Dataset Information

Evaluating the ecosystem services and benefits of wetland restoration by use of the rapid benefit indicators approach.

ABSTRACT: Wetlands in urban and urbanizing areas are often smaller, more degraded, and subject to more stressors than those in undeveloped locations. Their restored level of functioning may never equal that of a site in an undisturbed landscape. Yet, the social benefits from restoring these wetlands may be significant because of the relative scarcity of wetlands and natural areas in urban settings and also the large number of people who may benefit. In this study, we have outlined a systematic approach to compiling nonmonetary indicators of wetlands restoration benefits: The Rapid Benefit Indicators (RBI) Approach. The RBI approach is grounded in economic theory and compatible with methods used by environmental economists to value ecosystem services. We illustrate the RBI approach with a comparison of 2 sites within the Woonasquatucket River Watershed in Rhode Island. As an urbanizing watershed, the Woonasquatucket illustrates how decisions may differ when based primarily on evaluations of ecological functioning versus those that incorporate benefits to people. It demonstrates how small urban sites with relatively low ecological function can provide large social benefits. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2019;15:148-159. Published 2018. This article is a US Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

SUBMITTER: Mazzotta M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6475909 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluating the ecosystem services and benefits of wetland restoration by use of the rapid benefit indicators approach.

Mazzotta Marisa M Bousquin Justin J Berry Walter W Ojo Claudette C McKinney Rick R Hyckha Kristen K Druschke Caroline Gottschalk CG

Integrated environmental assessment and management 20181114 1

Wetlands in urban and urbanizing areas are often smaller, more degraded, and subject to more stressors than those in undeveloped locations. Their restored level of functioning may never equal that of a site in an undisturbed landscape. Yet, the social benefits from restoring these wetlands may be significant because of the relative scarcity of wetlands and natural areas in urban settings and also the large number of people who may benefit. In this study, we have outlined a systematic approach to ...[more]

PMID: 30246394

Similar Datasets

Project description:The global decline of marine foundation species (kelp forests, mangroves, salt marshes, and seagrasses) has contributed to the degradation of the coastal zone and threatens the loss of critical ecosystem services and functions. Restoration of marine foundation species has had variable success, especially for seagrasses, where a majority of restoration efforts have failed. While most seagrass restorations track structural attributes over time, rarely do restorations assess the suite of ecological functions that may be affected by restoration. Here we report on the results of two small-scale experimental seagrass restoration efforts in a central California estuary where we transplanted 117 0.25-m2 plots (2,340 shoots) of the seagrass species Zostera marina. We quantified restoration success relative to persistent reference beds, and in comparison to unrestored, unvegetated areas. Within three years, our restored plots expanded ~8,500%, from a total initial area of 29 to 2,513 m2 . The restored beds rapidly began to resemble the reference beds in (1) seagrass structural attributes (canopy height, shoot density, biomass), (2) ecological functions (macrofaunal species richness and abundance, epifaunal species richness, nursery function), and (3) biogeochemical functions (modulation of water quality). We also developed a multifunctionality index to assess cumulative functional performance, which revealed restored plots are intermediate between reference and unvegetated habitats, illustrating how rapidly multiple functions recovered over a short time period. Our comprehensive study is one of few published studies to quantify how seagrass restoration can enhance both biological and biogeochemical functions. Our study serves as a model for quantifying ecosystem services associated with the restoration of a foundation species and demonstrates the potential for rapid functional recovery that can be achieved through targeted restoration of fast-growing foundation species under suitable conditions.

Project description:There is growing support for characterizing ecosystem services in order to link conservation and human well-being. However, few studies have explicitly included ecosystem services within systematic conservation planning, and those that have follow two fundamentally different approaches: ecosystem services as intrinsically-important targeted benefits vs. substitutable co-benefits. We present a first comparison of these two approaches in a case study in the Central Interior of British Columbia. We calculated and mapped economic values for carbon storage, timber production, and recreational angling using a geographical information system (GIS). These 'marginal' values represent the difference in service-provision between conservation and managed forestry as land uses. We compared two approaches to including ecosystem services in the site-selection software Marxan: as Targeted Benefits, and as Co-Benefits/Costs (in Marxan's cost function); we also compared these approaches with a Hybrid approach (carbon and angling as targeted benefits, timber as an opportunity cost). For this analysis, the Co-Benefit/Cost approach yielded a less costly reserve network than the Hybrid approach (1.6% cheaper). Including timber harvest as an opportunity cost in the cost function resulted in a reserve network that achieved targets equivalently, but at 15% lower total cost. We found counter-intuitive results for conservation: conservation-compatible services (carbon, angling) were positively correlated with each other and biodiversity, whereas the conservation-incompatible service (timber) was negatively correlated with all other networks. Our findings suggest that including ecosystem services within a conservation plan may be most cost-effective when they are represented as substitutable co-benefits/costs, rather than as targeted benefits. By explicitly valuing the costs and benefits associated with services, we may be able to achieve meaningful biodiversity conservation at lower cost and with greater co-benefits.

Project description:Wetlands are valuable ecosystems because they harbor a huge biodiversity and provide key services to societies. When natural or human factors degrade wetlands, ecological restoration is often carried out to recover biodiversity and ecosystem services (ES). Although such restorations are routinely performed, we lack systematic, evidence-based assessments of their effectiveness on the recovery of biodiversity and ES. Here we performed a meta-analysis of 70 experimental studies in order to assess the effectiveness of ecological restoration and identify what factors affect it. We compared selected ecosystem performance variables between degraded and restored wetlands and between restored and natural wetlands using response ratios and random-effects categorical modeling. We assessed how context factors such as ecosystem type, main agent of degradation, restoration action, experimental design, and restoration age influenced post-restoration biodiversity and ES. Biodiversity showed excellent recovery, though the precise recovery depended strongly on the type of organisms involved. Restored wetlands showed 36% higher levels of provisioning, regulating and supporting ES than did degraded wetlands. In fact, wetlands showed levels of provisioning and cultural ES similar to those of natural wetlands; however, their levels of supporting and regulating ES were, respectively, 16% and 22% lower than in natural wetlands. Recovery of biodiversity and of ES were positively correlated, indicating a win-win restoration outcome. The extent to which restoration increased biodiversity and ES in degraded wetlands depended primarily on the main agent of degradation, restoration actions, experimental design, and ecosystem type. In contrast, the choice of specific restoration actions alone explained most differences between restored and natural wetlands. These results highlight the importance of comprehensive, multi-factorial assessment to determine the ecological status of degraded, restored and natural wetlands and thereby evaluate the effectiveness of ecological restorations. Future research on wetland restoration should also seek to identify which restoration actions work best for specific habitats.

Dataset Information

Evaluating the ecosystem services and benefits of wetland restoration by use of the rapid benefit indicators approach.

Publications

Evaluating the ecosystem services and benefits of wetland restoration by use of the rapid benefit indicators approach.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets