Identifying priority ecosystem services in tidal wetland restoration

被引:0
|
作者
Jackson, Chloe A. [1 ,5 ]
Hernandez, Connie L. [1 ,7 ]
Yee, Susan H. [2 ]
Nash, Maliha S. [3 ]
Diefenderfer, Heida L. [4 ]
Borde, Amy B. [4 ,6 ]
Harwell, Matthew C. [3 ]
Dewitt, Theodore H. [3 ]
机构
[1] Oak Ridge Inst Sci & Educ, Newport, OR 97365 USA
[2] US EPA, Gulf Ecosyst Measurement & Modeling Div, Off Res & Dev, Ctr Environm Measurement & Modeling, Gulf Breeze, FL USA
[3] US EPA, Pacific Coastal Ecol Branch, Pacific Ecol Syst Div, Newport, OR USA
[4] Pacific Northwest Natl Lab, Coastal Res Grp, Coastal Ecosyst Team, Energy & Environm Directorate,Coastal Sci Div, Sequim, WA USA
[5] Univ Massachusetts Boston, Sch Environm, Boston, MA 02125 USA
[6] Columbia Land Trust, Stewardship Team, Vancouver, WA USA
[7] US EPA, Enforcement & Compliance Assurance Div, Reg 9, San Francisco, CA USA
来源
关键词
ecosystem services; tidal wetlands; restoration; document analysis; prioritization; ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION;
D O I
10.3389/fevo.2024.1260447
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Classification systems can be an important tool for identifying and quantifying the importance of relationships, assessing spatial patterns in a standardized way, and forecasting alternative decision scenarios to characterize the potential benefits (e.g., ecosystem services) from ecosystem restoration that improve human health and well-being. We present a top-down approach that systematically leverages ecosystem services classification systems to identify potential services relevant for ecosystem restoration decisions. We demonstrate this approach using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National Ecosystem Service Classification System Plus (NESCS Plus) to identify those ecosystem services that are relevant to restoration of tidal wetlands. We selected tidal wetland management documents from federal agencies, state agencies, wetland conservation organizations, and land stewards across three regions of the continental United States (northern Gulf of Mexico, Mid-Atlantic, and Pacific Northwest) to examine regional and organizational differences in identified potential benefits of tidal wetland restoration activities and the potential user groups who may benefit. We used an automated document analysis to quantify the frequencies at which different wetland types were mentioned in the management documents along with their associated beneficiary groups and the ecological end products (EEPs) those beneficiaries care about, as defined by NESCS Plus. Results showed that a top combination across all three regions, all four organizations, and all four tidal wetland types was the EEP naturalness paired with the beneficiary people who care (existence). Overall, the Mid-Atlantic region and the land steward organizations mentioned ecosystem services more than the others, and EEPs were mentioned in combination with tidal wetlands as a high-level, more general category than the other more specific tidal wetland types. Certain regional and organizations differences were statistically significant. Those results may be useful in identifying ecosystem services-related goals for tidal wetland restoration. This approach for identifying and comparing ecosystem service priorities is broadly transferrable to other ecosystems or decision-making contexts.
引用
收藏
页数:22
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] A decision framework for identifying models to estimate forest ecosystem services gains from restoration
    Christin, Zachary L.
    Bagstad, Kenneth J.
    Verdone, Michael A.
    FOREST ECOSYSTEMS, 2016, 3
  • [32] IDENTIFYING PRIORITY AREAS FOR THE CONSERVATION OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES USING GIS-BASED MULTICRITERIA EVALUATION
    Liu, Yu
    Zhang, Hao
    Yang, Xiaoying
    Wang, Yongxiao
    Wang, Xiangrong
    Cai, Yuanbin
    POLISH JOURNAL OF ECOLOGY, 2013, 61 (03) : 415 - 430
  • [33] Early Ecosystem Development Varies With Elevation and Pre-Restoration Land Use/Land Cover in a Pacific Northwest Tidal Wetland Restoration Project
    Janousek, Christopher N.
    Bailey, Scott J.
    Brophy, Laura S.
    ESTUARIES AND COASTS, 2021, 44 (01) : 13 - 29
  • [34] Early Ecosystem Development Varies With Elevation and Pre-Restoration Land Use/Land Cover in a Pacific Northwest Tidal Wetland Restoration Project
    Christopher N. Janousek
    Scott J. Bailey
    Laura S. Brophy
    Estuaries and Coasts, 2021, 44 : 13 - 29
  • [35] Turning delivery of ecosystem services into a deliverable of ecosystem restoration
    Matzek, Virginia
    RESTORATION ECOLOGY, 2018, 26 (06) : 1013 - 1016
  • [36] Hierarchical priority setting for restoration in a watershed in NE Spain, based on assessments of soil erosion and ecosystem services
    Mattia Trabucchi
    Francisco A. Comín
    Patrick J. O’Farrell
    Regional Environmental Change, 2013, 13 : 911 - 926
  • [37] Hierarchical priority setting for restoration in a watershed in NE Spain, based on assessments of soil erosion and ecosystem services
    Trabucchi, Mattia
    Comin, Francisco A.
    O'Farrell, Patrick J.
    REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE, 2013, 13 (04) : 911 - 926
  • [38] Constructed Wetlands Using Treated Membrane Concentrate for Coastal Wetland Restoration and the Renewal of Multiple Ecosystem Services
    Chakraborti, Rajat K.
    Bays, James S.
    LAND, 2023, 12 (04)
  • [39] Author Correction: Global priority areas for ecosystem restoration
    Bernardo B. N. Strassburg
    Alvaro Iribarrem
    Hawthorne L. Beyer
    Carlos Leandro Cordeiro
    Renato Crouzeilles
    Catarina C. Jakovac
    André Braga Junqueira
    Eduardo Lacerda
    Agnieszka E. Latawiec
    Andrew Balmford
    Thomas M. Brooks
    Stuart H. M. Butchart
    Robin L. Chazdon
    Karl-Heinz Erb
    Pedro Brancalion
    Graeme Buchanan
    David Cooper
    Sandra Díaz
    Paul F. Donald
    Valerie Kapos
    David Leclère
    Lera Miles
    Michael Obersteiner
    Christoph Plutzar
    Carlos Alberto de M. Scaramuzza
    Fabio R. Scarano
    Piero Visconti
    Nature, 2022, 609 (7926) : E7 - E7
  • [40] Oyster Restoration to Recover Ecosystem Services
    Smith, Rachel S.
    Pruett, Jessica L.
    Annual Review of Marine Science, 2025, 17 (01) : 83 - 113