Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T04:11:59.435Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - Conclusions

from Part III - Synthesis and conclusions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2015

Tasman P. Crowe
Affiliation:
University College Dublin
Christopher L. J. Frid
Affiliation:
Griffith University, Queensland
Tasman P. Crowe
Affiliation:
University College Dublin
Dave Raffaelli
Affiliation:
University of York
Christopher L. J. Frid
Affiliation:
Griffith University, Queensland
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Marine ecosystems provide a range of essential benefits to society, including food and other products, waste assimilation, coastal protection and climate regulation as well as less tangible, but no less important cultural and aesthetic benefits (Chapter 2). To a considerable degree, those benefits are underpinned by ecosystem services dependent on the efficient functioning of the ecosystems, although detailed understanding of relationships between particular services and particular functional processes is currently being developed (Chapter 2). In turn, the efficient functioning of ecosystems has been linked to the number and identity of species present, as well as the prevailing environmental conditions (Chapter 5).

Society derives many of its benefits from ecosystems via sectoral activities and industries, such as fishing, construction, energy, shipping, leisure and tourism. These activities can impose pressures on ecosystems, such as removal of biomass, inputs of nutrients and other contaminants and the introduction of artificial structures and non-indigenous species (Chapter 3). Such pressures act through a range of mechanisms affecting different levels of biological organisation to modify biodiversity and ecosystem functioning (Chapters 3 and 4). The chapters in this book have reviewed current knowledge of how the spectrum of human activities and pressures (collectively referred to as stressors) affect biodiversity, ecosystem functioning and the provision of services and benefits to society. A key objective was to provide a synthesis of evidence for policy makers and managers to facilitate trade-offs between sectors of activity based on the benefits they provide weighed against the degree to which they may compromise the delivery of ecosystem services now and into the future (see Chapter 11).

In this chapter, we first synthesise and summarise the inferences presented in the book about the range of impacts of different activities and pressures on biodiversity and ecosystem processes. We then ask how this kind of knowledge can help policy makers and managers, particularly in the achievement of the international targets laid down in the Millennium Development Goals (Chapter 1) and whether the ecosystem approach and the concept of ecosystem services can provide an effective framework for facilitating the achievement of those goals.

