Evaluating and Monitoring the Health of Large Scale Ecosystems

Environmental Practice, 2019

Early ecosystem health report cards focused on assessing the health of natural ecosystems, producing a "snapshot" of ecosystem health at one point in time. Ecosystem health report cards are used to guide efforts that improve ecosystem health through natural resources management and stakeholder engagement. Common themes among Report Cards include water quality and quantity and habitat. These indicators are not strictly environmental concerns, though. They also impact, and are impacted by, human communities. For example, water quantity bridges natural and human resources: a minimum amount of water is needed to maintain ecosystem health, and humans rely on water for industries, for example agriculture. People impact the ecosystems in which they live, and it is important to assess their impacts on ecosystems, as well as assessing how an ecosystem functions to support these communities. This requires consideration of both indicators that bridge the natural and human world, and some that are considered strictly human-focused. These include infrastructure, employment, and nutrition/food availability. When combined with assessments of natural resources, the evaluation of human focused indicators and indicators that bridge the natural and human world provide a more complex and accurate view of system health. Using three case studies, this paper explores the importance of integrating economic, cultural, and social indicators into traditional ecosystem health report cards, the challenges such integration poses, and potential solutions.

Environmental Management, 1988

/ Ecosystem analysis has been advanced by an improved understanding of how ecosystems are structured and how they function. Ecology has advanced from an era-phasis on natural history to consideration of energeiics, the relationships and connections between species, hierarchies, and systems theory. Still, we consider ecosystems as entities with a distinctive character and individual characteristics. Ecosystem maintenance and preservation form the objective of impact analysis, hazard evaluation, and other management or regulation activities. In this article we explore an approach to ecosystem analysis which identifies and quantifies factors which define the condition or state of an ecosystem in terms of health criteria. We relate ecosystem health to human/nonhuman animal health and explore the difficulties of defining ecosystem health and suggest criteria which provide a functional definition of state and condition. We suggest that, as has been found in human/nonhuman animal health studies, disease states can be recognized before disease is of clinical magnitude. Example disease states for ecosystems are functionally defined and discussed, together with test systems for their early detection.

JOURNAL OF AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM HEALTH, 1992

In the past decade, metaphors drawn from human health are finding increasing application in environmental assessment at ecosystem levels. If ecosystem medicine is to come of age, it must cope with three fundamental dilemmas. The first stems from the recognition that there are no strictly objective criteria for judging health. Assessments of health, as in humans, inevitably are based on some combination of established norms and desirable attributes. The second stems from the irregular pulse of nature which either precludes the early recognition of substantive changes or gives rise to false alarms. The third is posed by the quest for indicators that have the attributes of being holistic, early warning, and diagnostic. Indicators that excel in one of these aspects, often fail in another. Advances in ecosystem medicine are likely to come from closer collaboration with medical colleagues in both clinical and epidemiological areas. In particular the time appears ripe for a more systematic effort to characterize ecosystem maladies, to validate treatments and to develop more sophisticated diagnostic protocols. These aspects are illustrated with comparisons drawn from studies of environmental transformation in the Laurentian Great Lakes, the Baltic Sea and Canadian terrestrial ecosystems. 1. I n t r o d u c t i o n * Dedicated to Prof. J. Stan Rowe whose pioneering work in formulating a holistic perspective on ecosystem health has substantially contributed to the development of these ideas.

Ecosystem Health, 1999

Environmental Ethics, 2004

On most understandings of what an ecosystem is, it is a kind of thing that can be literally, not just metaphorically, healthy or unhealthy. Health is best understood as a kind of well-being; a thing’s health is a matter of retaining those structures and functions that are good for it. While it is true both that what’s good for an ecosystem depends on how we define the system and that how we define the system depends on our interests, these facts do not force us to the conclusion that an ecosystem has no good of its own. Ecosystems and persons can have goods of their own in spite of the fact that the schemes we use to categorize them are matters that we decide upon.

Science, 2006

Ecosystem Health and Sustainability, 2015

Ecosystems are becoming damaged or degraded as a result of stresses especially associated with human activities. A healthy ecosystem is essential to provide the services that humans and the natural environment require and has tremendous social and economic value. Exploration of the definition of ecosystem health includes what constitutes health and what it means to be healthy. To evaluate ecosystem health, it is necessary to quantify ecosystem conditions using a variety of indicators. In this paper, the main principles and criteria for indicator selection, classification of indicators for different kinds of ecosystems, the most appropriate indicators for measuring ecosystem sustainability, and various methods and models for the assessment of ecosystem health are presented. Drivers, sustainability, and resilience are considered to be critical factors for ecosystem health and its assessment. Effective integration of ecological understanding with socioeconomic, biophysical, biogeochemical, and public-policy dimensions is still the primary challenge in this field, and devising workable strategies to achieve and maintain ecosystem health is a key future challenge.

