DOCSLIB.ORG

ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT AN]) Appropriathd CARRYING CAPACITY: a TOOL for PLANNING TOWARD SUSTAINABILITY

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT AN]) Appropriathd CARRYING CAPACITY: a TOOL for PLANNING TOWARD SUSTAINABILITY ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT AN]) APPROPRIAThD CARRYING CAPACITY: A TOOL FOR PLANNING TOWARD SUSTAINABILITY by MATHIS WACKERNAGEL Dip!. Ing., The Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, ZUrich, 1988 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (School of Community and Regional Planning) We accept this thesis as conforming to the r ired standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA October 1994 © Mathis Wackernagel, 1994 advanced In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an Library shall make it degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the that permission for extensive freely available for reference and study. I further agree copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. (Signature) ejb’i’t/ Pios-ii’ii &toof of C iwivry Gf (i l r€dva k hi di’e The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Date O 6) ) DE-6 (2/88) ABSThACT There is mounting evidence that the ecosystems of Earth cannot sustain current levels of economic activity, let alone increased levels. Since some consume Earth’s resources at a rate that will leave little for future generations, while others still live in debilitating poverty, the UN’s World Commission on Environment and Economic Development has called for development that is sustainable. The purpose of this thesis is to further develop and test a planning tool that can assist in translating the concern about the sustainability crisis into public action. The research advances the concept of “Ecological Footprint” or “Appropriated Carrying Capacity” (EF/ACC) as a planning tool for conceptualizing and developing sustainability. To meet this purpose, I document the development of the EF/ACC concept, explore its potential use in public decision- making towards sustainability, apply the concept in a real world context, and finally, empirically analyze its usefulness to actors in the public domain. The research shows that the EF/ACC concept can link global social and ecological concerns to individual and institutional decision-making. Though the tool needs further refinement to make it readily applicable to the planning practitioners’ everyday decisions, it has proved useful as a conceptual tool for framing the sustainabiity challenges. More than 20 EF/ACC applications, by others and by me, range from environmental outdoor education for children to policy and project assessments for municipalities and regions. With these examples, EF/ACC has contributed to translating sustainability into concrete terms and to providing direction for planning toward sustainability. II TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ii Table of Contents iii List of Tables vii List of Figures viii Acknowledgement . ix INTRODUCTION A. The Challenge 1 B. The Purpose of this Thesis Research 4 C. Structure of the Thesis’ Presentation 6 D. Scope of the Thesis 7 E. Significance of the Thesis 9 II. THE SUSTAINABILITY CRISIS: EXPLORING ITS FACETS AND LINKING ITS THEMES 10 A. Why Worry? Examining the Sustainabiity Crisis 11 1. The ecological crisis 13 2. The socioeconomic crisis 21 3. The political crisis 23 4. The epistemological crisis 28 5. The psychological crisis 38 B. Making the Connections: The Common Theme of the Sustainability Crisis 42 C. Reacting to the Crisis: Exploring the Necessary Conditions for Sustainability 50 1. The ecological bottom-line for sustainabiity: a case for strong sustainability 52 2. The socioeconomic conditions for sustainability . 55 3. The political conditions for sustainability 57 4. The epistemological conditions for sustainability . * 57 5. The psychological conditions for sustainability . 58 D. Developing Sustainability: The Need for Planning Tools that Can Translate Sustainability Concerns into Effective Action 60 111 III. ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT OR APPROPRIATED CARRYING CAPACITY: DEVELOPING A TOOL FOR PLANNING TOWARD SUSTAINABILITY .. 62 A. The Conceptual Foundation of EF/ACC 62 1. Assessing natural capital 62 2. Defining EF/ACC 67 3. EF/ACC and its conceptual ancestors 69 4. EF/ACC and its conceptual siblings 71 B. The Five Rationales for EF/ACC 78 1. Ecological rationale 78 2. Socioeconomic rationale 84 3. Political rationale 88 4. Epistemological rationale 91 5. Psychological rationale 95 IV. DEVELOPING A CALCULATION PROCEDURE FOR ASSESSING EF/ACC OF AN ECONOMY 97 A. Establishing an Operational EF/ACC Definition 97 B. Outlining the Calculation Procedure 100 1. The land-use of consumption 100 2. Consumption categories 101 3. Land and land-use categories 102 4. The matrix 111 C. Adopting the Calculation Procedure to Specific Applications . 