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

Breslow, Sara Jo; Allen, Margaret L.; Holstein, Danielle; Sojka, Brit; Barnea, Raz; Basurto, Xavier; Carothers, Courtney; Charnley, Susan; Coulthard, Sarah; Dolšak, Nives; Donatuto, Jamie; García-Quijano, Carlos G.; Hicks, Christina C.; Levine, Arielle; Mascia, Michael B.; Norman, Karma; Poe, Melissa R.; Satterfield, Terre; Martin, Kevin St.; Levin, Phillip S.

doi:10.1080/20964129.2017.1411767

Cited by 71 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 34 publications

(61 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another example of the contextual development of indicators is the Vanuatu National Sustainable Development Plan 2016-2030 (also known as Vanuatu 2030: The People's Plan), which characterizes policy objectives, targets, and indicators in relation to traditional and customary values and priorities including "access to land and natural resources, traditional knowledge and production skills, and community vitality" (Tanguay 2015; DSPPAC 2017 "Vanuatu 2030: The People's Plan"). Other examples of the contextual development of well-being indicators include organization-specific efforts (i.e., NOAA's California Current Integrated Ecosystem Assessment (Breslow et al 2017)) and other nationalfocused plans (i.e., Bhutan's Gross National Happiness Index (Meier and Chakrabarti 2016), the Aotearoa New Zealand Well-being Budget (New Zealand Government 2019 "Living Standards Framework"), the United Kingdom National Wellbeing Measures (Office for National Statistics 2018)).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Creating a space for place and multidimensional well-being: lessons learned from localizing the SDGs

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Achieving sustainable development globally requires multilevel and interdisciplinary efforts and perspectives. Global goals shape priorities and actions at multiple scales, creating cascading impacts realized at the local level through the direction of financial resources and implementation of programs intended to achieve progress towards these metrics. We explore ways to localize global goals to best support human well-being and environmental health by systematically comparing the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with regionally-derived well-being dimensions that encompass components of social-ecological resilience across the Pacific Islands. Our research shows that, in the context of the Pacific, there are overlaps but also significant gaps between regional conceptions of well-being and the globally-derived SDGs. Some dimensions, related to human health and access to infrastructure and finances, are well represented in the SDGs. Other dimensions of high importance when localizing perspectives of well-being, such as those regarding connections between and across people and place and Indigenous and local knowledge, are not. Furthermore, internationally generated indicators may result in trade-offs and measurement challenges in local contexts. Creating space for place-based values in global sustainability planning aligns with international calls for transformational changes needed to achieve global goals. We identify challenges in applying SDG indicators at the local level and provide lessons learned to foster equitable and holistic approaches and outcomes for sustainability.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Creating a space for place and multidimensional well-being: lessons learned from localizing the SDGs

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although there are many methodologies that consider the criteria selection process and quality of the criteria themselves (Castillo & Pitfield, 2010;Calliera et al, 2013;Khadka, & Vacik, 2012;Tanguay et al, 2013;Mascarenhas et al, 2015;Breslow et al, 2017), they present more similarities than differences. Currently most include some component of multi-stakeholder consultations and can be considered hybrid expert/participative approaches.…”

Section: Criteria Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthesizing and standardizing criteria for the evaluation of sustainability indicators in the water sector

Pires

Morató

Peixoto

et al. 2019

Environ Dev Sustain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Indicators are one of the tools available in planning and management projects that aid in the decision-making process and the monitoring of those decisions on the path towards the sustainable use and management of natural resources. However, the quality and reliability of the indicators depends on the constant improvement of the means to assess and design criteria sets. The identification and selection of criteria to evaluate indicators is not a trivial task. The research identified a proliferation of unconsolidated criteria in use in the sustainability and water resource management domains. In response, a process of synthesis and consolidation was undertaken in order to reduce the level of redundancies and to identify possible candidates for "core criteria" that are identified as being a relevant part of most evaluation frameworks. A representative collection of sources from the specialized literature was screened for evaluation criteria. In total, 74 sources were examined, containing a total of 346 mentions of criteria used for indicator assessment. An indepth synthesis was performed using a structured matrix to organize and identify the redundancies in the criteria being utilized. The analysis permitted a reduction of the 346 criteria found to 60 unique criteria. The study proposes a standard name and a description for each criterion, aiming to provide more clarity and reduce ambiguity. The criteria were also ranked to identify which criteria were in more systemic use. Of the 60 criteria found, the 12 most cited were identified as possible core criteria for framework development. Also, in order to facilitate the design of indicator sets, all 60 criteria were divided into two approaches (scientific/top-down or end-use/bottom-up). This study identified significant redundancies and a lack of standardization in the use of criteria and it also ranked criteria to facilitate multi-method framework development. Thus, it is crucial that indicator developers not only consider criteria that have some level of standardization to be able to compare and communicate with other agencies and communities but also consider how to utilize corecriteria in the design of indicator sets.

show abstract

“…Common to these efforts is the focus on the meanings people place on their interactions with the environment and society, and their abilities to act and enjoy their lives. Yet, as with ecosystem services assessments, material aspects of well-being are predominantly measured, while non-material elements (such as sense of place, cultural values, and identities) are lacking (Mckinnon et al, 2016), and may require additional social scientific methods to develop appropriate metrics and next-generational conceptual models, especially those designed to examine subjective perceptions of well-being (Breslow et al, , 2017.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Representation of Human Well-Being and Cultural Importance in Conceptualizing the West Hawai‘i Ecosystem

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecosystem-based management approaches are increasingly used to address the critical linkages between human and biophysical systems. Yet, many of the socialecological systems (SES) frameworks typically used in coastal and marine management neither represent the social and ecological aspects of the system in equal breadth or depth, nor do they adequately operationalize the social, or human, dimensions. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's West Hawai'i Integrated Ecosystem Assessment, a program grounded in ecosystem-based management, recognizes the importance of place-based human dimensions in coastal and marine resource management that speak to a fuller range of social and cultural dimensions of ecosystem-based management. Previous work with stakeholders in West Hawai'i revealed noteworthy SES dynamics and highlighted both the importance and lack of understanding of the links between ecosystem services and human well-being, particularly services that enhance and maintain active cultural connections to a place. While cultural ecosystem services and human well-being are often recognized as important elements of SES, there have been substantial barriers to fully representing them, likely due to perceived difficulties of measuring non-material benefits and values, many of which are socially constructed and subjective. This study examined SES frameworks related to cultural ecosystem services and human well-being to advance the representation and operationalization of these important concepts in coastal and marine management. We describe key insights and questions focused on: (1) points of inclusion for human dimensions in SES models, (2) culturally relevant domains of human well-being and related indicators, (3) the importance of place and its interaction with scale, and finally (4) the tension between a gestalt vs. discrete approach to modeling, assessing, and sustainably managing social-ecological systems.

show abstract

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

Cited by 71 publications

References 34 publications

Creating a space for place and multidimensional well-being: lessons learned from localizing the SDGs

Creating a space for place and multidimensional well-being: lessons learned from localizing the SDGs

Synthesizing and standardizing criteria for the evaluation of sustainability indicators in the water sector

Improving Representation of Human Well-Being and Cultural Importance in Conceptualizing the West Hawai‘i Ecosystem

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About