2009

Copyright  2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means without permission in writing from the publisher: Island Press, 1718 Connecticut Avenue, Suite 300, NW, Washington, DC 20009. ISLAND PRESS is a trademark of The Center for Resource Economics. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication data. Ecosystems and human well-being : current state and trends : findings of the Condition and Trends Working Group / edited by Rashid Hassan, Robert Scholes, Neville Ash. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment was carried out between 2001 and 2005 to assess the consequences of ecosystem change for human well-being and to establish the scientific basis for actions needed to enhance the conservation and sustainable use of ecosystems and their contributions to human well-being. The MA responds to government requests for information received through four international conventions—the Convention on Biological Diversity, the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, and the Convention on Migratory Species—and is designed to also meet needs of other stakeholders, including the business community, the health sector, nongovernmental organizations, and indigenous peoples. The sub-global assessments also aimed to meet the needs of users in the regions where they were undertaken. The assessment focuses on the linkages between ecosystems and human well-being and, in particular, on ‘‘ecosystem services.’’ An ecosystem is a dynamic complex of plant, animal, and microorganism communities and the nonliving environment interacting as a functional unit. The MA deals with the full range of ecosystems—from those relatively undisturbed, such as natural forests, to landscapes with mixed patterns of human use and to ecosystems intensively managed and modified by humans, such as agricultural land and urban areas. Ecosystem services are the benefits people obtain from ecosystems. These include provisioning services such as food, water, timber, and fiber; regulating services that affect climate, floods, disease, wastes, and water quality; cultural services that provide recreational, aesthetic, and spiritual benefits; and supporting services such as soil formation, photosynthesis, and nutrient cycling. The human species, while buffered against environmental changes by culture and technology, is fundamentally dependent on the flow of ecosystem services.

2012

Copyright  2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means without permission in writing from the publisher: Island Press, 1718 Connecticut Avenue, Suite 300, NW, Washington, DC 20009. ISLAND PRESS is a trademark of The Center for Resource Economics. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication data. Ecosystems and human well-being : current state and trends : findings of the Condition and Trends Working Group / edited by Rashid Hassan, Robert Scholes, Neville Ash. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment was carried out between 2001 and 2005 to assess the consequences of ecosystem change for human well-being and to establish the scientific basis for actions needed to enhance the conservation and sustainable use of ecosystems and their contributions to human well-being. The MA responds to government requests for information received through four international conventions—the Convention on Biological Diversity, the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, and the Convention on Migratory Species—and is designed to also meet needs of other stakeholders, including the business community, the health sector, nongovernmental organizations, and indigenous peoples. The sub-global assessments also aimed to meet the needs of users in the regions where they were undertaken. The assessment focuses on the linkages between ecosystems and human well-being and, in particular, on ‘‘ecosystem services.’’ An ecosystem is a dynamic complex of plant, animal, and microorganism communities and the nonliving environment interacting as a functional unit. The MA deals with the full range of ecosystems—from those relatively undisturbed, such as natural forests, to landscapes with mixed patterns of human use and to ecosystems intensively managed and modified by humans, such as agricultural land and urban areas. Ecosystem services are the benefits people obtain from ecosystems. These include provisioning services such as food, water, timber, and fiber; regulating services that affect climate, floods, disease, wastes, and water quality; cultural services that provide recreational, aesthetic, and spiritual benefits; and supporting services such as soil formation, photosynthesis, and nutrient cycling. The human species, while buffered against environmental changes by culture and technology, is fundamentally dependent on the flow of ecosystem services.

Journal of Aquatic Ecosystem Health, 1995

A pragmatic and integrative approach to evaluation of the environment combines ecosystem sciences, health sciences, and social sciences. Each has a crucial role to play: the ecosystem sciences provide information on the complex dynamics of ecosystems as they are influenced by stress and disturbance; the health sciences provide a methodology for systematic diagnosis of pathology, taxonomy of ills, and models for preventive as well as rehabilitative modes; the social sciences bring to the fore the importance of human values which are part and parcel of any health evaluation. The complexity of stress-response systems precludes anything approximating a complete understanding of mechanisms underpinning ecosystem transformations. However, the loss of ecosystem services and management options appears to be a general phenomenon that permits an overall evaluation of ecosystem health in both aquatic and terrestrial systems. Such blanket indicators take into account both the impairment of ecosystem function and societal values. This is illustrated by the history of ecosystem transformation in the Laurentian Lower Great Lakes and in the overharvested forest ecosystems of Eastern Canada. In both cases, cultural stress resulted in losses in highly valued ecosystem services and management options. These losses have been partially compensated for by new technologies that have permitted commercial use of the remaining lower quality resources. This process itself, however, may be pathological, reinforcing a degradation sequence rather than serving to restore ecosystem health.