114 V. ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF PEOPLE, THEIR CONSUMPTION AN]) THEIR TECHNOLOGY: EF/ACC APPLICATIONS 117 A. The Appropriated Carrying Capacity of an Average Canadian . 117 1. The purpose of this calculation . 117 2. The calculation procedure 118 3. Examples of translating consumption into land-use 120 4. Results and comparisons 122 5. The precision of EF/ACC estimate 126 B. Other EF/ACC Applications 127 1. Technology assessment 128 2. Local and regional decision-making 129 3. National and international decision-making 132 4. Social equity 134 5. Social behaviour and public education 136 iv VI. EXPLORING EF/ACC’S USEFULNESS FOR PLANNING TOWARD SUSTAINABILITY 139 A. Measuring “Usefulness” 139 1. Choosing interviewing as the research method . 139 2. Establishing two scales 141 3. Identifying potential barriers to the EFIACC tool 143 4. Selecting key informants 146 5. Developing an interview questionnaire 150 6. The process of the questionnaire-based interview research 155 7. Limitations of this interview research 156 B. Documenting the Interview Results 159 1. The key informants’ understanding of sustainability 160 2. The key informants’ support for the EF/ACC concept 165 C. Analyzing the Interview Results 175 1. Evaluating EF/ACC’s usefulness 176 2. Evaluating the interview process as an EF/ACC application 188 VII. CONCLUSION 193 A. Conclusion with Respect to the Research Objectives 193 B. Suggested Areas for Further Research 199 1. Tool improvements: including all competing uses of nature 200 2. Local applications: analyzing the impact of settlement patterns and consumption 201 3. Larger scale applications: analyzing the impact of regional and national policies 203 4. Communication: making the tool and its ideas more accessible 206 5. Behavioral analyses: exploring the social psychology of the sustainability crisis 207 C. Implications of the EF/ACC Tool for Planning 208 1. Creating public awareness 209 2. Planning for sustainable national and international development 213 3. Planning sustainable communities 216 BIBLIOGRAPHY 219 V . APPENDICES 246 Appendix 1: Land Area Equivalent for Fossil Fuel: Three Calculation Approaches 247 Appendix 1.1: Energy-Land Equivalence Ratio Based on Ethanol Production 248 Appendix 1.2: Energy-Land Equivalence Ratio Based on CO2 Absorption 252 Appendix 1.3: Energy-Land Equivalence Ratio Based on Creating Renewable Substitutes 255 Appendix 2: Background Data for the Land-use Consumption Matrix 257 Appendix 2.1: Data for Calculating the Average Canadian Footprint 258 Appendix 2.2: Supplementary Tables on Food Consumption and Energy 292 Appendix 2.3: Data References (for Data in Appendix 2) 303 Appendix 2.4: Abbreviations and Units 307 Appendix 3: Interview Research 308 Appendix 3.1: Summary of Draft Handbook Reviews 309 Appendix 3.2: List of the Interviewed Key Informants 310 Appendix 3.3: The Questionnaire 311 Appendix 3.4: Excerpts from the Answers of the Key Informants . 325 vi 101 LIST OF TABLES Table 4.1 The five main consumption categories Table 4.2 The eight main land and land-use categories 103 Table 5.1 The consumption land-use matrix 123 Table 6.1 Scales for sustainability perspectives and EF/ACC support 142 Table 6.2 Structure of the interviews 152 Table A1.1 Comparing results of various ethanol productivity studies 251 Table A1.2 CO2 sequestering by forest ecosystems 253 Table A2. 1 General data 292 Table A2.2 Canadian crop production and consumption 295 Table A2.3 Canadian animal products and their consumption 297 Table A2.4 Food supply and caloric value for an average Canadian 298 Table A2.5 Embodied energy in various materials 299 Table A2.6 Consumption energy conversion 300 Table A2.7 Specific energy content 301 Table A2.8 Approximate conversion ratios for biomass productivity 302 vi’ LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 Three spheres of health 51 Figure 6.1 Distribution of key informants according to their sustainability understanding and support for the EF/ACC tool 177 Figure 7.1 David Pearce’s “policy wedge” to decouple consumption from resource throughput 205 viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Studying in Vancouver at the School of Community and Regional Planning was a rich and enjoyable experience. I felt fortunate about being surrounded by nature’s beauty and, even more, about being embedded in a community of caring and supportive friends. Especially grateful am I to my academic friends and mentors, first and foremost my supervisor and “Doktorvater Bill Rees, but also the other committee members Peter Boothroyd, Tom Hutton and Bob Woollard. In addition, I was generously supported by the UBC Task Force on Healthy and Sustainable Communities, particularly by its coordinator Janette McIntosh as well as by the other members of the Task Force composed of my committee (but Tom), Larry Green, Clyde Hertzman, Judy Lynam, and Sharon Manson-Singer who all stimulated and encouraged my research. Also many people in the Vancouver area who I met through my work with the Task Force or who I interviewed for my research provided me with many insights and much inspiration. Further I would like to thank my other friends from Community Alternatives, from the School of Community and Regional Planning and the Centre for Human Settlements, from International House, and the friends who I have met through them.