-16/lexicon-of-geospatial-terminology |
Organization Standards for Geospatial Environmental Data Management | ||
70 | FGDC 2020 |
FGDC. 2020. “National Spatial Data Infrastructure Strategic Plan 2021–2024.” Federal Geographic Data Committee. Reston, VA. https://www.fgdc.gov/nsdi-plan/nsdi-strategic-plan-2021-2024.pdf. |
71 | ISO 2021 |
ISO. 2021. ISO—Standards. International Standards Organization. Geneva, Switzerland. https://www.iso.org/standards.html. |
72 | Lewin 2021 (Also “Lewin [2021]”) |
Lewin, Matthew. 2021. “How to Review a Geospatial Strategy.” ESRI. Accessed December 10, 2021. https://www.esri.com/about/newsroom/arcuser/how-to-review-a-geospatial-strategy/ |
Geospatial Data Collection Consistency | ||
73 | EBJ 2020 |
EBJ. 2020. Digitalization & Data Management in the Environmental Industry in the 2020s. Environmental Business Journal 33, no. 9 & 10. https://ebionline.org/product/digitalization-data-management/ |
74 | FedStats Undated. |
FedStats. Undated. “Latitude and Longitude.” Accessed August 26, 2022. https://web.archive.org/web/20140813074310/http://www.fedstats.gov/kids/mapstats/concepts_latlg.html. |
75 | Kerski and Clark 2012 |
Kerski, Joseph J., and Jill Clark. 2012. The GIS Guide to Public Domain Data. Redlands, CA: Esri Press. |
76 | GISGeography 2021 |
GISGeography. 2021. “GPS Accuracy: HDOP, PDOP, GDOP, Multipath & the Atmosphere.” Modified May 30, 2022. https://gisgeography.com/gps-accuracy-hdop-pdop-gdop-multipath/ |
77 | Maher 2020 |
Maher, Richard. 2020. “Datum Epochs, And How to Understand Them.” April 6. Accessed November 12, 2021. https://www.xyht.com/surveying/links-need-seeing-to-datum-epochs-and-how-to-understand-them/ |
78 | Gakstatter, 2013 |
Gakstatter, Eric. 2013. “Part 2: Nightmare on GIS Street – Accuracy, Datums, and Geospatial Data.” Modified May 23, 2013. https://geospatial-solutions.com/part-2-nightmare-on-gis-street-accuracy-datums-and-geospatial-data/. |
79 | U.S. Space Force 2022 |
U.S. Space Force. 2022. “GPS Accuracy.” Modified March 3,2022. https://www.gps.gov/systems/gps/performance/accuracy/#how-accurate |
Geospatial Data Standards | ||
80 | Breunig et al. 2020 |
Breunig, Martin, Patrick E. Bradley, Markus Jahn, Paul Kuper, Nima Mazroob, Norbert Rösch, Mulhim Al-Doori, Emmanuel Stefanakis, and Mojgan Jadidi. 2020. “Geospatial Data Management Research: Progress and Future Directions.” ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information 9, no. 2: 95. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9020095 |
81 | Evans et al. 2020 |
Evans, Ben, Kelsey Druken, Jingbo Wang, Rui Yang, Clare Richards, and Lesley Wyborn. 2017. “A Data Quality Strategy to Enable FAIR, Programmatic Access across Large, Diverse Data Collections for High Performance Data Analysis.” Informatics 4, no. 4: 45. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics4040045 |
82 | USEPA 2003 |
USEPA. 2003. Guidelines for Creating a Geospatial Quality Assurance Project Plan: EPA QA/G-5G. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, D.C. March 2003. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-06/documents/g5g-final.pdf. |
Geospatial Data: GIS Hardware | ||
83 | ESRI Undated |
ESRI. Undated. “Components of ArcGIS for Server.” Accessed August 26, 2022. https://enterprise.arcgis.com/en/server/10.3/get-started/linux/components-of-arcgis-for-server.htm |
84 | USGS Undated |
USGS. Undated. “What is a geographic information system (GIS)?” Accessed August 26, 2022. https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-a-geographic-information-system-gis?qt-news_science_products=0#qt-news_science_products |
Geospatial Metadata | ||
