The use of ecosystem services information by the U.S. national estuary programs

Martin, Lawrence

doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.05.004

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Understanding the connections between users and habitats can help communities better manage coastal resources and plan for long-term sustainability. For example, it is ideal to consider how EGS may be affected when setting priorities in conservation assessments (Egoh et al, 2007); national programs can also benefit from using information on linkages to help ground conversations on coastal land-use management to uses and values of primary concern to local stakeholders (Martin, 2014); and for considering alternative scenarios and tradeoffs when weighing future options (Daily et al, 2009;Martín-López et al, 2014;Arkema et al, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Linking people to coastal habitats: A meta-analysis of final ecosystem goods and services on the coast

Littles¹,

Jackson

DeWitt

et al. 2018

Ocean & Coastal Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coastal ecosystem goods and services (EGS) have steadily gained traction in the scientific literature over the last few decades, providing a wealth of information about underlying coastal habitat dependencies. This meta-analysis summarizes relationships between coastal habitats and final ecosystem goods and services (FEGS) users. Through a "weight of evidence" approach synthesizing information from published literature, we assessed habitat classes most relevant to coastal users. Approximately 2,800 coastal EGS journal articles were identified by online search engines, of which 16% addressed linkages between specific coastal habitats and FEGS users, and were retained for subsequent analysis. Recreational (83%) and industrial (35%) users were most cited in literature, with experiential-users/hikers and commercial fishermen most prominent in each category, respectively. Recreational users were linked to the widest diversity of coastal habitat subclasses (i.e., 22 of 26). Whereas, mangroves and emergent wetlands were most relevant for property owners. We urge EGS studies to continue surveying local users and identifying habitat dependencies, as these steps are important precursors for developing appropriate coastal FEGS metrics and facilitating local valuation. In addition, understanding how habitats contribute to human well-being may assist communities in prioritizing restoration and evaluating development scenarios in the context of future ecosystem service delivery.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Linking people to coastal habitats: A meta-analysis of final ecosystem goods and services on the coast

Littles¹,

Jackson

DeWitt

et al. 2018

Ocean & Coastal Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the lack of an overarching coastal or marine policy, there is the potential to learn from international experiences (Kidd, 1995;Lonsdale et al, 2015;Martin, 2014;Morris, 2008;Stojanovic & Barker, 2008;Elliott, 2013). These experiences can help to conceptualise a move towards the sustainable management of Irish estuaries and coasts.…”

Section: Shifting Paradigm For Integrated Environmental Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring transition pathways as an alternative approach for the integrated management of Irish estuaries and coasts

Kelly¹,

Ellis²,

Flannery³

2018

Towards Coastal Resilience and Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human reliance on estuarine and coastal resources for a multitude of goods and services is under threat. Due to the impact of anthropogenic activities such as agriculture, urban development, commercial fishing and shipping, these resources are being over-exploited, habitats are being destroyed and important species are being lost (EPA, 2016; Rilo et al., 2013). These adverse effects are evident at global, national and local scales, which makes their management, involving multi-levels of governance, challenging. Existing governance frameworks, where management is fragmented among sectors and institutions, are unable to respond to complex and dynamic ecosystems or build capacity to cope with change (Bigagli, 2015; Boyes & Elliott, 2015; Virapongse et al., 2016). In Ireland, the management of coastal ecosystems is largely carried out in a fragmented, sectoral and uncoordinated manner. There is no overarching national coastal or marine policy and there is no single body with overall responsibility for Irish estuaries and coasts. A more holistic approach is required to deal with the multi-uses, multi-users, multi-scales and multi-effects of estuarine and coastal ecosystems. The aim of this chapter is to propose an approach for the integrated and sustainable management of estuaries and coasts in Ireland. To do this, it first explores the need for sustainable management, particularly in relation to fragmented governance. Sustainable approaches are analysed and include normative approaches based on the concept of integration.

show abstract

“…Federal estuary management programs have successfully used ecosystem services concepts to frame management issues and communicate with stakeholders [9,10]. A few programs have leveraged monetary valuation studies to calculate the dollar value of the estuary to the local economy and market improvements to stakeholders.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A few programs have leveraged monetary valuation studies to calculate the dollar value of the estuary to the local economy and market improvements to stakeholders. However, widespread implementation of ecosystem services assessments in estuary management has been limited due to concerns of being too technical and nuanced to convey to stakeholders, or requiring funding and expertise to implement beyond commonly-valued resources such as fisheries [9,10]. As a result, estuary management criteria are still often limited to a narrow set of indirect proxies for ecosystem services, such as seagrass cover or water quality [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, widespread implementation of ecosystem services assessments in estuary management has been limited due to concerns of being too technical and nuanced to convey to stakeholders, or requiring funding and expertise to implement beyond commonly-valued resources such as fisheries [9,10]. As a result, estuary management criteria are still often limited to a narrow set of indirect proxies for ecosystem services, such as seagrass cover or water quality [9]. An analysis of just how common ecosystem services concepts are in estuarine management plans, including what stakeholders are likely to benefit or be impacted by decisions, can lay the groundwork for ecosystem services assessments by demonstrating the breadth of ecosystem services that can be considered, linking ecosystem services explicitly to different stakeholder groups, and expanding the perception of available assessment techniques.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Who Benefits from National Estuaries? Applying the FEGS Classification System to Identify Ecosystem Services and their Beneficiaries

Yee

Sullivan

Williams

et al. 2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In spite of their perceived value, the widespread implementation of ecosystem services assessments has been limited because of perceptions of being too technical, too expensive, or requiring special expertise. For example, federal estuary management programs have widely used ecosystem services concepts to frame management issues and communicate with stakeholders. Yet, indicators assessed, monitored, and reported in estuarine management still have traditionally focused on ecological conditions, with weak connections, if any, to social or economic outcomes. Approaches are needed which expand the range of ecosystem services that can be considered, link ecosystem services explicitly to different stakeholder groups, facilitate effective communication with economists and other social scientists, and expand the array of available valuation techniques. We applied the concept of final ecosystem goods and services to review the broad suite of ecosystem services and their beneficiaries relevant to the management of two federal programs for estuary management, the National Estuary Program (NEP) and the National Estuarine Research Reserve System (NERRS). The Final Ecosystem Goods and Services Classification System provided a structured framework for connecting ecosystem services to their beneficiaries and the environments providing them. Document analysis of management plans assessed the degree to which these programs consider ecosystem services, their beneficiaries, and habitats within the estuarine watershed. The hierarchical list of final ecosystem goods and services generated from document analysis serves as a tool for defining management goals, identifying stakeholders, developing meaningful indicators, and conducting valuation studies in estuarine management planning efforts. Though developed here for estuarine management, the keyword hierarchy and final ecosystem goods and services approach have broad applicability and transferability to other environmental management scenarios.

show abstract

The use of ecosystem services information by the U.S. national estuary programs

Cited by 9 publications

References 22 publications

Linking people to coastal habitats: A meta-analysis of final ecosystem goods and services on the coast

Linking people to coastal habitats: A meta-analysis of final ecosystem goods and services on the coast

Exploring transition pathways as an alternative approach for the integrated management of Irish estuaries and coasts

Who Benefits from National Estuaries? Applying the FEGS Classification System to Identify Ecosystem Services and their Beneficiaries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About