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Biocultural Indicators to Support Locally Led Environmental Management and Monitoring
    Copyright © 2019 by the author(s). Published here under license by the Resilience Alliance. DeRoy, B. C., C. T. Darimont, and C. N. Service. 2019. Biocultural indicators to support locally led environmental management and monitoring. Ecology and Society 24(4):21. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-11120-240421 Synthesis Biocultural indicators to support locally led environmental management and monitoring Bryant C. DeRoy 1,2, Chris T. Darimont 1,2 and Christina N. Service 1,2,3 ABSTRACT. Environmental management (EM) requires indicators to inform objectives and monitor the impacts or efficacy of management practices. One common approach uses “functional ecological” indicators, which are typically species whose presence or abundance are tied to functional ecological processes, such as nutrient productivity and availability, trophic interactions, and habitat connectivity. In contrast, and used for millennia by Indigenous peoples, biocultural indicators are rooted in local values and place- based relationships between nature and people. In many landscapes today where Indigenous peoples are reasserting sovereignty and governance authority over natural resources, the functional ecological approach to indicator development does not capture fundamental values and ties to the natural world that have supported social-ecological systems over the long term. Accordingly, we argue that the development and use of biocultural indicators to shape, monitor, and evaluate the success of EM projects will be critical to achieving ecological and social sustainability today. We have provided a framework composed of criteria to be considered when selecting and applying meaningful and efficacious biocultural indicators among the diverse array of potential species and values. We used a case study from a region now referred to as coastal British Columbia, Canada, to show how the suggested application of functional ecological indicators by the provincial government created barriers to the development of meaningful cogovernance.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ecological Footprint Emerged As a Response to the Challenge of Sustainable Development, Which Aims at Securing Everybody's Well-Being Within Planetary Constraints
    16 Ecological Footprint accounts The Ecological Footprint emerged as a response to the challenge of sustainable development, which aims at securing everybody's well-being within planetary constraints. It sharpens sustainable development efforts by offering a metric for this challenge’s core condition: keeping the human metabolism within the means of what the planet can renew. Therefore, Ecological Footprint accounting seeks to answer one particular question: How much of the biosphere’s (or any region’s) regenerative capacity does any human activity demand? The condition of keeping humanity’s material demands within the amount the planet can renew is a minimum requirement for sustainability. While human demands can exceed what the planet renew s for some time, exceeding it leads inevitably to (unsustainable) depletion of nature’s stocks. Such depletion can only be maintained temporarily. In this chapter we outline the underlying principles that are the foundation of Ecological Footprint accounting. 16 Ecological Footprint accounts Runninghead Right-hand pages: 16 Ecological Footprint accounts Runninghead Left-hand pages: Mathis Wackernagel et al. 16 Ecological Footprint accounts Principles 1 Mathis Wackernagel, Alessandro Galli, Laurel Hanscom, David Lin, Laetitia Mailhes, and Tony Drummond 1. Introduction – addressing all demands on nature, from carbon emissions to food and fibres Through the Paris Climate Agreement, nearly 200 countries agreed to keep global temperature rise to less than 2°C above the pre-industrial level. This goal implies ending fossil fuel use globally well before 2050 ( Anderson, 2015 ; Figueres et al., 2017 ; Rockström et al., 2017 ). The term “net carbon” in the agreement further suggests humanity needs far more than just a transition to clean energy; managing land to support many competing needs also will be crucial.
