Impacts of human activities on the supply of marine ecosystem services: A conceptual model for offshore wind farms to aid quantitative assessments.

Increased pressures from human activities may cause cumulative ecological effects on marine ecosystems. Increasingly, the study of ecosystem services is applied in the marine environment to assess the full effects of human activities on the ecosystem and on the benefits it provides. However, in the marine environment, such integrated studies have yet to move from qualitative and score-based to fully quantitative assessments. To bridge this gap, this study proposed a 4-tiered method for summarizing available knowledge and modelling tools to aid in quantitative assessments of ecosystem services supply. First, the ecosystem functioning mechanisms underlying the supply of services are conceptually mapped. Second, the impacts of the human activity of interest are summarized and linked to the first conceptual model in a case-specific model of ecosystem services supply. Third, indicators are selected that would best represent changes in the most important parameters of the conceptual model in a quantitative manner. Fourth, the knowledge gained in the previous steps is used to select models that are most useful to quantify changes in ecosystem services supply under the human pressure of interest. This approach was applied to the case study of offshore wind energy in the Belgian part of the North Sea, which is one of the most rapidly expanding industries in the marine environment globally. This study provides a useful tool to proceed towards quantification of marine ecosystem services, highlighting the need for a fully integrated approach to developing environmental impact assessment tools.

Towards a comprehensive sustainability methodology to assess anthropogenic impacts on ecosystems: Review of the integration of Life Cycle Assessment, Environmental Risk Assessment and Ecosystem Services Assessment.

Nowadays, a variety of methodologies are available to assess local, regional and global impacts of human activities on ecosystems, which include Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) and Ecosystem Services Assessment (ESA). However, none can individually assess both the positive and negative impacts of human activities at different geographical scales in a comprehensive manner. In order to overcome the shortcomings of each methodology and develop more holistic assessments, the integration of these methodologies is essential. Several studies have attempted to integrate these methodologies either conceptually or through applied case studies. To understand why, how and to what extent these methodologies have been integrated, a total of 110 relevant publications were reviewed. The analysis of the case studies showed that the integration can occur at different positions along the cause-effect chain and from this, a classification scheme was proposed to characterize the different integration approaches. Three categories of integration are distinguished: post-analysis, integration through the combination of results, and integration through the complementation of a driving method. The literature review highlights that the most recurrent type of integration is the latter. While the integration through the complementation of a driving method is more realistic and accurate compared to the other two categories, its development is more complex and a higher data requirement could be needed. In addition to this, there is always the risk of double-counting for all the approaches. None of the integration approaches can be categorized as a full integration, but this is not necessarily needed to have a comprehensive assessment. The most essential aspect is to select the appropriate components from each methodology that can cover both the environmental and socioeconomic costs and benefits of human activities on the ecosystems.

Aligning biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services in spatial planning: Focus on ecosystem processes.

Although the consideration of socio-economic demands with biodiversity conservation is now high on the environmental policy agenda, it is not yet standard practice in spatial planning. This is argued to be related, among others, to a lack of awareness among stakeholders and practitioners of the underpinning role of ecosystem functioning and biodiversity to support human well-being. Meanwhile, there is mounting critique on the absolute focus of biodiversity conservation on static properties such as species and habitats. The establishment of more ecologically sensible objectives that include ecosystem processes besides species and habitats is put forward as a more effective way of environmental conservation. Methodological approaches increasingly consider ecosystem processes. However, the processes that are included mostly relate to aspects of biodiversity such as dispersal and productivity, and rarely do they include abiotic mechanisms that underlie biodiversity. We here report on the development of a method that integrates two principles which we identify as key to advance the integration of ecosystem services with biodiversity conservation in planning practice: (1) consider the variety of ecosystem processes, biotic as well as abiotic, that support biodiversity and ecosystem services, and (2) link the ecosystem processes to biodiversity and to socio-economic benefits to identify the common ground between seemingly conflicting objectives. The methodology uses a stepwise approach and is based on an extensive review of available knowledge on ecosystem functioning, expert consultation and stakeholder involvement. We illustrate how the methodology supports the setting of strategic goals to accomplish a healthy coastal ecosystem in Belgium, and exemplify how this may affect spatial plans. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate how including processes opens opportunities to align biodiversity and ecosystem services and how this increases chances to provide long-term benefits for biodiversity and human well-being. The paper may provide inspiration to advance current spatial planning approaches.