EBJ 2020 | Reference ID 73 | |
85 | GISGeography 2022 |
GISGeography. 2022. “What is Metadata? (Hint: It’s All About the Data).” Modified June 4, 2022. https://gisgeography.com/gis-metadata/. |
Geospatial Data Software | ||
86 | Huisman and de By, 2009 |
Huisman, Otto, and Rolf A. de By. 2009. Principles of Geographic Information Systems, 4th ed. Enshede, The Netherlands: The International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation (ITC). |
Geospatial Data Dissemination: Web Format | ||
87 | Fu and Sun, 2011 Also “Fu and Sun (2011)” |
Fu, Pinde, and Jiulin Sun. 2011. Web GIS—Principles and Applications. Redlands, CA: Esri Press. |
88 | Tomlinson 2003 |
Tomlinson, Roger. 2003. GIS—Thinking about Geographic Information System Planning for Managers. Redlands, CA: Esri Press. |
Geospatial Visualization of Environmental Data | ||
89 | Field 2018 |
Field, Kenneth. 2018. Cartography. Redlands, CA: Esri Press |
90 | Balley et. al. 2014 Also “Balley et. al. (2014)” |
Balley, Sandrine, Blanca Baella, Sidonie Christophe, Maria Pla, Nicolas Regnauld and Jantien Stoter. 2014. “Chapter 2, Map Specifications and User Requirements.” In Abstracting Geographic Information in a Data-Rich World, Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography, edited by Dirk Burghardt, Cécile Duchêne, and William Mackaness. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-00203-3_2 |
Public Communication and Stakeholder Engagement | ||
94 | Corner, Shaw, and Clarke 2018 |
Corner, Adam, Chris Shaw, and Jamie Clarke. 2018. “Principles for Effective Communication and Public Engagement on Climate Change: A Handbook for IPCC Authors.” Oxford: Climate Outreach. January 2018. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2017/08/Climate-Outreach-IPCC-communications-handbook.pdf |
EA 2021 | Reference ID 22 | |
95 | GO FAIR 2021 |
GO FAIR. 2021. FAIR Principles. https://www.go-fair.org/fair-principles/. Last accessed September 15, 2021. |
99 | Jarreau et al. 2017 |
Jarreau, Paige Brown, Zeynep Altinay, and Reynolds, Amy. 2017. Best Practices in Environmental Communication: A Case Study of Louisiana’s Coastal Crisis. Environmental Communication 11:2, 143-165. DOI: 10.1080/17524032.2015.1094103 |
103 | Wilkinson et al. 2016 |
Wilkinson, Mark D., Michel Dumontier, IJsbrand Jan Aalbersberg, Gabrielle Appleton, Myles Axton, Arie Baak, Niklas Blomberg, Jan-Willem Boiten, Luiz Bonino da Silva Santos, Philip E. Bourne, Jildau Bouwman, Anthony J. Brookes, Tim Clark, Mercè Crosas, Ingrid Dillo, Olivier Dumon, Scott Edmunds, Chris T. Evelo, Richard Finkers, Alejandra Gonzalez-Beltran, Alasdair J.G. Gray, Paul Groth, Carole Goble, Jeffrey S. Grethe, Jaap Heringa, Peter A.C ’t Hoen, Rob Hooft, Tobias Kuhn, Ruben Kok, Joost Kok, Scott J. Lusher, Maryann E. Martone, Albert Mons, Abel L. Packer, Bengt Persson, Philippe Rocca-Serra, Marco Roos, Rene van Schaik, Susanna-Assunta Sansone, Erik Schultes, Thierry Sengstag, Ted Slater, George Strawn, Morris A. Swertz, Mark Thompson, Johan van der Lei, Erik van Mulligen, Jan Velterop, Andra Waagmeester, Peter Wittenburg, Katherine Wolstencroft, Jun Zhao and Barend Mons. 2016. “The FAIR Guiding Principles for Scientific Data Management and Stewardship.” Scientific Data 3: 160018. doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.18 |
105 | Zong et al. 2022 |
Zong, Jonathan, Crystal Lee, Alan Lundgard, JiWoong Jang, Daniel Hajas, and Arvind Satyanarayan. 2022. “Rich Screen Reader Experiences for Accessible Data Visualization.” MIT Visualization Group. Eurographics Conference on Visualization (EuroVis) 2022. 41:3. http://vis.csail.mit.edu/pubs/rich-screen-reader-vis-experiences/ |
