The final ecosystem goods and services Voltron: the power of tools together.

Environmental decision-making benefits from considering ecosystem services to ensure that aspects of the environment that people rely upon are fully evaluated. By focusing consideration of ecosystem services on final ecosystem goods and services (FEGS), the aspects of the environment directly enjoyed, used, or consumed by humans, these analyses can be more streamlined and effective. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has developed a set of tools to facilitate this consideration. The central feature of FEGS is that ecosystems are viewed through the diverse ways people directly benefit from them. The National Ecosystem Services Classification System (NESCS) Plus provides a framework for describing and identifying FEGS consistently. The standardization made available by NESCS Plus allows other tools and databases to interact using the NESCS Plus architecture and taxonomy, providing diverse insights for decision makers. Here, we examine the synergy of using the following four tools together: (1) the FEGS Scoping Tool; (2) the FEGS Metrics Report; (3) the EnviroAtlas; and (4) the EcoService Models Library. The FEGS Scoping Tool helps users determine what ecosystem services are relevant to a decision by harnessing FEGS understanding to enable communities to identify the relative importance of beneficiaries relevant to a decision and biophysical aspects of the environment of direct relevance to those beneficiaries. The FEGS Metrics Report can guide which metrics to monitor or model to represent those priority services. The EnviroAtlas, a powerful tool containing geospatial data and other resources related to ecosystem services, chemical and non-chemical stressors, and human health, and the EcoService Models Library, a database of ecosystem models, are two tools that support users in mapping and modeling endpoints relevant to priority services. While each of these tools is valuable on its own, together, they provide a powerful approach to easily incorporate and operationalize ecosystem services efforts into different parts of decision-making processes across different types of decisions. We illustrate how these integrated tools can be used together with a hypothetical example of a complex environmental management case study and the combined benefit of using the FEGS tools together.

Integrated stakeholder prioritization criteria for environmental management.

It is widely recognized that stakeholder engagement can lead to improved decision making. However, decision makers must identify and engage appropriate stakeholder groups. This can be challenging when there is a wide and diverse range of potential stakeholders, often the case in environmental management. Some fields, business and public relations for example, have proposed criteria or methodologies for prioritizing stakeholders for inclusion in decision making, but current methods of stakeholder evaluation in environmental management focus on stakeholder identification, categorization, and relationship analysis, none of which explicitly prioritize stakeholders. In this paper we propose a set of ten criteria, drawn from the literature, that can be used to prioritize stakeholders for environmental management decision making. These criteria are: level of interest, level of influence, magnitude of impact, probability of impact, urgency/temporal immediacy, proximity, economic interest, rights, fairness, and underrepresented/underserved populations. Not all criteria will be relevant to all decision makers, but we suggest this set of criteria encompasses those stakeholder engagement factors most commonly considered by decision makers. This paper proposes these criteria that form the basis of future decision support approaches in environmental management contexts and we argue for development and testing of these criteria to connect stakeholder prioritization and environmental decision making.

Connecting stakeholder priorities and desired environmental attributes for wetland restoration using ecosystem services and a heat map analysis for communications.

Framing ecological restoration and monitoring goals from a human benefits perspective (i.e., ecosystem services) can help inform restoration planners, surrounding communities, and relevant stakeholders about the direct benefits they may obtain from a specific restoration project. We used a case study of tidal wetland restoration in the Tillamook River watershed in Oregon, USA, to demonstrate how to identify and integrate community stakeholders/beneficiaries and the environmental attributes they use to inform the design of and enhance environmental benefits from ecological restoration. Using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Final Ecosystem Goods and Services (FEGS) Scoping Tool, we quantify the types of ecosystem services of greatest common value to stakeholders/beneficiaries that lead to desired benefits that contribute to their well-being in the context of planned uses that can be incorporated into the restoration project. This case study identified priority stakeholders, beneficiaries, and environmental attributes of interest to inform restoration goal selection. This novel decision context application of the FEGS Scoping Tool also included an effort focused on how to communicate the connections between stakeholders, and the environmental attributes of greatest interest to them using heat maps.

The EPA Ecosystem Services Tool Selection Portal.

The dynamics of an environmental decision-making context can be complicated. The use of decision support tools can help better facilitate restoring and maintaining ecosystems that provide environmental benefits (ecosystem services) to people. Although an ecosystem services assessment tool is designed for specific purposes, having access to a comprehensive suite of tools offers the user additional insight and resources to help in decision making. A range of approaches exist to connect ecosystem services to a given decision context ranging from less to more complex: using the best professional judgment; applying examples from other efforts; testing individual tool applications; and using a systematic, decision-tree approach to navigate among relevant tools and frameworks. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency developed a decision-tree approach for a user to navigate the question of how to choose among a suite of ecosystem services assessment tools for three decision contexts: (1) ecological risk assessments; (2) cleanup of contaminated sites; (3) and generic structured decision-making processes. This tool selection navigator was developed with/for the intended user, including developing crosswalks between tool functionality and the user's language for what they require in a tool. To navigate the tool, the user first chooses one of three decision contexts. Second, the user selects among the different phases of the decision process. Third, the user selects among a few ecosystem-services related tasks relevant to the decision context chosen to identify potential tools. The tool uses simple language to navigate the decision pathways and provides the user with a suite of potential ES resources and tools for their given decision context.

Capturing twenty years of change in ecosystem services provided by coastal Massachusetts habitats.

