Goals, beneficiaries, and indicators of waterfront revitalization in Great Lakes Areas of Concern and coastal communities

The EPA Ecosystem Services Tool Selection Portal

The dynamics of an environmental decision-making context can be complicated. The use of decision support tools can help better facilitate restoring and maintaining ecosystems that provide environmental benefits (ecosystem services) to people. Although an ecosystem services assessment tool is designed for specific purposes, having access to a comprehensive suite of tools offers the user additional insight and resources to help in decision making. A range of approaches exist to connect ecosystem services to a given decision context ranging from less to more complex: using the best professional judgment; applying examples from other efforts; testing individual tool applications; and using a systematic, decision-tree approach to navigate among relevant tools and frameworks. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency developed a decision-tree approach for a user to navigate the question of how to choose among a suite of ecosystem services assessment tools for three decision contexts: (1) ecological risk assessments; (2) cleanup of contaminated sites; (3) and generic structured decision-making processes. This tool selection navigator was developed with/for the intended user, including developing crosswalks between tool functionality and the user's language for what they require in a tool. To navigate the tool, the user first chooses one of three decision contexts. Second, the user selects among the different phases of the decision process. Third, the user selects among a few ecosystem-services related tasks relevant to the decision context chosen to identify potential tools. The tool uses simple language to navigate the decision pathways and provides the user with a suite of potential ES resources and tools for their given decision context.

The final ecosystem goods and services Voltron: the power of tools together

Environmental decision-making benefits from considering ecosystem services to ensure that aspects of the environment that people rely upon are fully evaluated. By focusing consideration of ecosystem services on final ecosystem goods and services (FEGS), the aspects of the environment directly enjoyed, used, or consumed by humans, these analyses can be more streamlined and effective. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has developed a set of tools to facilitate this consideration. The central feature of FEGS is that ecosystems are viewed through the diverse ways people directly benefit from them. The National Ecosystem Services Classification System (NESCS) Plus provides a framework for describing and identifying FEGS consistently. The standardization made available by NESCS Plus allows other tools and databases to interact using the NESCS Plus architecture and taxonomy, providing diverse insights for decision makers. Here, we examine the synergy of using the following four tools together: (1) the FEGS Scoping Tool; (2) the FEGS Metrics Report; (3) the EnviroAtlas; and (4) the EcoService Models Library. The FEGS Scoping Tool helps users determine what ecosystem services are relevant to a decision by harnessing FEGS understanding to enable communities to identify the relative importance of beneficiaries relevant to a decision and biophysical aspects of the environment of direct relevance to those beneficiaries. The FEGS Metrics Report can guide which metrics to monitor or model to represent those priority services. The EnviroAtlas, a powerful tool containing geospatial data and other resources related to ecosystem services, chemical and non-chemical stressors, and human health, and the EcoService Models Library, a database of ecosystem models, are two tools that support users in mapping and modeling endpoints relevant to priority services. While each of these tools is valuable on its own, together, they provide a powerful approach to easily incorporate and operationalize ecosystem services efforts into different parts of decision-making processes across different types of decisions. We illustrate how these integrated tools can be used together with a hypothetical example of a complex environmental management case study and the combined benefit of using the FEGS tools together.

Ecosystem Services Profiles for Communities Benefitting from Estuarine Habitats along the Massachusetts Coast, USA

The Massachusetts Bays National Estuary Partnership is one of 28 programs in the United States Environmental Protection Agency's National Estuary Program (NEP) charged with developing and implementing comprehensive plans for protecting and restoring the biological integrity and beneficial uses of their estuarine systems. The Partnership has recently updated their comprehensive management plan to include restoration targets for coastal habitats, and as part of this effort, the program explored how to better demonstrate that recovery of ecological integrity of degraded ecosystems also provides ecosystem services that humans want and need. An essential step was to identify key stakeholders and understand the benefits important to them. The primary objective of the study presented here was to evaluate variability in beneficial uses of estuarine habitats across coastal communities in Massachusetts Bays. We applied a text mining approach to extract ecosystem services concepts from over 1400 community planning documents. We leveraged a Final Ecosystem Goods and Services (FEGS) classification framework and related scoping tool to identify and prioritize the suite of natural resource users and ecosystem services those users care about, based on the relative frequency of mentions in documents. Top beneficiaries included residents, experiencers and viewers, property owners, educators and students, and commercial or recreational fishers. Beneficiaries had a surprising degree of shared interests, with top ecosystem services of broad relevance including for naturalness, fish and shellfish, water movement and navigability, water quality and quantity, aesthetic viewscapes, availability of land for development, flood mitigation, and birds. Community-level priorities that emerged were primarily related to regional differences, the local job industry, and local demographics. Identifying priority ecosystem services from community planning documents provides a starting point for setting locally-relevant restoration goals, designing projects that reflect what stakeholders care about, and supporting post-restoration monitoring in terms of accruing relevant benefits to local communities.

