Evaluating indicators of human well-being for ecosystem-based management

Introduction:Interrelated social and ecological challenges demand an understanding of how environmental change and management decisions affect human well-being.This paper out-lines a framework for measuring human well-being for ecosystem-based management(EBM).We present a prototype that can be adapted and developed for various scales and contexts.Scientists and managers use indicators to assess status and trends in integrated ecosystem assessments(IEAs).To improve the social science rigor and success of EBM,we developed a systematic and transparent approach for evaluating indicators of human well-being for an IEA.Methods:Our process is based on a comprehensive conceptualization of human well-being,a scalable analysis of management priorities,and a set of indicator screening criteria tailored to the needs of EBM.We tested our approach by evaluating more than 2000 existing social indicators related to ocean and coastal management of the US West Coast.We focused on two foundational attributes of human well-being:resource access and self-determination.Outcomes and Discussion:Our results suggest that existing indicators and data are limited in their ability to reflect linkages between environmental change and human well-being,and extremely limited in their ability to assess social equity and justice.We reveal a critical need for new social indicators tailored to answer environmental questions and new data that are disaggregated by social variables to measure equity.In both,we stress the importance of collaborating with the people whose well-being is to be assessed.Conclusion:Our framework is designed to encourage governments and communities to carefully assess the complex tradeoffs inherent in environmental decision-making.

Thirty-two essential questions for understanding the social-ecological system of forage fish:the case of pacific herring

Forage fishes are ecologically and economically important low trophic level species,and in recent years interest in their biology and management has intensified.Pacific Herring are emblemat-ic of the management issues facing forage species-they are central components of the Northeast Pacific pelagic food web and support important commercial fisheries.In addition,the importance of Herring to indigenous peoples have made them cultural keystone species.We employed a participatory process to promote collaborative priority-setting for this critical forage species.Working with managers,the fisher-ies industry,indigenous peoples,and scientists,we co-constructed a conceptual model of the Pacific Her-ring social-ecological system(SES)in the Northeast Pacific.We then identified a set of questions,that,if answered,would significantly increase our ability to sustainably manage the Herring SES.Our objective was to generate a road map for scientists who wish to conduct useful forage fish research,for resource managers who wish to develop new research efforts that could fill critical gaps,and for public agencies and private foundations seeking to prioritize funding on forage fish issues in the Pacific.With this socio-cultural centrality comes complexity for fisheries management.Our participatory process highlighted the value of conceptualizing the full SES,overcame disciplinary differences in scientific approaches,research philos-ophy,and language,and charted a path forward for future research and management for forage species.

Principles for managing marine ecosystems prone to tipping points

As climatic changes and human uses intensify,resource managers and other decision makers are taking actions to either avoid or respond to ecosystem tipping points,or dramatic shifts in structure and function that are often costly and hard to reverse.Evidence indicates that explicitly addressing tipping points leads to improved management outcomes.Drawing on theory and examples from marine systems,we distill a set of seven principles to guide effective management in ecosystems with tipping points,derived from the best available science.These principles are based on observations that tipping points(1)are possible everywhere,(2)are associated with intense and/or multifaceted human use,(3)may be preceded by changes in earlywarning indicators,(4)may redistribute benefits among stakeholders,(5)affect the relative costs of action and inaction,(6)suggest biologically informed management targets,and(7)often require an adaptive response to monitoring.We suggest that early action to preserve system resilience is likely more practical,affordable,and effective than late action to halt or reverse a tipping point.We articulate a conceptual approach to management focused on linking management targets to thresholds,tracking early-warning signals of ecosystem instability,and stepping up investment in monitoring and mitigation as the likelihood of dramatic ecosystem change increases.This approach can simplify and economize management by allowing decision makers to capitalize on the increasing value of precise information about threshold relationships when a system is closer to tipping or by ensuring that restoration effort is sufficient to tip a system into the desired regime.