    [Show full text]
  • Ascendency As Ecological Indicator for Environmental Quality Assessment at the Ecosystem Level: a Case Study
    Hydrobiologia (2006) 555:19–30 Ó Springer 2006 H. Queiroga, M.R. Cunha, A. Cunha, M.H. Moreira, V. Quintino, A.M. Rodrigues, J. Seroˆ dio & R.M. Warwick (eds), Marine Biodiversity: Patterns and Processes, Assessment, Threats, Management and Conservation DOI 10.1007/s10750-005-1102-8 Ascendency as ecological indicator for environmental quality assessment at the ecosystem level: a case study J. Patrı´ cio1,*, R. Ulanowicz2, M. A. Pardal1 & J. C. Marques1 1IMAR- Institute of Marine Research, Department of Zoology, Faculty of Sciences and Technology, University of Coimbra, 3004-517, Coimbra, Portugal 2Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, University of Maryland, Solomons, Maryland, 20688-0038, USA (*Author for correspondence: E-mail: [email protected]) Key words: network analysis, ascendency, eutrophication, estuary Abstract Previous studies have shown that when an ecosystem consists of many interacting components it becomes impossible to understand how it functions by focussing only on individual relationships. Alternatively, one can attempt to quantify system behaviour as a whole by developing ecological indicators that combine numerous environmental factors into a single value. One such holistic measure, called the system ‘ascen- dency’, arises from the analysis of networks of trophic exchanges. It deals with the joint quantification of overall system activity with the organisation of the component processes and can be used specifically to identify the occurrence of eutrophication. System ascendency analyses were applied to data over a gradient of eutrophication in a well documented small temperate intertidal estuary. Three areas were compared along the gradient, respectively, non eutrophic, intermediate eutrophic, and strongly eutrophic. Values of other measures related to the ascendency, such as the total system throughput, development capacity, and average mutual information, as well as the ascendency itself, were clearly higher in the non-eutrophic area.
    [Show full text]
  • (2017). Making the Sustainable Development Goals Consistent With
    PERSPECTIVE published: 11 July 2017 doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2017.00018 Making the Sustainable Development Goals Consistent with Sustainability Mathis Wackernagel*, Laurel Hanscom and David Lin Global Footprint Network, Oakland, CA, United States The UN’s Sustainable development Goals (SDGs) are the most significant global effort so far to advance global sustainable development. Bertelsmann Stiftung and the sustainable development solutions network released an SDG index to assess countries’ average perfor- mance on SDGs. Ranking high on the SDG index strongly correlates with high per person demand on nature (or “Footprints”), and low ranking with low Footprints, making evident that the SDGs as expressed today vastly underperform on sustainability. Such underperformance is anti-poor because lowest-income people exposed to resource insecurity will lack the Edited by: financial means to shield themselves from the consequences. Given the significance of the Federico Maria Pulselli, University of Siena, Italy SDGs for guiding development, rigorous accounting is essential for making them consistent Reviewed by: with the goals of sustainable development: thriving within the means of planet Earth. Fabrizio Saladini, University of Siena, Italy Keywords: sustainable development goals, SDG index, Ecological Footprint, biocapacity, sustainability, resource Siamak Sam Loni, accounting, resource security, poverty eradication Monash Sustainable Development Institute (MSDI), Australia *Correspondence: INTRODUCTION: SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS Mathis Wackernagel
    [Show full text]
  • About This File
    AUTHORS Bruce G. Marcot is the regional wildlife ecologist in the Ecological Framework for Management Research, Development, and Application Program, Pacific Northwest Research Station, U.S. Department of Agri- culture, Forest Service in Portland, Oregon. Michael J. Wisdom is the technology transfer scientist at the Starkey Experimental Forest, Pacific Northwest Research Station, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service in La Grande, Oregon. Hiram W. LI is a professor in the Department of Fish and Wildlife at Oregon State University in Corvallis, Oregon. Gonzalo C. Castillo is a graduate student at Oregon State University in Corvallis, Oregon. Managing for Featured, Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species and Unique Habitats for Ecosystem Sustainability Bruce G. Marcot, Michael J. Wisdom, Hiram W. Li, and Gonzalo C. Castillo From Volume III: Assessment Paul F. Hessburg, Science Team Leader and Technical Editor Eastside Forest Ecosystem Health Assessment Richard L. Everett, Assessment Team Leader Published by: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station General Technical Report PNW-GTR-329 February 1994 In cooperation with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Pacific Northwest Region ABSTRACT Marcot, Bruce G.; Wisdom, Michael J.; Li, Hiram W.; Castillo, Gonzalo C. 1994. Managing for fea- tured, threatened, endangered, and sensitive species and unique habitats for ecosystem sustainability. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-329. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 39 p. (Everett, Richard L., assessment team leader; Eastside forest ecosystem health assessment; Hessburg, Paul F., science team leader and tech. ed., Volume III: assessment.) The traditional approach to wildlife management has focused on single species—historically game species and more recently threatened and endangered species.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenges in the Development and Use of Ecological Indicators Virginia H
    Ecological Indicators 1 (2001) 3–10 Challenges in the development and use of ecological indicators Virginia H. Dale a,∗, Suzanne C. Beyeler b,1 a Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6036, USA b Institute of Environmental Sciences, Miami University, Oxford, OH 45058, USA Accepted 7 March 2001 Abstract Ecological indicators can be used to assess the condition of the environment, to provide an early warning signal of changes in the environment, or to diagnose the cause of an environmental problem. Ideally the suite of indicators should represent key information about structure, function, and composition of the ecological system. Three concerns hamper the use of ecological indicators as a resource management tool. (1) Monitoring programs often depend on a small number of indicators and fail to consider the full complexity of the ecological system. (2) Choice of ecological indicators is confounded in management programs that have vague long-term goals and objectives. (3) Management and monitoring programs often lack scientific rigor because of their failure to use a defined protocol for identifying ecological indicators. Thus, ecological indicators need to capture the complexities of the ecosystem yet remain simple enough to be easily and routinely monitored. Ecological indicators should meet the following criteria: be easily measured, be sensitive to stresses on the system, respond to stress in a predictable manner, be anticipatory, predict changes that can be averted by management actions, be integrative, have a known response to disturbances, anthropogenic stresses, and changes over time, and have low variability in response. The challenge is to derive a manageable set of indicators that together meet these criteria.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of the Applicability of a Marine Biotic Index to Characterize the Status of Estuarine Ecosystems: the Case of Mondego Estuary (Portugal) F
    Ecological Indicators 4 (2004) 215–225 Evaluation of the applicability of a marine biotic index to characterize the status of estuarine ecosystems: the case of Mondego estuary (Portugal) F. Salas a,∗, J.M. Neto a, A. Borja b, J.C. Marques a a Institute of Marine Research (IMAR), c/o Department of Zoology, University of Coimbra, 3004-517 Coimbra, Portugal b AZTI, Departamento de Oceanograf´ıa y Medio Ambiente Marino, Herrera Kaia, Portualdea s/n, 20110 Pasaia (Gipuzkoa), Spain Accepted 2 April 2004 Abstract The need for new tools to assess the environmental status of coastal and estuarine systems encouraged Borja et al. [Mar. Pollut. Bull. 40 (2000) 1100] to develop a new index, the AZTI’s Marine Biotic Index (AMBI), which needs to be tested as much as possible in different geographical areas to assess its applicability. This index was applied in the Mondego estuary (western coast of Portugal) together with the Shannon–Wiener, Margalef, Simpson, and W-statistic indices, which are widely used in detecting the effects of marine pollution. Results show that, in some cases, the AMBI provides a more accurate assessment of environmental conditions than the other indices, which were influenced by the dominance of certain species, allowing us to consider it as a promising tool to characterize marine and estuarine environmental quality. © 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Benthos; Environmental quality; Estuaries; Marine biotic index; Soft-bottom; Water Framework Directive 1. Introduction natural and man-induced changes to the environment, integrating long-term environmental conditions. There is an increasing need for techniques capable For the development of the AMBI, the soft-bottom of evaluating changes in the coastal and estuarine en- macrofauna is divided into five groups according to vironments.