Using ecosystem health and welfare assessments to determine impacts of wild collection for public aquariums

Aquatic ecosystems are currently facing a multitude of stressors from anthropogenic impacts, including climate change, pollution, and overfishing. Public aquariums positively contribute to ecosystems through conservation, education, and scientific advancement; but may also negatively detract from these systems through collection of animals from the wild and sourcing from commercial suppliers. Changes within the industry have occurred, although evidence-based assessments of 1) how aquariums collect and maintain their populations to determine sustainability of the environment they have harvested; and 2) the welfare of these harvested animals once within the aquariums are still needed. The objectives of this study were to assess the ecosystem health of locations aquariums frequently visit to collect fish from the wild, and then evaluate the wellbeing of fishes at aquariums after extended periods in captivity. Assessments included use of chemical, physical, and biological indicators at field sites, and use of a quantitative welfare assessment at aquariums for comparison to species reared through aquaculture. Anthropogenic pressures at field sites were observed, but no evidence of high degradation or compromised health of animals were found. Welfare assessments of aquarium exhibit tanks produced high-positive scores overall (> 70/84), demonstrating that both wild collected (avg. score 78.8) and aquaculture fishes (avg. score 74.5) were coping appropriately within their environments. Although findings indicated that fish can be taken from the wild at low-moderate rates without any deleterious impact on the environment and cope equally well in aquarium settings, alternatives such as aquaculture should be considered as a strategy to reduce pressure on known stressed aquatic environments or where significant numbers of fishes are being taken.

Setting an agenda to catalyze research in the social and organizational dimensions of Great Lakes remediation, restoration, and revitalization

The Great Lakes region was once a hub of industry and innovation that provided wealth and identity to the region. Economic upheavals have left the region trying to recreate economies and cleanup degraded environments. There have been multiple, overlapping efforts to change these conditions and create a new narrative for the region through environmental remediation, habitat restoration, and community revitalization on the path towards resilience. The elements that contribute to success are organized differently in different places, and are not always identified or characterized in the environmental literature. Trying to fill this conceptual gap is critical because landscape-scale environmental cleanup has been delivered at the local scale through various partnerships and arrangements. Thus, this special collection of articles in the Journal of Great Lakes Research explores how individuals, organizations, and communities are engaging in the complex process of environmental cleanup and revitalization throughout the region. This collection of articles represents a range of approaches to unpack how people are navigating and contributing to this regenerative process from quantitative studies at the regional scale that characterize global patterns to in-depth qualitative studies that identify and characterize the processes that unfold in specific places to change our environments both ecologically and socially. These articles represent the broad experience unfolding in the region to understand these activities through research and navigate them through practice. This collection will add new dimensions to Great Lakes research by including the individuals, organizations, and agencies as components of the ecosystem.

Defining community revitalization in Great Lakes Areas of Concern and investigating how revitalization can be catalyzed through remediation and restoration

An international effort to restore contaminated areas across the Great Lakes has been underway for over 50 years. Although experts have increasingly recognized the inherent connections between ecological conditions and community level benefits, Great Lakes community revitalization continues to be a broad and complex topic, lacking a comprehensive definition. The purpose of this study was to generate a testable "AOC-Revitalization Framework" for linking remediation and restoration success, represented by Beneficial Use Impairment (BUI) removal in U.S. Great Lakes Areas of Concern (AOC), to community revitalization. Using directed content analysis, we conducted a literature review and identified 433 potential revitalization metrics and indicators and grouped them into 15 broader community revitalization attributes to develop the following definition of Great Lakes community revitalization: "locally driven community resurgence resulting in resilient and equitable enhancements to social, economic, and environmental community structures." We surveyed experts within the Great Lakes AOC program on the likelihood remediation and restoration success, would positively impact revitalization attributes. Focus groups triangulated survey results. Results identified BUI removal was expected to positively affect revitalization, but the type of revitalization outcome was based on the BUI being removed. The AOC-Revitalization Framework is the first to empirically outline these possible linkages, providing a clear testable structure for future research; it can be used to better understand how environmental improvements are or are not leading to community revitalization and more accurately identify components of revitalization impacted, thus supporting more equitable representation, communication, and measurement of the relationship.