Type
Chapter
Information
Marine Ecosystems
Human Impacts on Biodiversity, Functioning and Services
, pp. 377 - 394
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Balmford, A., Fisher, B., Green, R. E.et al. (2011). Bringing ecosystem services into the real world: an operational framework for assessing the economic consequences of losing wild nature. Environmental and Resource Economics, 48, 161–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berkes, F., Colding, J. and Folke, C. (2003). Navigating Social–Ecological Systems: Building Resilience for Complexity and Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Black, J., Milner-Gulland, E. J., Sotherton, N. and Mourato, S. (2010). Valuing complex environmental goods: landscape and biodiversity in the North Pennines. Environmental Conservation, 37, 136–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, M. G. (2013). Constructing replacement habitat for specialist and generalist molluscs: the effect of patch size. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 473, 201–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, N. E., Lovell, R, Wheeler, B. W.et al. (2014). Biodiversity, cultural pathways and human health. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 29, 198–204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Convention on Biological Diversity (1995). COP 7 Decision VII/11. Available at: www.cbd.int/decision/cop/?id=7748.
Crain, C. M., Kroeker, K. and Halpern, B. S. (2008). Interactive and cumulative effects of multiple human stressors in marine systems. Ecology Letters, 11, 1304–1315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
FAO (1995). Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. Rome: FAO.
FAO (1999). Into the next Millennium: Fishery perspective. Bangkok, Thailand: UN FAO.
Frid, C. L. J. and Paramor, O. A. L. (2012). Feeding the world: what role for fisheries? ICES Journal of Marine Science, 69, 145–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gatto, M., De Leo, G. A., 2000. Pricing biodiversity and ecosystem services: the never-ending story. BioScience, 50, 347–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gomez-Baggethun, E., Ruiz-Perez, M. (2011). Economic valuation and the commodification of ecosystem services. Progress in Physical Geography, 35, 613–628.Google Scholar
Halpern, B. S., Walbridge, S., Selkoe, K. A., et al. (2008). A global map of human impact on marine ecosystems. Science, 319, 948–952.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hobbs, R. J., Higgs, E. S., and Hall, C. M. (2013). Novel Ecosystems: Intervening in the New Ecological World Order. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jakobsson, J. and Stefánsson, G. (1998). Rational harvesting of the cod–capelin–shrimp complex in the Icelandic marine ecosystem. Fisheries Research, 37, 7–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kidd, S., Plater, A., and Frid, C. L. J. (2011). The Ecosystem Approach to Marine Planning and Management. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
Kontogianni, A., Tourkolias, C., Machleras, A. and Skourtos, M. (2012). Service providing units, existence values and the valuation of endangered species: a methodological test. Ecological Economics, 79, 97–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littig, B. and Griessler, E. (2005). Social sustainability: a catchword between political pragmatism and social theory. International Journal for Sustainable Development, 8, 65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luck, G. W., Kai, M. A., Chan, U. E.et al. (2012). Ethical considerations in on-ground applications of the ecosystem services concept. Bioscience, 62, 1020–1029.Google Scholar
Mace, G. M. (2014). Whose conservation? Science, 345, 1558–1560.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mace, G. M., Bateman, I., Albon, S.et al. (2011). The UK National Ecosystem Assessment Technical Report, UK National Ecosystem Assessment. Cambridge: UNEP-WCMC.Google Scholar
McCauley, D. J. (2006). Selling out on nature. Nature, 443, 27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis. Washington DC: World Resources Institute.
Pauly, D. (1995). Anecdotes and the shifting baseline syndrome of fisheries. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 10, 430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perlman, D. L. and Adelson, G. (1997). Biodiversity. Exploring Values and Priorities in Conservation. Oxford: Blackwell Science.Google Scholar
Pope, J., Annandale, D. and Morrison-Saunders, A. (2003). Conceptualising sustainability assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 24, 595–616.Google Scholar
Reid, W. V., Mooney, H. A., Capistrano, D.et al. (2006). Nature: the many benefits of ecosystem services. Nature, 443, 749–749.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rice, J. C. and Garcia, S. M. (2011). Fisheries, food security, climate change, and biodiversity: characteristics of the sector and perspectives on emerging issues. ICES Journal of Marine Science, doi: 10.1093/icesjms/fsr041.CrossRef
Rodney, W. S. and Paynter, K. T. (2006). Comparisons of macrofaunal assemblages on restored and non-restored oyster reefs in mesohaline regions of Chesapeake Bay in Maryland. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 335, 39–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodwell, J. (2013). Aesthetic and spiritual responses to the environment. A two-day BESS workshop at York, 22/23 January 2013. Available at: http://www.nerc-bess.net.
Salles, J.-M., 2011. Valuing biodiversity and ecosystem services: why put economic values on nature? Comptes Rendus Biologies, 334, 469–482.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shogren, J. F., Tschirhart, J., Anderson, T.et al. (1999). Why economics matters for endangered species protection. Conservation Biology, 13, 1257–1261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stelzenmüller, V., Breen, P, Stamford, T. et al. (2013). Monitoring and evaluation of spatially managed areas: A generic framework for implementation of ecosystem-based marine management and its application. Marine Policy, 37, 149–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Troell, M., Joyce, A., Chopin, T.et al. (2009). Ecological engineering in aquaculture: potential for integrated multi-trophic aquaculture (IMTA) in marine offshore systems. Aquaculture, 297, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, K., Schaafsma, M., Elliott, M.et al. (2014). UK National Ecosystem Assessment Follow-on. Work Package Report 4: Coastal and marine ecosystem services: principles and practice. Cambridge: UNEP-WCMC.
Turner, R. K. (2011). A pluralistic approach to ecosystem assessment and evaluation. A Report to Defra, London. Available at: http://www.defra.gov.uk/naturalcapitalcommittee/files/ncc-assetcheck-03.pdf.
Turner, R. K. and Daily, G. C. (2008). The Ecosystem Services Framework and natural capital conservation. Environmental Resource Economics, 39, 25–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United Nations (1992). Convention on Biological Diversity. New York: UN.
United Nations (2013). World Resources Report: Creating a Sustainable Food Future. New York: UN.
Warren, R. S., Fell, P. E., Rozsa, R.et al. (2002). Salt marsh restoration in Connecticut: 20 years of science and management. Restoration Ecology, 10, 497–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×