Practical implementation of cumulative‐effects management of marine ecosystems in western North America

Abstract

Globally, ecosystem structure and function have been degraded by the cumulative effects (CE) of multiple stressors. To maintain ecosystem resilience, there is an urgent need to better account for CE in management decision-making at various scales. Current laws and regulations are supported by a multitude of frameworks and strategies that vary in application and terminology use across management agencies and geopolitical boundaries. We synthesized management frameworks that accounted for CE in marine ecosystems at the regional and national levels across western North America (Canada, United States, Mexico) to identify similarities and shared challenges to successful implementation. We examined examples of solutions to the identified challenges (e.g., interagency and cross-border partnerships to overcome challenges of managing for ecologically relevant spatial scales). Management frameworks in general consisted of 3 phases: scoping and structuring the system; characterizing relationships; and evaluating management options. Challenges in the robust implementation of these phases included lack of interagency coordination, minimal incorporation of diverse perspectives, and data deficiencies. Cases that provided solutions to these challenges encouraged coordination at ecological rather than jurisdictional scales, enhanced involvement of stakeholders and Indigenous groups, and used nontraditional data sources for decision-making. Broader implementation of these approaches, combined with increased interagency and international coordination and collaboration, should facilitate the rapid advancement of more effective CE assessment and ecosystem management in North America and elsewhere.

Toward a conceptual framework for managing and conserving marine habitats: A case study of kelp forests in the Salish Sea

“…The combination of this focus group's conceptual model and the relatively consistent support for these pathways found in the literature review suggests expert perceptions of the system are a good starting point for understanding the dynamics important to informing the decision‐making process for conservation and management of kelp in the Salish Sea. The validation of this conceptual model, in addition to quantifying the strength of directionality in relationships, may provide the foundation for predicting anthropogenic impacts on kelp forests in the Salish Sea using semiquantitative and quantitative modeling techniques that could give further insight into the relative importance of each linkage on kelp forest persistence (Hollarsmith et al, 2021 ). However, further inclusion of regional stakeholders and the general public in participatory processes related to this conceptual model and specific management actions will ensure other nodes of the social–ecological system are accounted for in the decision‐making process (Dietz, 2013 ; Stier et al, 2017 ).…”

“…The validation of this conceptual model, in addition to quantifying the strength of directionality in relationships, may provide the foundation for predicting anthropogenic impacts on kelp forests in the Salish Sea using semiquantitative and quantitative modeling techniques that could give further insight into the relative importance of each linkage on kelp forest persistence (Hollarsmith et al, 2021).…”

“…In the course of the literature review, we identified research gaps and limitations in local data to guide and prioritize future research efforts. The development of these linkages and the information from the literature review could help drive subsequent semiquantitative analyses, such as qualitative network models or Bayesian belief networks, that evaluate how important each direct and indirect linkage is between Drivers, Pressures, and the State of kelp populations (Hollarsmith et al, 2021 ). By combining both expert opinion and a comprehensive and structured literature review, we were able to create a robust analysis to inform management despite local data gaps.…”

Methodological approaches to assess climate vulnerability and cumulative impacts on coastal landscapes

“…We know that CVC is intensified by human pressures and by its exposure to the impacts of climate change (Spalding et al, 2014;Newton et al, 2020) due to human population growth and the increase in economic activities in the coastal areas. For this reason, governments need management decisions or development projects to assess how human activities contribute to Cumulative Environmental Impacts CEI to determine how they interact to affect a species or ecosystem (Hollarsmith et al, 2021).…”

“…At the same time, the cumulative impacts are increasing in number and intensity, mainly due to the growth of the human population and the increase in economic activities in coastal areas. Consequently, governments need management decisions or development projects to evaluate how human activities Contribute to Cumulative Environmental Impacts CAIA to determine how multiple human activities may interact to affect a species or ecosystem (Hollarsmith et al, 2021).…”