A UK perspective on the development of marine ecosystem indicators
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Londinium, England, United KingdomMarine Pollution Bulletin (Impact Factor: 2.99). 02/2005; 50(1):9-19. DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2004.10.028
This paper reviews the suite of marine ecosystem indicators currently in use or under development in the UK to support the major national and international biodiversity and ecosystem policies. Indicators apply to a range of different ecosystem components, and range from those that can only be used for high level environmental health monitoring, to those which actively support management. Assessment of indicators against a management framework of driving force, pressure, state, impact and response, has shown that there are many indicators of state for ecosystem components, but relatively few for pressure of human activities on the environment, or of the socio-economic response to those pressures. This outcome, a result of unplanned sectorally driven indicator development, is not a co-ordinated contribution to marine environmental management and must be addressed if we are to avoid high monitoring costs and duplication of effort.
Full-text previewDOI: · Available from: gulfofmaine.org
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "Each of these initiatives requires developing and adopting objectives and quantitative indicators both as aims for management but also as a means of determining when management has been successful (e.g. Rogers and Greenaway, 2005; Aubry and Elliott, 2006). Hence, these initiatives reflect the objectives created here for habitat restoration (Table 5). "
ABSTRACT: Explains the workings of an estuarine ecosystem, quantifies the human impact on those processes, and proposes ecohydrology solutions. New/Changes to this edition • Each chapter has been updated with the latest scientific knowledge and case studies from the last 8 years since the 1st edition book was published. • Professor Mike Elliott has joined Professor Eric Wolanski as a co-author and helps to expand the ecological and management aspects, thus complementing the hydrophysical and hydroecological aspects. • The chapters on the estuarine ecosystem functioning and on the practical solutions— what works and what does not work in managing and/or restoring estuaries—have been almost totally rewritten. • The book provides several new syntheses, including those on the ecology of muddy estuaries, estuarine fish, habitat creation, eco-engineering and biodiversity offsets, and on the considerations involved in determining the health of the estuary. Estuarine Ecohydrology, Second Edition, provides an ecohydrology viewpoint of an estuary as an ecosystem by focusing on its principal components: the river, the estuarine waters, the sediment, the nutrients, the wetlands, the oceanic influence, and the aquatic food web—as well as models of the health of an estuary ecosystem. Estuaries, the intersection of freshwater and coastal ecosystems, exhibit complex physical and biological processes which must be understood in order to sustain and restore them when necessary. Only after understanding an estuary as an ecosystem can the scientist confidently propose ecohydrology solutions for managing the estuary in an ecologically sustainable manner. This process leads to solutions beyond the purely technical. This book demonstrates how (based on an understanding of the processes controlling estuarine ecosystem health) one can quantify the estuary’s ability to cope with human stresses. The theories, models, and real-world solutions presented will serve as a toolkit for designing a management plan for the ecologically sustainable development of an estuary.
- "Among the decision-making evaluation methods currently[1,2], there were two main kinds of weight confirm methods: the subjective method, the objective weighting method. Familiar ones were the delphi method, AHP method, factor Analysis method, entropy value method, comprehensive index, fuzzy comprehensive index, fuzzy comprehensive evaluation[5,6,7,8,9,10]et al. But there is a big defect that it is hard to get rid of the influence of artificial factors and the randomness of measurement process when using these methods to evaluate, which will lead to the loss of some information and impact the rationality of the evaluation. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "The changes in these conditions usually have environmental and economic impacts on ecosystems such as altered biodiversity or reduced resource availability, and ultimately on social and economic features of the society and human health as well. A set of appropriated societal and policy makers' prioritizations affecting any part of the chain between the drivers and the impacts can reduce undesired impacts (Rogers and Greenaway, 2005; Kristensen, 2004; Gabrielsen and Bosch, 2003). "
ABSTRACT: This paper illustrates an index-based coastal risk assessment that was performed on a micro-tidal alluvial plain taking into account the relative sea level rise (RSLR) for the evaluation of coastal vulnerability and exposure. This process took into account both the inundation of inshore land and the beach retreat due to storm surge, calculated on the basis of geomorphological data (bathymetry, sedimentology and beach width) and wave climate. The evaluation process was conceived with reference to a low and high hazard, associated with a wave storm with 1 year and 50 years return period. For the latter case, the response to RSLR was calculated taking into account both isostatic response and ice cap melting due to global warming, while the vertical land movement was assessed taking into account the different its rates in the northern and southern coastal area. The exposure and the damage of the coastal assets were evaluated with a simplified conceptual framework, which uses land cover data and a statistical population dataset.