A conceptual approach to characterizing ecological suitability: Informing socio-ecological measures for restoration effectiveness

A combination of ecological and socio-economic outcome indicators is essential for understanding and assessing the effectiveness of the remediation and restoration of degraded ecosystems and revitalizing communities that could benefit from these ecosystem management activities. In this paper, we propose and develop a conceptual approach to characterize ecological suitability that incorporates ecological attributes that support ecosystem structural diversity and functionality, stakeholder values and perceptions, and the benefits derived from ecosystem goods and services. A structured literature review was used to identify existing restoration frameworks and indicators to inform the conceptual foundation for characterizing ecological suitability. The structure of the conceptual approach primarily builds from ecological and social attributes in the International Principles and Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration (Gann et al., 2019). We provide a conceptual example of the ecological suitability approach in estuaries. This example is based on habitat suitability and food web characterizations in combination with the provisioning of ecosystem services and desired social benefits to prioritize and evaluate restoration effectiveness. This foundational work sets the stage for developing a composite measure of ecological suitability. The holistic conceptual approach presented complements existing information regarding restoration effectiveness evaluations. Characterizing ecological suitability is a novel way to incorporate ecological and social information and communicate potential restoration outcomes to ecosystem managers and stakeholders.

Human well-being and natural capital indictors for Great Lakes waterfront revitalization

Revitalization of natural capital amenities at the Great Lakes waterfront can result from sediment remediation, habitat restoration, climate resilience projects, brownfield reuse, economic redevelopment and other efforts. Practical indicators are needed to assess the socioeconomic and cultural benefits of these investments. We compiled U.S. census-tract scale data for five Great Lakes communities: Duluth/Superior, Green Bay, Milwaukee, Chicago, and Cleveland. We downloaded data from the US Census Bureau, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Environmental Protection Agency, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and non-governmental organizations. We compiled a final set of 19 objective human well-being (HWB) metrics and 26 metrics representing attributes of natural and seminatural amenities (natural capital). We rated the reliability of metrics according to their consistency of correlations with metric of the other type (HWB vs. natural capital) at the census-tract scale, how often they were correlated in the expected direction, strength of correlations, and other attributes. Among the highest rated HWB indicators were measures of mean health, mental health, home ownership, home value, life success, and educational attainment. Highest rated natural capital metrics included tree cover and impervious surface metrics, walkability, density of recreational amenities, and shoreline type. Two sociodemographic covariates, household income and population density, had a strong influence on the associations between HWB and natural capital and must be included in any assessment of change in HWB benefits in the waterfront setting. Our findings are a starting point for applying objective HWB and natural capital indicators in a waterfront revitalization context.

Beneficial Use Impairments, Degradation of Aesthetics, and Human Health: A Review

In environmental programs and blue/green space development, improving aesthetics is a common goal. There is broad interest in understanding the relationship between ecologically sound environments that people find aesthetically pleasing and human health. However, to date, few studies have adequately assessed this relationship, and no summaries or reviews of this line of research exist. Therefore, we undertook a systematic literature review to determine the state of science and identify critical needs to advance the field. Keywords identified from both aesthetics and loss of habitat literature were searched in PubMed and Web of Science databases. After full text screening, 19 studies were included in the review. Most of these studies examined some measure of greenspace/bluespace, primarily proximity. Only one study investigated the impacts of making space quality changes on a health metric. The studies identified for this review continue to support links between green space and various metrics of health, with additional evidence for blue space benefits on health. No studies to date adequately address questions surrounding the beneficial use impairment degradation of aesthetics and how improving either environmental quality (remediation) or ecological health (restoration) efforts have impacted the health of those communities.

Synthesis of Two Decades of US EPA's Ecosystem Services Research to Inform Environmental, Community, and Sustainability Decision Making

A conceptual framework is helpful to understand what types of ecosystem services (ES) information is needed to support decision making. Principles of structured decision making are helpful for articulating how ES consideration can influence different elements in a given decision context resulting in changes to the environment, human health, and well-being. This article presents a holistic view of an ES framework, summarizing two decades of the US EPA's ES research, including recent advances in final ES, those ES that provide benefits directly to people. Approximately 150 peer-reviewed publications, technical reports, and book chapters characterize a large ES research portfolio. In introducing framework elements and the suite of relevant US EPA research for each element, both challenges and opportunities are identified. Lessons from research to advance each of the final ES elements can be useful for identifying gaps and future science needs. Ultimately, the goal of this article is to help the reader develop an operational understanding of the final ES conceptual framework, an understanding of the state of science for a number of ES elements, and an introduction to some ES tools, models, and frameworks that may be of use in their case-study applications or decision-making contexts.