Accounting for ecosystem services across expansive and diverse landscapes presents unique challenges to managers tasked with navigating and synthesizing the social-ecological dynamics of varied stakeholder interests and ecological functions. One approach to this challenge is through expert based matrices that provide valuations for specific service-habitat combinations. In this study, we combine a literature review with local expert input to build an ecosystem service capacity matrix for the Massachusetts Bays National Estuary Partnership (MassBays). We then apply this matrix to a custom conglomerate land cover data set and a habitat connectivity analysis to assess the spatial and temporal dynamics in select ecosystem services of coastal habitats across MassBays from 1996 to 2016. In 1996, saltmarsh was the primary provider of coastal ecosystem services, representing roughly 60% of the total service capacity. More specifically, high elevation saltmarsh was top-ranked, followed by tidal flats, seagrass, low elevation saltmarsh and unclassified saltmarsh. This distribution of service provisioning varied considerably among the five regions of MassBays, reflecting the unique habitat mixes and local expert valuations of each. Although saltmarsh dominated the overall production of services, seagrass and tidal flats drove 97% of the service changes that occurred from one year to the next. From 1996 to 2016, MassBays lost 50% of its seagrass cover and gained 20% more tidal flats, resulting in a 5% overall loss in ecosystem services. Again, this varied among the five regions, with Cape Cod losing as much as 12% of a given service while the Upper North Shore gained 4% in services overall. We bootstrapped the analysis to provide a range of probable outcomes. We also mapped the changes in service production for each of the sixty-eight embayments. This analysis will aid local managers in accounting for ecosystem services as they develop management plans for their represented stakeholders.

Ecosystem Services Profiles for Communities Benefitting from Estuarine Habitats along the Massachusetts Coast, USA.

The Massachusetts Bays National Estuary Partnership is one of 28 programs in the United States Environmental Protection Agency's National Estuary Program (NEP) charged with developing and implementing comprehensive plans for protecting and restoring the biological integrity and beneficial uses of their estuarine systems. The Partnership has recently updated their comprehensive management plan to include restoration targets for coastal habitats, and as part of this effort, the program explored how to better demonstrate that recovery of ecological integrity of degraded ecosystems also provides ecosystem services that humans want and need. An essential step was to identify key stakeholders and understand the benefits important to them. The primary objective of the study presented here was to evaluate variability in beneficial uses of estuarine habitats across coastal communities in Massachusetts Bays. We applied a text mining approach to extract ecosystem services concepts from over 1400 community planning documents. We leveraged a Final Ecosystem Goods and Services (FEGS) classification framework and related scoping tool to identify and prioritize the suite of natural resource users and ecosystem services those users care about, based on the relative frequency of mentions in documents. Top beneficiaries included residents, experiencers and viewers, property owners, educators and students, and commercial or recreational fishers. Beneficiaries had a surprising degree of shared interests, with top ecosystem services of broad relevance including for naturalness, fish and shellfish, water movement and navigability, water quality and quantity, aesthetic viewscapes, availability of land for development, flood mitigation, and birds. Community-level priorities that emerged were primarily related to regional differences, the local job industry, and local demographics. Identifying priority ecosystem services from community planning documents provides a starting point for setting locally-relevant restoration goals, designing projects that reflect what stakeholders care about, and supporting post-restoration monitoring in terms of accruing relevant benefits to local communities.

What is it about coral reefs? Translation of ecosystem goods and services relevant to people and their well-being.

There is an astonishing diversity of ways in which people benefit from coral reefs. They provide recreation, resource extraction, inspirational, and educational opportunities, among many others as well as being valued just for their existence. As the condition of coral reef ecosystems decline, so do their ability to provide these benefits. Prudent management of coral reefs and the benefits they provide are important as some predict most coral reefs globally will be lost by the mid-21st century. Meanwhile, coral reef managers have limited tools and relevant data to design and implement effective environmental management practices that will enable coral reefs to provide benefits demanded by society. We demonstrate an approach to identify and measure environmental components of coral reefs that directly benefit human well-being. The approach views ecosystems through the lens of a specific set of beneficiaries and the biophysical features directly relevant to each. We call these biophysical features Final Ecosystem Goods and Services (FEGS). In our demonstration, we (1) identify a range of beneficiaries of coral reefs; (2) identify metrics of FEGS for those beneficiaries; and (3) describe how data quantifying those biophysical metrics might be used to facilitate greater economic and social understanding.

Ca(V)1.2 calcium channel dysfunction causes a multisystem disorder including arrhythmia and autism.

Ca(V)1.2, the cardiac L-type calcium channel, is important for excitation and contraction of the heart. Its role in other tissues is unclear. Here we present Timothy syndrome, a novel disorder characterized by multiorgan dysfunction including lethal arrhythmias, webbing of fingers and toes, congenital heart disease, immune deficiency, intermittent hypoglycemia, cognitive abnormalities, and autism. In every case, Timothy syndrome results from the identical, de novo Ca(V)1.2 missense mutation G406R. Ca(V)1.2 is expressed in all affected tissues. Functional expression reveals that G406R produces maintained inward Ca(2+) currents by causing nearly complete loss of voltage-dependent channel inactivation. This likely induces intracellular Ca(2+) overload in multiple cell types. In the heart, prolonged Ca(2+) current delays cardiomyocyte repolarization and increases risk of arrhythmia, the ultimate cause of death in this disorder. These discoveries establish the importance of Ca(V)1.2 in human physiology and development and implicate Ca(2+) signaling in autism.