Global forest restoration opportunities to foster coral reef conservation.

Sediment runoff from disturbed coastal catchments is a major threat to marine ecosystems. Understanding where sediments are produced and where they are delivered enables managers to design more effective strategies for improving water quality. A management strategy is targeted restoration of degraded terrestrial areas, as it provides opportunities to reduce land-based runoff from coastal areas and consequently foster coral reef conservation. To do this strategically, a systematic approach is needed to identify watersheds where restoration actions will provide the highest conservation benefits for coral reefs. Here, we develop a systematic approach for identifying global forest restoration opportunities that would also result in large decreases in the flux of sediments to coral reefs. We estimate how land-use change affects sediment runoff globally using high-resolution spatial data and determine the subsequent risk of sediment exposure on coral reefs using a diffusion-based ocean transport model. Our results reveal that sediment export is a major issue affecting 41% of coral reefs globally. The main coastal watersheds with the highest sediment export are predominantly located in Southeast Asian countries, with Indonesia and the Philippines accounting for 52% of the sediment export in coastal areas near coral reefs. We show how restoring forest across multiple watersheds could help to reduce sediment export to 63,000 km2 of coral reefs. Although reforestation opportunities in areas that discharge onto coral reefs are relatively small across watersheds, it is possible to achieve large sediment reduction benefits by strategically targeting watersheds located in regions with a high density of corals near to the coast. Thus, reforestation benefits on coral reefs do not necessarily come from the watersheds that produce the highest sediment export. These analyses are key for generating informed action to support both international conservation policy and national restoration activities.

A spatial framework for improved sanitation to support coral reef conservation.

Coral reefs are one of the most valuable yet threatened ecosystems in the world. Improving human wastewater treatment could reduce land-based impacts on coral reefs. However, information on the quantity and spatial distribution of human wastewater pollution is lacking. Here, we develop a spatial model linking residential human wastewater pollution (nitrogen and phosphorus/year) and conservation sectors [coral reefs] to better understand the relative differences in the distribution and efficacy of different sanitation services and their potential implications for conservation monitoring and management. We apply our model to Fiji, where ongoing initiatives and investments in wastewater treatment for human health could be leveraged to cost-effectively improve coral reef condition. We estimate that wastewater treatment plants account for nearly 80% of human wastewater nutrients released into surface waters. Wasterwater nutrient pollution is widespread, affecting 95% of reefs, but is concentrated across a few watersheds. Our spatially explicit approach can be used to better understand potential benefits and trade-offs between sanitation service improvements and coral reef health, helping to bridge the sanitation and conservation sectors as well as inform and prioritize on the ground action.

Urban green space use during a time of stress: A case study during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brisbane, Australia.

Spending time in nature is one potential way to cope with the negative physical and psychological health impacts from major stressful life events. In 2020, a large fraction of the global population was impacted by restrictions to contain the spread of the COVID-19 outbreak, a period characterised by marked health risks and behavioural changes. Here we explore whether people responded to this stressor by spending more time in nature and investigate the reasons for any changes.We surveyed 1,002 people in Brisbane, Australia in 2020, to measure the change in use of green space during the restrictions period and benefits people associated with visiting them.About 36% of participants increased their urban green space use, but 26% reduced it, indicating a great deal of flux. Furthermore, 45% of the previous non-users of urban green space began using it for the first time during the restrictions period. Older people were less likely to increase their green space use and those with a backyard were more likely to increase their use of green spaces.Participants' change in use occurred regardless of the amount of green space available in close proximity to their households. In addition, we did not find a relationship between nature-relatedness and change in use.People's reasons for green space use shifted during the pandemic-related restrictions period, with many emphasising improvement of personal well-being rather than consolidating community capital. Most participants indicated an increase in the importance of the psychological and physical benefits obtained from urban green spaces.We conclude that increased urban green space use during moments of stress such as the COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to ameliorate some of the negative effects of the stressor, but that the capacity and desire to spend more time in green space varies markedly across society. Sufficient urban green space provision for all sections of society will maximise the opportunity to employ a nature-based coping mechanism during times of personal or community stress.