Advancing Translational Research in Environmental Science: The Role and Impact of Social Sciences

Increasing recognition of the complexity of environmental problems and the need to understand social processes and human values is leading environmental management agencies in many nations, including the USA, to integrate more research from the social sciences through the inclusion of social scientists on interdisciplinary teams. For this study we conducted focus groups at three research laboratories within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Research and Development to better understand how inclusion of social sciences influenced the research process and outcomes, and the barriers to and facilitators of integration. The focus groups identified effects on the research process including improved problem framing, the introduction of new methodologies, and greater stakeholder and public inclusion, while research outcomes included the inclusion or refinement of social and environmental perspectives and systems thinking, increased translatability of research, and new partnerships. Barriers identified included lack of familiarity with social sciences which affected perceptions of social sciences and organizational capacity to absorb and apply social science expertise. Facilitators included receptivity of team members, intentional communication strategies, and project structures and organizational commitment that support interdisciplinary work. Finding a key barrier to be lack of clarity about the different roles social sciences play in translational research, we present a conceptual model defining the roles and contributions of social scientists that clarifies the distinction between "integration" of social sciences in research and "application" of skills and knowledge from the social sciences which play distinct but equally important roles in translational research approaches and solutions-driven research. These insights on the ways social sciences contribute to translational research efforts advance integration of social and natural sciences in environmental science research, particularly in applied contexts.

Evolving Institutional Arrangements for use of an ecosystem approach in restoring Great Lakes Areas of Concern

The 1987 Canada-U.S. Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement required Remedial Action Plans (RAPs) be collaboratively generated between local stakeholders and government agencies to implement an ecosystem approach in cleaning up 43 historically polluted Areas of Concern (AOCs) throughout the Laurentian Great Lakes. The institutional arrangements that have emerged over the past 35 years to foster an ecosystem approach in RAPs are expected to have changed over time and be varied in some aspects—reflecting unique socio-ecological contexts of each AOC—while also sharing some characteristics that were either derived from the minimally prescribed framework or developed convergently. Here we surveyed institutional arrangements to describe changes over time relevant to advancing an ecosystem approach in restoring beneficial uses in the 43 AOCs. While eight AOCs evidenced little institutional change, the remaining 35 AOCs demonstrated a growing involvement of local organizations in RAPs, which has enhanced local capacity and ownership and helped strengthen connections to broader watershed initiatives. We also noted an expansion of strategic partnerships that has strengthened science-policy-management linkages and an increasing emphasis on sustainability among RAP institutions. Our study details how institutional arrangements in a decentralized restoration program have evolved to implement an ecosystem approach and address new challenges

US EPA EnviroAtlas Meter-Scale Urban Land Cover (MULC): 1-m Pixel Land Cover Class Definitions and Guidance

This article defines the land cover classes used in Meter-scale Urban Land Cover (MULC), a unique, high resolution (one meter2 per pixel) land cover dataset developed for 30 US communities for the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) EnviroAtlas. MULC data categorize the landscape into these land cover classes: impervious surface, tree, grass-herbaceous, shrub, soil-barren, water, wetland and agriculture. MULC data are used to calculate approximately 100 EnviroAtlas metrics that serve as indicators of nature's benefits (ecosystem goods and services). MULC, a dataset for which development is ongoing, is produced by multiple classification methods using aerial photo and LiDAR datasets. The mean overall fuzzy accuracy across the EnviroAtlas communities is 88% and mean Kappa coefficient is 0.84. MULC is available in EnviroAtlas via web browser, web map service (WMS) in the user's geographic information system (GIS), and as downloadable data at EPA Environmental Data Gateway. Fact Sheets and metadata for each MULC Community are available through EnviroAtlas. Some MULC applications include mapping green and grey infrastructure, connecting land cover with socioeconomic/demographic variables, street tree planting, urban heat island analysis, mosquito habitat risk mapping and bikeway planning. This article provides practical guidance for using MULC effectively and developing similar high resolution (HR) land cover data.

Applying best-worst scaling to rank ecosystem and economic benefits of restoration and conservation in the Great Lakes

Since 2010, over $2.4 billion in public funds have been invested in the cleanup and restoration of the Great Lakes Basin through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. Efforts have targeted restoration of Areas of Concern and other degraded sites. While the ecological benefits of Great Lakes restoration have been highlighted by the Environmental Protection Agency, and the economic benefits studied by the binational International Joint Commission, public preferences for Great Lakes conservation and restoration have not been well studied. Using best-worst scaling and a seven-preference choice set, 1,215 Basin residents quantitatively ranked their preferred reasons to restore and conserve Great Lakes shorelines and waterways, with a focus on restoration at Areas of Concern and National Park Service sites. The analysis shows the most preferred reason for restoration and conservation is to promote human health, followed by the protection of native species, and the prevention of new invasive species from entering the Great Lakes. The least preferred reason for restoration and conservation is to improve local property values. Although respondents' top reason was human-centered, respondents' preferred ecosystem conservation over the benefits of economic revitalization, recreational use, and improved property values. Preferences analyzed by gender, income, and home location followed these same rankings. Preferences for habitat restoration and the prevention of invasive species align with the focus areas guiding the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, providing evidence of public support for this expansive, publicly funded restoration effort.