ABSTRACT
In this chapter we are going to discuss areas of impact assessment representing in some respects the end of the spectrum opposite to those discussed in the last chapter, being areas where the presence of simulation modelling is virtually non-existent. To focus our discussion we have chosen the areas of terrestrial ecology (a heavily researched scientific area) and landscape, a more subjective area of impact assessment. The reasons for the absence of simulation modelling are very different for each of the two areas, but they have in common the fact that the logic of the thinking process is more dominated by the substantive content of their disciplines than by the logic of applying particular rules and simulation models of one level of sophistication or another, as was the case with the areas of impact discussed in the previous chapter. In addition, even if both areas conform in general terms to the stages and general sequencing sketched out before (baseline, prediction, assessment, mitigation), they each adopt very different approaches.
