Evolutionary resilience and complex lagoon systems.

The present study applies an evolutionary resilience framework to complex socioecological systems in the coastal regions in Europe with a particular focus on lagoons. Despite their variations, lagoons share common challenges in achieving effective and sustainable ways of governing and managing economic, social, and environmental uncertainties. Our aim is to demonstrate that building resilience involves planning not only for recovery from shocks but also for cultivating preparedness and seeking potential transformative opportunities that emerge from change. The framework consists of 4 dimensions: persistence, adaptability, transformability, and preparedness. To illustrate how this 4-dimensional framework can be applied to the specific context of lagoons, we draw on examples of good and poor practices from the 10 lagoons studied as part of the ARCH project. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2016;12:711-718. © 2016 SETAC.

State-of-the-lagoon reports as vehicles of cross-disciplinary integration.

An integrative approach across disciplines is needed for sustainable lagoon and estuary management as identified by integrated coastal zone management. The ARCH research project (Architecture and roadmap to manage multiple pressures on lagoons) has taken initial steps to overcome the boundaries between disciplines and focus on cross-disciplinary integration by addressing the driving forces, challenges, and problems at various case study sites. A model was developed as a boundary-spanning activity to produce joint knowledge and understanding. The backbone of the model is formed by the interaction between the natural and human systems, including economy and governance-based subsystems. The model was used to create state-of-the-lagoon reports for 10 case study sites (lagoons and estuarine coastal areas), with a geographical distribution covering all major seas surrounding Europe. The reports functioned as boundary objects to build joint knowledge. The experiences related to the framing of the model and its subsequent implementation at the case study sites have resulted in key recommendations on how to address the challenges of cross-disciplinary work required for the proper management of complex social-ecological systems such as lagoons, estuarine areas, and other land-sea regions. Cross-disciplinary integration is initially resource intensive and time consuming; one should set aside the required resources and invest efforts at the forefront. It is crucial to create engagement among the group of researchers by focusing on a joint, appealing overall concept that will stimulate cross-sectoral thinking and focusing on the identified problems as a link between collected evidence and future management needs. Different methods for collecting evidence should be applied including both quantitative (jointly agreed indicators) and qualitative (narratives) information. Cross-disciplinary integration is facilitated by functional boundary objects. Integration offers important rewards in terms of developing a better understanding and subsequently improved management of complex social-ecological systems. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2016;12:690-700. © 2016 SETAC.

Assessment of marine ecosystem services indicators: Experiences and lessons learned from 14 European case studies.

This article shares the experiences, observations, and discussions that occurred during the completing of an ecosystem services (ES) indicator framework to be used at European Union (EU) and Member States' level. The experience base was drawn from 3 European research projects and 14 associated case study sites that include 13 transitional-water bodies (specifically 8 coastal lagoons, 4 riverine estuaries, and 1 fjord) and 1 coastal-water ecosystem. The ES pertinent to each case study site were identified along with indicators of these ES and data sources that could be used for mapping. During the process, several questions and uncertainties arose, followed by discussion, leading to these main lessons learned: 1) ES identification: Some ES that do not seem important at the European scale emerge as relevant at regional or local scales; 2) ES indicators: When direct indicators are not available, proxies for indicators (indirect indicators) might be used, including combined data on monitoring requirements imposed by EU legislation and international agreements; 3) ES mapping: Boundaries and appropriate data spatial resolution must be established because ES can be mapped at different temporal and spatial scales. We also acknowledge that mapping and assessment of ES supports the dialogue between human well-being and ecological status. From an evidence-based marine planning-process point of view, mapping and assessment of marine ES are of paramount importance to sustainable use of marine natural capital and to halt the loss of marine biodiversity. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2016;12:726-734. © 2016 SETAC.