What is TEK? | ||
106 | Miraglia 1998 |
Miraglia, Rita A. 1998. Traditional Ecological Knowledge Handbook: A Training Manual and Reference Guide for Designing, Conducting, and Participating in Research Projects Using Traditional Ecological Knowledge. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage, AK. http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/techpap/rp97052b.pdf. |
107 | NRCS Undated |
NRCS. Undated. Traditional Ecological Knowledge: An Important Facet of Natural Resources Conservation. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Baton Rouge, LA. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1045244.pdf. |
108 | NYSDEC 2020 |
NYSDEC. 2020. New York State Forest Action Plan. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, NY. December 2020. https://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/lands_forests_pdf/nysfap.pdf. |
109 | U.S. FWS 2011 |
U.S. FWS. 2011. Traditional Ecological Knowledge for Application by Service Scientists, Fish & Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. February 2011. https://www.fws.gov/nativeamerican/pdf/tek-fact-sheet.pdf. |
110 | U.S. NPS 2020 |
U.S. NPS. 2020. “Overview of TEK.” National Park Service, U.S. Department of Interior. Modified August 5, 2020. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/tek/description.htm. |
Acquiring Traditional Ecological Knowledge Data | ||
111 | Anderson 2010 |
Anderson, Jane. 2010. Indigenous/Traditional Knowledge and Intellectual Property. Center for the Study of the Public Domain, Duke University School of Law, Durham, NC. https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/pdf/ip_indigenous-traditionalknowledge.pdf. |
112 | U.S. NPS 2018 |
U.S. NPS. 2018. “Protection of TEK.” National Park Service, U.S. Department of Interior. Modified February 23, 2018. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/tek/protection.htm#. |
113 | WIPO Undated |
WIPO. Undated. Traditional Knowledge and Intellectual Property—Background Brief. World Intellectual Property Organization. Accessed April 8, 2022. https://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/briefs/tk_ip.html |
Using and Consuming Traditional Ecological Knowledge Data | ||
114 | USACE 2015 |
USACE. 2015. Colonie Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) Site Record of Decision, Colonie Site Main Site Soils. United States Army Corps of Engineers, New York District Office. |
Managing Traditional Ecological Knowledge Data | ||
115 | Cresswell 2004 |
Cresswell, Tim. 2004. Place: A Short Introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. |
7 | Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa 2018 |
Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa. 2018. Expanding the Narrative of Tribal Health: The Effects of Wild Rice Water Quality Rule Changes on Tribal Health. Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Resource Management Division, Cloquet, MN. http://www.fdlrez.com/rm/downloads/WQSHIA.pdf. |
31 | Tuan 1975 |
Tuan, Yi-Fu. 1975. “Place: An Experiential Perspective.” The Geographical Review LXV (2): 151-165. |
2 | Williams et al. 2018 |
Williams, Kathleen, David Bolgrien, Joel Hoffman, Ted Angradi, Jessica Carlson, Rosita Clarke, Adam Fulton, Heidi Timm-Bijold, Molly MacGregor, Anett Trebitz, and Salaam Witherspoon. 2018. How the Community Value of Ecosystem Goods and Services Empowers Communities to Impact the Outcomes of Remediation, Restoration, and Revitalization Projects. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Center for Environmental Assessment, Duluth, MN. EPA/600/R-17/292. |