Search

A growing number of nations aim to design coastal plans to reduce conflicts in space and safeguard ecosystems that provide important benefits to people and economies. Critics of coastal and ocean planning point to a complicated process with many actors, objectives, and uncertain outcomes. This paper explores one such decision-making process in Belize, which combines ecosystem service modeling, stakeholder participation, and spatial planning to design the country’s first integrated coastal zone management plan, officially approved by the government in August 2016. We assessed risk to three coastal-marine habitats posed by eight human uses and quantified current and future delivery of three ecosystem services: protection from storms, catch and revenue from lobster fishing, and tourism expenditures to identify a preferred zoning scheme. We found that a highly adaptive team of planners, scientists, and analysts can overcome common planning obstacles, including a dearth of data describing the health of the coastal zone and the many uses it supports, complicated legal and political landscapes, and limited in-country technical capacity. Our work in Belize serves as an example for how to use science about the ways in which nature benefits people to effectively and transparently inform coastal and ocean planning decisions around the world.EDITED BY Joao Rodrigues

Coastal protection of communities and property using “green infrastructure” approaches is gaining popularity as the science and practice improve. Guidance is limited for decision makers interested in taking action to protect shorelines. Here, we offer practical guidance for decision makers interested in moving beyond generalities for coastal protection strategies. We present three case examples from the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and in Belize, each posing different questions, and thus using different approaches, to evaluate whether green infrastructure strategies could be useful. For basic questions about where habitat-based approaches are likely to add value, index-based models are useful in identifying priority areas for habitat protection or restoration. Process-based models are best used to examine strategies where the interest is in the likely magnitude of value from gray and green infrastructure approaches. Process-based models in coastal Texas demonstrate that marsh habitats are spatially variabl...

Recent calls for ocean planning envision informed management of social and ecological systems to sustain delivery of ecosystem services to people. However, until now, no coastal and marine planning process has applied an ecosystem-services framework to understand how human activities affect the flow of benefits, to create scenarios, and to design a management plan. We developed models that quantify services provided by corals, mangroves, and seagrasses. We used these models within an extensive engagement process to design a national spatial plan for Belize’s coastal zone. Through iteration of modeling and stakeholder engagement, we developed a preferred plan, currently under formal consideration by the Belizean government. Our results suggest that the preferred plan will lead to greater returns from coastal protection and tourism than outcomes from scenarios oriented toward achieving either conservation or development goals. The plan will also reduce impacts to coastal habitat and increase revenues from lobster fishing relative to current management. By accounting for spatial variation in the impacts of coastal and ocean activities on benefits that ecosystems provide to people, our models allowed stakeholders and policymakers to refine zones of human use. The final version of the preferred plan improved expected coastal protection by >25% and more than doubled the revenue from fishing, compared with earlier versions based on stakeholder preferences alone. Including outcomes in terms of ecosystem-service supply and value allowed for explicit consideration of multiple benefits from oceans and coasts that typically are evaluated separately in management decisions.

Natural capital is of critical importance for biodiversity and people's well-being. Studies indicate that understanding the connection between environmental health and human benefit (i.e., ecosyste...

Ecosystem services have clear promise to help identify and protect priority areas for biodiversity. To leverage them effectively, practitioners must conduct timely analyses at appropriate scales, often with limited data. Here we use simple spatial analyses on readily available datasets to compare the distribution of five ecosystem services with tiger habitat in central Sumatra. We assessed services and habitat in 2008 and the changes in these variables under two future scenarios: a conservation-friendly Green Vision, and a Spatial Plan developed by the Indonesian government. In 2008, the range of tiger habitat overlapped substantially with areas of high carbon storage and sediment retention, but less with areas of high water yield and nutrient retention. Depending on service, location and spatial grain of analysis, there were both gains and losses from 2008 to each scenario; however, aggregate provision of each ecosystem service (except water yield) and total area of tiger habitat were higher in the Vision than the Plan, likely driven by an increase in forest cover in the Vision. Sub-watersheds with high levels of several ecosystem services contained substantially more tiger habitat than random subsets of sub-watersheds, suggesting that prioritizing ecosystem services could benefit tiger conservation. Our analyses provided input to government-led spatial planning and strategic environmental assessments in the study area, indicating that even under time and data constraints, policy-relevant assessments of multiple ecosystem services are feasible.

The limited understanding of how ecosystem service knowledge (ESK) is used in decision making constrains our ability to learn from, replicate, and convey success stories. We explore use of ESK in decision making in three international cases: national coastal planning in Belize; regional marine spatial planning on Vancouver Island, Canada; and regional land-use planning on the island of Oahu, Hawaii. Decision makers, scientists, and stakeholders collaborated in each case to use a standardized ecosystem service accounting tool to inform spatial planning. We evaluate interview, survey, and observation data to assess evidence of ‘conceptual’, ‘strategic’, and ‘instrumental’ use of ESK. We find evidence of all modes: conceptual use dominates early planning, while strategic and instrumental uses occur iteratively in middle and late stages. Conceptual and strategic uses of ESK build understanding and compromise that facilitate instrumental use. We highlight attributes of ESK, characteristics of the process, and general conditions that appear to affect how knowledge is used. Meaningful participation, scenario development, and integration of local and traditional knowledge emerge as important for particular uses. Keywords: knowledge use, ecosystem services, spatial planning, decision making, science–policy interface