    [Show full text]
  • Amphibians As Ecological Indicators
    Amphibians as Ecological Indicators As our environment rapidly changes from various threats, we are left to wonder exactly what the implications and effects of these impacts are. A clue to examine these impacts, or even monitor restoration efforts, can be considered with the use of an ecological indicator. An ecological indicator can be defined by the EPA as, “A measure, an index of measures, or a model that characterizes an ecosystem or one of its critical components.” With this perspective, ecological indicators can be used to assess environmental conditions and trends over time. Amphibians have often been thought to serve as a particularly desirable indicator species. They utilize both aquatic and terrestrial habitats, as dictated through their biphasic life cycle, and their skin is permeable. For these reasons, they are considered to be more sensitive (in both habitats) to environmental changes and stressors than other species (Blaustein et al. 1994). In addition, many species can usually be found in abundance and monitoring efforts are considered effective. Most amphibians are very predictable as far as their reproductive queues. Observing changes in the behavior of amphibians can indicate potential environmental contaminants or pollution sites (Hammer et al. 2004). Abundance and populations of species can illustrate the overall health of the ecosystem and habitat quality. For example, if a significant increase in population is noted, one indication may be for very favorable conditions in the environment with this species; often more precedent than even vegetative responses. A program hoping to utilize an example such as the previous scenario is the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Project (CERP).
    [Show full text]
  • Measuring Ecological Complexity
    Ecological Indicators 10 (2010) 1069–1076 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Ecological Indicators journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolind Review Measuring ecological complexity Lael Parrott ∗ Complex Systems Laboratory, Département de géographie, Université de Montréal, C.P. 6128 succursale “centre-ville”, Montréal, Québec, Canada H3C 3J7 article info abstract Article history: Complexity is an elusive term in ecology that is often used in different ways to describe the state of an Received 8 October 2009 ecosystem. Ecological complexity has been linked to concepts such as ecological integrity, diversity and Received in revised form 3 February 2010 resilience and has been put forth as a candidate ecological orientor. In this article, the concept of complex- Accepted 26 March 2010 ity as a system attribute is presented and candidate measures of ecological complexity are reviewed. The measures are distinguished by their ability to characterize the spatial, temporal, structural or spatiotem- Keywords: poral signatures of an ecosystem. Many of these measures have been adapted from disciplines such as Ecological complexity physics and information theory that have a long history of quantifying complexity, however more work Complex systems Ecological orientors needs to be done to develop techniques adapted to ecological data. It is argued that if appropriate mea- Entropy sures are developed and validated for ecosystems, ecological complexity could become a key ecological indicator. © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Contents
    [Show full text]
  • A PROPOSED FRAMEWORK for IDENTIFYING and EVALUATING ECOSYSTEM SERVICE TRADEOFFS for MARINE PROTECTED AREA PLANNING Michael Harte
    IIFET 2010 Montpellier Proceedings A PROPOSED FRAMEWORK FOR IDENTIFYING AND EVALUATING ECOSYSTEM SERVICE TRADEOFFS FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREA PLANNING Michael Harte, Oregon State University, [email protected] Randall Rosenberger, Oregon State University, [email protected] Gil Sylvia, Oregon State University, [email protected] Selina Heppell, Oregon State University, [email protected] ABSRACT Existing research on the effectiveness of marine protected areas narrowly focuses on developing sets of management indicators tied to outcomes described in management plans or on the achievement of a single objective such as an increase in the size or number of older, more fecund female fish in a protected area. These approaches, however, fail to capture the dynamic complexity of social, cultural, economic and ecological processes, uncertainty, and tradeoffs associated with the establishment and operation of marine protected areas. Moreover, there is usually little recognition of local coastal communities, including fishing communities, and the values they hold in the evaluation of the relative benefits and costs of marine protected areas. We describe a framework for evaluating and assessing economic and ecosystem tradeoffs associated with marine protected areas and other forms of marine spatial planning. This framework integrates biophysical data and community-based social and economic evaluation methods. It identifies ecosystem services, their benefits and associated uncertainties in assessing the economic and social tradeoffs associated with changes in the use of the marine environment. Keywords: Ecosystem Services, Marine Protected Areas, Stated Preferences, Trade-off Analysis INTRODUCTION Existing research on marine protected area (MPA) effectiveness focuses on developing sets of management indicators tied to outcomes listed in a MPA management plan (see Pomeroy et al.
