Relative impacts of multiple human stressors in estuaries and coastal waters in the North Sea-Baltic Sea transition zone.

The objectives of this study are 1) to map the potential cumulative impacts of multiple human activities and stressors on the ecosystems in the transition zone between the North Sea and Baltic Sea, for Danish waters 2) to analyse differences in stressor contribution between the European Union's Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD, off-shore waters) and Water Framework Directive (WFD, coastal waters), and 3) to assess the local relative importance of stressors for 14 areas along a land-sea gradient, from inner fjords or coastal areas to offshore waters. The mapping of cumulative impacts is anchored in 35 datasets describing a broad range of human stressors and 47 ecosystem components ranging from phytoplankton over benthic communities to fish, seabirds and marine mammals, which we combined by means of a widely used spatial human impact model. Ranking of the stressor impacts for the entire study area revealed that the top five stressors are: 'Nutrients', 'Climate anomalies', 'Non-indigenous species', 'Noise' and 'Contaminants'. The gradient studies showed that some stressors (e.g. 'Nutrients', 'Shipping' and 'Physical modification') have a relatively higher impact within the fjord/estuarine systems whilst others (e.g. 'Fisheries', 'Contaminants' and 'Noise') have relatively higher impact in the open waters. Beyond mapping of cumulative human impacts, we discuss how the maps can be used as an analytical tool to inform ecosystem-based management and marine spatial planning, using the MSFD and WFD as examples.

Uncertainty analysis and robust areas of high and low modeled human impact on the global oceans.

Increasing anthropogenic pressure on marine ecosystems from fishing, pollution, climate change, and other sources is a big concern in marine conservation. Scientists have thus developed spatial models to map cumulative human impacts on marine ecosystems. However, these models are based on many assumptions and incorporate data that suffer from substantial incompleteness and inaccuracies. Rather than using a single model, we used Monte Carlo simulations to identify which parts of the oceans are subject to the most and least impact from anthropogenic stressors under 7 simulated sources of uncertainty (factors: e.g., missing stressor data and assuming linear ecosystem responses to stress). Most maps agreed that high-impact areas were located in the Northeast Atlantic, the eastern Mediterranean, the Caribbean, the continental shelf off northern West Africa, offshore parts of the tropical Atlantic, the Indian Ocean east of Madagascar, parts of East and Southeast Asia, parts of the northwestern Pacific, and many coastal waters. Large low-impact areas were located off Antarctica, in the central Pacific, and in the southern Atlantic. Uncertainty in the broad-scale spatial distribution of modeled human impact was caused by the aggregate effects of several factors, rather than being attributable to a single dominant source. In spite of the identified uncertainty in human-impact maps, they can-at broad spatial scales and in combination with other environmental and socioeconomic information-point to priority areas for research and management.