Linking risk factors to risk treatment in ecological risk assessment of marine biodiversity

Abstract

Implementing marine ecosystem-based management at regional and small spatial scales is challenging due to the complexity of ecosystems, human activities, their interactions and multilayered governance. Ecological risk assessments (ERAs) of marine biodiversity are often used to prioirtise issues but only give broad guidance of how issues might be addressed in the form of strategies. However, at small and regional spatial scales marine natural resource managers have to make decisions within these strategies about how to manage specific interactions between human uses and ecological components. By using the transition between risk characterization and risk treatment in ERA for marine biodiversity tractable ways through the complexity can be found. This paper will argue that specific management and research actions relevant to smaller spatial scales can be developed by using the linkage between risk factors and risk treatment in ERA. Many risk factors require risk treatments that extend beyond the boundary of local agencies or sector responsibilities. The risk factor-treatment platform provides a practical way that these boundaries can be opened up by providing a scientifically based and transparent process to engage all actors who need to be involved in addressing the issues raised by an ERA. First, the principles of the mechanism will be described. Second, how the mechanism is constructed will be introduced using examples from an urban estuary. Application of the mechanism reveals three different types of risk factors (stressor, ecological, and knowledge gap) that can be used to develop specific management and research actions to treat risks. The systematic approach enables the dual complexities of marine ecosystems and multiple human pressures to be unravelled to identify and target issues effectively. The risk factor treatment linkage provides a platform to negotiate and develop effective management and research actions across jurisdictional, disciplinary, community and stakeholder boundaries.

Implementing Sustainably Managed Fisheries Using Ecological Risk Assessment and Bowtie Analysis

“…One, the level of risk maybe under-or over-estimated; and two, some of the factors contributing to the risk are not clearly identified making it difficult for management to understand what needs to be addressed to lower the risk. Consequently, this potentially leads to the development of management and research actions that are not matched to the risk factors contributing to an ecological component being at risk of unsustainable fishing [26]. Illustration of the link between components of the pathway between human pressures and consequences on management objectives.…”

“…Second, and most importantly, the ERA identifies the risk factors contributing to the level of risk for each ecological component. These risk factors are the basis for determining effective risk treatments [26] which include management actions and filling key knowledge gaps. The risk factors are then fed into the second-stage BTA to evaluate how best to allocate effective management and research actions given limited resources.…”

“…The level of risk is estimated by determining the pressure from fishing and other human activities being exerted on a species and the capacity of that species to respond to that pressure, referred to as human pressure (HP) and capacity to respond (CTR) respectively. Details of how HP and CTR components are estimated are given in [26] and the Supplementary Tables S1-S9 and will be demonstrated in the case study. Briefly, the level of HP is estimated by assigning a measure for each stressor (derived from research results and the literature review from the risk identification stage), a decision criteria for each measure as to whether it contributes to the human pressure or is unknown, and then summing all contributing stressors, including unknowns, expressed as a proportion of the total number of stressors used.…”

“…Therefore, the next step is crucial. Issues arising from the risk analysis stage identify and collate the factors contributing to the risk level for a species [26]. There are four types of risk factors-stressor/impact, management control, ecological and knowledge gaps.…”

Estimating the Exposure of Coral Reefs and Seagrass Meadows to Land-Sourced Contaminants in River Flood Plumes of the Great Barrier Reef: Validating a Simple Satellite Risk Framework with Environmental Data

“…The assessment of risk in this study is defined as "the methods by which the likely adverse effect of combined contaminants on ecosystems is estimated with a known degree of certainty using scientific methodology" [20]. Risk management approaches are becoming increasingly more common [21] in a range of applications including fisheries science [22,23], marine spatial planning [24] and ecosystem management [25,26]. Plume water types are associated with different levels and combinations of pollutants and, in combination with in situ WQ information, provide a broad scale approach to reporting contaminant concentrations in the GBR marine environment.…”