Integrated cross-realm planning: A decision-makers' perspective

Álvarez‐Romero, Jorge G.; Adams, Vanessa M.; Pressey, Robert L.; Douglas, Michael M.; Dale, Allan; Augé, Amélie A.; Ball, Derek; Childs, John; Digby, Michael; Dobbs, R. J.; Gobius, Niilo; Hinchley, David; Lancaster, Ian; Maughan, Mirjam; Perdrisat, Ian

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2015.07.003

Cited by 40 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some of these tools are quantitative and pre-packaged for widespread use, but still require some local data inputs, such as the Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs model (Nelson et al, 2009). As mentioned previously, other qualitative tools have been developed to explore management options for "cross-system" threats such as humancaused terrestrial runoff to the coastal oceans (Álvarez-Romero et al, 2011(Álvarez-Romero et al, , 2015. To our knowledge, this decision tree is the first tool to provide guidance on whether or not to consider land-sea planning at all.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Riverine transport is the primary mechanism for direct impacts of terrestrial human activities on the nearshore marine environment (Alongi, 1998;Rabouille et al, 2001;Halpern et al, 2015). The negative effects of excess nutrients and sediments transported by rivers to coastal oceans have been well-described worldwide (Smith et al, 1999;Rabalais et al, 2002;Fabricius, 2005) and are perceived as a major concern by conservation practitioners and resource managers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pressures on marine ecosystems that originate on land are uniquely difficult to address, because they require cooperation across agencies, industries, and communities that often do not work together or even communicate (Álvarez-Romero et al, 2015). Integrating land-sea connections into natural resource management is complex and time-intensive Makino et al, 2013) and may not be feasible in all settings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Where Does River Runoff Matter for Coastal Marine Conservation?

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Excess sediment and nutrient runoff from land-based human activities are considered serious threats to coastal and marine ecosystems by most conservation practitioners, resource managers, fishers, and other "downstream" resource users. Deleterious consequences of coastal runoff, including eutrophication and hypoxia, have been observed worldwide. Literature on integrated coastal management offers numerous methods to address land-based activities that generate runoff, but many of these approaches are time-and resource-intensive. Often, high-level conservation managers have few tools to aid in decisions about whether land-based threats that generate runoff are of sufficient concern to warrant further investment in planning and management interventions. To address this decision-making process, we present a decision tree that uses geophysical and ecological characteristics to sort any marine coastal ecosystem into a category of high, moderate, low, or minimal risk from the land-based threats of nutrient and sediment runoff. By identifying situations where runoff could influence biodiversity or ecosystem services, the decision tree assists managers in making informed, and standardized decisions about when and where to invest further efforts in integrated land-sea planning. We ground-truth the decision tree by evaluating it in five very different regions and conclude the tree classifies regions similarly to the existing literature that is available, but based on less information. Recognizing that the decision tree only encompasses environmental variables, we also discuss approaches for interpreting the decision tree's outputs in local social and economic contexts. The tree provides a tool for conservation managers to decide whether the scope of their work should include land-sea planning.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Where Does River Runoff Matter for Coastal Marine Conservation?

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Conservation planning for connected ecosystems at the land-sea interface is inherently difficult because planning requires linking processes for land-use change, run-off, dispersal of pollutants in the ocean and the impacts of pollutants on marine habitats (Álvarez-Romero et al 2015a). This study linked ridge to reef processes to develop an approach for making decisions on the conservation of coral reef and seagrass ecosystems potentially threatened by expansion of oil palm plantations in a data poor region.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite this, the potential impact of runoff from oil palm on these ecosystems is rarely, if ever, explicitly considered during planning processes. Ignoring cross-system interactions at the land-sea interface can hinder effective conservation decisions, and may result in suboptimal or perverse outcomes (Álvarez-Romero et al 2015a). Although guidelines for sustainable oil palm certification have been developed (OPIC, see http://www.rspo.org), the extent these guidelines mitigate the risks to marine biodiversity from increased runoff associated with new plantations is unknown, as cross-system impacts are not explicitly considered in the criteria for sustainability assessment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing direct and indirect threats to marine ecosystems to balance multiple objectives

Tulloch¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human activities affecting the environment are intensifying. In marine ecosystems, direct stressors of overfishing and habitat destruction have led to biodiversity declines, prompting calls for conservation action and more sustainable resource management. Managing stressors becomes more challenging when stressors interact, or are indirect, whereby the source of the threatening activity is displaced from impacts, such as the localised effects of global warming, or runoff from land-use change degrading coral reefs. Effective management requires improved understanding of ecosystem responses to multiple stressors and consideration of interactions between stressors and species.Opposing objectives and outcomes of marine conservation (i.e. reducing stressors) versus resource management (often increasing stressors) compromise effective decision-making. Approaches are needed that include ecological and socio-economic information to promote long-term sustainability of extractive uses, protect functioning ecosystems, and conserve biodiversity. The choice of tool used to inform ecosystem management is typically constrained by management goals and available resources -spatial planning is typically used for conservation, whereas resource management relies more on population modelling.The goal of this thesis is to harness spatial and population modelling techniques to combine resource management with biodiversity conservation and link direct and indirect stressors to marine biodiversity persistence. Chapter 1 provides the context for the thesis, where I explore these themes and outline differences in decision-making for conservation versus extraction. In Chapter 2, I explore how agencies have managed stressors to date, and show that a decision-theoretic approach known as "structured decision-making" (SDM) is a more logical and effective way of managing stressors than traditional approaches that map threats. SDM requires clear objectives, canvassing of alternative management options, and linking outcomes for biodiversity to the effectiveness of each management option. SDM ensures that conservation actions occur where they are the most cost-efficient or effective. I apply recommendations from Chapter 2 in two case studies for managing multiple stressors to marine ecosystems: 1) spatial planning for oil palm agriculture and coral reef fisheries in Papua New Guinea (Chapters 3 and 4), and 2) managing whale species affected by harvesting, climate change and krill population dynamics in the Southern Hemisphere (Chapters 5 and 6).In Chapter 3 I combine ecosystem models and threat maps with spatial conservation planning to predict responses of coral and seagrass ecosystems to changing land uses. My novel framework identifies high priority areas for marine reserves whilst accounting for indirect impacts of land use change such as oil palm development and uncertainty in future stressor intensities. I demonstrate ii how we can reduce adverse impacts of oil palm expansion and make more effective whole-ofsystem decisions for coasta...

show abstract

Combining eight research areas to foster the uptake of ecosystem‐based management in fresh waters

Langhans

Domisch

Balbi

et al. 2019

Aquatic Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Freshwater ecosystems are under a constant risk of being irreversibly damaged by human pressures that threaten their biodiversity, the sustainability of ecosystem services (ESs), and human well‐being. Despite the implementation of various environmental regulations, the challenges of safeguarding freshwater assets have so far not been tackled successfully. A promising way forward to stop the loss of freshwater biodiversity and to sustain freshwater‐based ESs is by implementing ecosystem‐based management (EBM), an environmental planning and adaptive management approach that jointly considers social and ecological needs. Responsible for considerable recent success in sustainably managing and conserving marine ecosystems, EBM has not yet been championed for fresh waters. A major reason for the delayed uptake of EBM in fresh waters is likely to be its complexity, requiring planners to be familiar with the latest developments in a range of different research areas. EBM would therefore benefit from becoming more tangible to receive attention on the ground. To facilitate uptake, eight core research areas for EBM and their innovations are introduced, and the way in which they feed into the workflow that guides the EBM planning stage is explained. The workflow links biodiversity distributions with ES supply‐and‐demand modelling and SMART (specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and timely) target planning, including scenario‐ and cross‐realm perspectives, the prioritization of management alternatives, spatial prioritization of biodiversity conservation and ES areas, and the quantification of uncertainties. Given the extensive resources, time, and technical capacity required to implement the full workflow, a light and an ultralight version of the workflow are also provided. Applied in concert, the eight well‐known research areas allow for better planning and operationalizing, and eventually for implementing EBM in freshwater ecosystems. EBM has great potential to increase public acceptance by introducing the consideration of human needs and aspirations into typically biodiversity‐driven conservation and management approaches. This will ultimately improve the integrity of freshwater ecosystems.

show abstract

Integrated cross-realm planning: A decision-makers' perspective

Cited by 40 publications

References 61 publications

Where Does River Runoff Matter for Coastal Marine Conservation?

Where Does River Runoff Matter for Coastal Marine Conservation?

Managing direct and indirect threats to marine ecosystems to balance multiple objectives

Combining eight research areas to foster the uptake of ecosystem‐based management in fresh waters

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About