Pasar tiempo en la naturaleza es una forma de contrarrestar el impacto físico y psicológico que tiene los eventos estresantes en nuestras vidas. En el 2020, una gran porción de la población mundial fue impactada por las restricciones impuestas por la propagación del COVID­19, un periodo que se caracterizó por notables riesgos para la salud y cambios en el comportamiento de las personas. Aquí exploramos si las personas respondieron a este evento estresante pasando más tiempo en la naturaleza y también investigamos las razones asociadas a cualquier cambio.Encuestamos a 1002 personas en Brisbane, Australia, en el 2020, para medir el cambio en el uso de los espacios verdes públicos durante la cuarentena ocasionada por la pandemia y los beneficios que la gente ha asociado a su visita.Alrededor del 36% de los encuestados aumentaron el uso de los espacios verdes públicos urbanos y el 26% lo redujo, lo que indica un cambio en la concepción del uso durante la pandemia. Esto se confirma ya que un 45% de los encuestados que no han usado espacios verdes públicos previo a la cuarentena, lo utilizaron por primera vez. Los adultos mayores fueron menos proclive a aumentar el uso de espacios verdes y los encuestados que poseían un patio en sus hogares, tendieron a un mayor uso de los espacios verdes.Independientemente a la cantidad disponible de espacios verdes públicos en la proximidad de los hogares de los participantes, se ha producido un cambio en las visitas a espacios verdes públicos. Además, no encontramos una relación entre la conexión con la naturaleza de los participantes y el cambio de uso de espacios verdes públicos.Durante la cuarentena, los participantes han cambiado las razones por las cuales utilizaron espacios verdes públicos urbanos. Muchos participantes hicieron hincapié en los beneficios al bienestar personal en lugar de aquellos beneficios comunitarios. Por ejemplo, la mayoría de los participantes indicaron un aumento de la importancia de los beneficios psicológicos y físicos obtenidos por el uso de espacios verdes públicos urbanos.Concluimos que, en momentos de estrés, como por ejemplo la pandemia COVID­19, un aumento en el uso de espacios verdes tiene el potencial de mejorar algunos de los efectos negativos del estrés, pero que el deseo y la habilidad de pasar más tiempo en los espacios verdes varía notablemente en la sociedad. Proveer suficientes espacios verdes públicos para todos los sectores de la sociedad, maximizaría la oportunidad de emplear un mecanismo para afrontar los estreses personales o comunitarios, basado en la naturaleza. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

Considering landscape-level processes in ecosystem service assessments.

The provision of ecosystem services is inherently spatial. Landscape structure affects service provision through multiple landscape-level processes, such as fragmentation, edge and connectivity effects. These processes can affect areas of ecosystem service supply and demand, and the flows linking those areas. Despite the emergence of sophisticated spatial ecosystem service assessments in the last two decades, we show through a literature review that landscape-level processes are still rarely considered in a comprehensive way. Even when they are considered, landscape effects are mostly limited to landscape composition, and configuration effects are underrepresented. Furthermore, most studies infer ecosystem service provision by only evaluating supply, ignoring demand and flows. Here we present a simple conceptual framework that illustrates how to incorporate landscape-level processes in the assessment of the different components of the service provision chain (supply, demand and flows). Using simulations, we evaluated how estimations of ecosystem service provision change when considering different landscape processes and discussed the implications of disregarding landscape effects. However, to fully implement the framework, a series of challenges linked to mapping and quantifying supply and demand, defining adequate scales of analysis, measuring flows, and parameterizing models for different types of services, still need to be overcome. To promote an adequate use and management of ecosystem services, it is essential to better incorporate landscape processes in ecosystem service assessments. This will lead to more quantitatively accurate and spatially precise estimates.

Reframing landscape fragmentation's effects on ecosystem services.

Landscape structure and fragmentation have important effects on ecosystem services, with a common assumption being that fragmentation reduces service provision. This is based on fragmentation's expected effects on ecosystem service supply, but ignores how fragmentation influences the flow of services to people. Here we develop a new conceptual framework that explicitly considers the links between landscape fragmentation, the supply of services, and the flow of services to people. We argue that fragmentation's effects on ecosystem service flow can be positive or negative, and use our framework to construct testable hypotheses about the effects of fragmentation on final ecosystem service provision. Empirical efforts to apply and test this framework are critical to improving landscape management for multiple ecosystem services.