    [Show full text]
  • (2007). an Exploration of the Mathematics Behind the Ecological
    A. Galli et al., International Journal of Ecodynamics. Vol. 2, No. 4 (2007) 250–257 AN EXPLORATION OF THE MATHEMATICS BEHIND THE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT A. GALLI1,2, J. KITZES2, P. WERMER2, M. WACKERNAGEL2, V. NICCOLUCCI1 & E. TIEZZI1 1Department of Chemical and Biosystems Sciences, University of Siena, Siena, Italy. 2Global Footprint Network, Oakland, CA, USA. ABSTRACT Introduced in the early 1990s, the ecological footprint has become a well-known and widespread environmental accounting tool. It measures human demand on nature and compares this to the availability of regenerative capacity on the planet. The method expresses human demand in terms of global hectares – i.e. biologically productive hectares with world-average productivity necessary for resource production and waste assimilation. Almost 15 years of research application and methodological advancements have made the ecological foot- print an increasingly robust theoretical framework, and it continues to be refi ned. This article documents the most updated footprint methodology and focuses on the mathematics that supports footprint and biocapacity accounts, as well as its underlying factors such as equivalence and yield factors. To clarify the meaning and the usefulness of footprint and biocapacity reported in terms of global hectares, an in-depth description of the units of measure is presented. Finally, the different research questions that emerge when reporting data in nation-specifi c hectares as opposed to global hectares are investigated. Keywords: actual hectares, biocapacity, ecological footprint, equivalence factors, global hectares, method, yield factors. 1 INTRODUCTION Ecological footprint analysis was fi rst introduced in the early 1990s by Mathis Wackernagel and William Rees [1, 2] as an environmental accounting tool to account for demand on (ecological footprint) and supply of (biocapacity) renewable natural capital.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Assessment & Indicators Research
    U.S. EPA Office of Research STAR and Development’s Science To Achieve Results (STAR) REPORT Research in Progress Vol.2 Issue 2 Mar. 1998 A product of the National Center for Environmental Research and Quality Assurance ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT & INDICATORS RESEARCH One of EPA’s major strategic goals is to ing efforts of EMAP and other federal programs, will be restore and maintain the health and biological considered in developing future coordinated national diversity of ecosystems, while supporting sus- assessments of ecological conditions, as well as for tainable economies and communities. How- assessments at regional and watershed scales. ever, our understanding of the interactions In 1996 and 1997, EPA’s external research program, among the living things and habitats that make Science to Achieve Results (the “STAR program”) pro- up healthy ecosystems is still limited. We lack vided funds adequate indicators and assessment approaches for develop- to characterize ecosystem health at large or ing ecosys- tem indica- small spatial scales. A good ecological indicator tors and is a measure of one or more ecological factors assessment that, in a repeatable and well understood way, approaches reflects the overall “health”, or integrity and to improve sustainability, of an ecosystem. the ability of EPA, other Recognizing the need to track status and trends in agencies and the condition of the nation’s ecological resources, in the scientists to late 1980s EPA established the Environmental Monitoring focus and Assessment Program (EMAP). EMAP supported attention research to identify the most scientifically defensible and where most cost-effective ecological indicators for ecosystems such as needed in coastal waters, wetlands, inland waters and forests.
    [Show full text]