Back to Search Start Over

Developing expert scientific consensus on the environmental and societal effects of marine artificial structures prior to decommissioning

Authors :
Knights, Antony
Lemasson, Anaëlle
Firth, Louise
Bond, Todd
Claisse, Jeremy
Coolen, Joop W.P.
Copping, Andrea
Dannheim, Jennifer
De Dominicis, Michela
Degraer, Steven
Elliott, Michael
Fernandes, Paul
Fowler, Ashley
Frost, Matt
Henry, Lea Anne
Hicks, Natalie
Hyder, Kieran
Jagerroos, Sylvia
Jones, Daniel
Love, Milton
Lynam, Christopher
Macreadie, Peter
Marlow, Joseph
Mavraki, Ninon
McLean, Dianne
Montagna, Paul
Paterson, David
Perrow, Martin
Porter, Joanne
Russell, Debbie
Bull, Ann Scarborough
Schratzberger, Michaela
Shipley, Brooke
van Elden, Sean
Vanaverbeke, Jan
Want, Andrew
Watson, Stephen
Wilding, Thomas
Somerfield, Paul
Knights, Antony
Lemasson, Anaëlle
Firth, Louise
Bond, Todd
Claisse, Jeremy
Coolen, Joop W.P.
Copping, Andrea
Dannheim, Jennifer
De Dominicis, Michela
Degraer, Steven
Elliott, Michael
Fernandes, Paul
Fowler, Ashley
Frost, Matt
Henry, Lea Anne
Hicks, Natalie
Hyder, Kieran
Jagerroos, Sylvia
Jones, Daniel
Love, Milton
Lynam, Christopher
Macreadie, Peter
Marlow, Joseph
Mavraki, Ninon
McLean, Dianne
Montagna, Paul
Paterson, David
Perrow, Martin
Porter, Joanne
Russell, Debbie
Bull, Ann Scarborough
Schratzberger, Michaela
Shipley, Brooke
van Elden, Sean
Vanaverbeke, Jan
Want, Andrew
Watson, Stephen
Wilding, Thomas
Somerfield, Paul
Source :
ISSN: 0301-4797
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

Thousands of artificial (‘human-made’) structures are present in the marine environment, many at or approaching end-of-life and requiring urgent decisions regarding their decommissioning. No consensus has been reached on which decommissioning option(s) result in optimal environmental and societal outcomes, in part, owing to a paucity of evidence from real-world decommissioning case studies. To address this significant challenge, we asked a worldwide panel of scientists to provide their expert opinion. They were asked to identify and characterise the ecosystem effects of artificial structures in the sea, their causes and consequences, and to identify which, if any, should be retained following decommissioning. Experts considered that most of the pressures driving ecological and societal effects from marine artificial structures (MAS) were of medium severity, occur frequently, and are dependent on spatial scale with local-scale effects of greater magnitude than regional effects. The duration of many effects following decommissioning were considered to be relatively short, in the order of days. Overall, environmental effects of structures were considered marginally undesirable, while societal effects marginally desirable. Experts therefore indicated that any decision to leave MAS in place at end-of-life to be more beneficial to society than the natural environment. However, some individual environmental effects were considered desirable and worthy of retention, especially in certain geographic locations, where structures can support improved trophic linkages, increases in tourism, habitat provision, and population size, and provide stability in population dynamics. The expert analysis consensus that the effects of MAS are both negative and positive for the environment and society, gives no strong support for policy change whether removal or retention is favoured until further empirical evidence is available to justify change to the status quo. The combination of desira

Details

Database :
OAIster
Journal :
ISSN: 0301-4797
Notes :
application/pdf, Journal of Environmental Management 352 (2024), ISSN: 0301-4797, ISSN: 0301-4797, English
Publication Type :
Electronic Resource
Accession number :
edsoai.on1430715923
Document Type :
Electronic Resource