Ecological indicators for system-wide assessment of the greater everglades ecosystem restoration program
Ecological indicators for system-wide assessment of the greater everglades ecosystem restoration program
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.ecolind.2008.08.009
复制
发表时间：
2009-11-01
影响因子：
6.9
通讯作者：
Harwell, Matthew C.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Doren, Robert F.;Trexler, Joel C.;Harwell, Matthew C.
开发科学可信的工具来衡量生态修复项目的成功是一项艰巨而艰巨的任务。然而，衡量生态系统总体健康和生态完整性的可靠指标对于评估恢复计划的成功至关重要。南佛罗里达生态系统恢复特别工作组(特别工作组)帮助协调联邦、州、地方和部落政府之间数十亿美元的多组织努力，以恢复佛罗里达大沼泽地，该工作组正在使用一小套系统范围的生态指标来评估恢复工作。一个由科学家和管理人员组成的小组通过使用12个标准的选择过程，从数百个领域中确定了11个生态指标，以确定它们作为全系统套件的一部分的适用性。这12个标准是：(1)指标是否与生态系统相关？(2)它是否对变异性做出反应，使其适用于整个系统？(3)指标是否可行，是否可衡量？(4)指标是否对系统驱动因素敏感，是否可预测？(5)指标是否可用通用语言解释？(6)是否存在关于指标的乐观趋势可能暗示悲观恢复趋势的情况？(7)是否存在关于指标的悲观趋势该指标可能与修复活动无关？(8)该指标是否有科学依据？(9)可以明确，应为该指标建立可衡量的目标，以便评估成功情况？(10)该指标是否具有能够导致纠正行动的特殊性？(11)该指标所针对的生态系统过程或结构水平是什么？(12)该指标是否提供生态变化的早期预警信号？此外，还编制了一份两页的红绿灯成绩单，以协助资源管理者、政策制定者和公众以共同语言交流生态指标所蕴含的复杂科学知识。报告卡采用了普遍理解的信号灯符号，绿色表示正在实现目标，黄色表示尚未实现目标，可能需要采取纠正行动，红色表示目标远未实现，需要采取纠正行动。本文介绍了制定和选择标准、指标和红绿灯报告卡格式和内容的科学过程和结果。个别指标的详细过程和结果载于本期《生态指标》的配套文件中。爱思唯尔有限公司出版。
Developing scientifically credible tools for measuring the success of ecological restoration projects is a difficult and a non-trivial task. Yet, reliable measures of the general health and ecological integrity of ecosystems are critical for assessing the success of restoration programs. The South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force (Task Force), which helps coordinate a multi-billion dollar multi-organizational effort between federal, state, local and tribal governments to restore the Florida Everglades, is using a small set of system-wide ecological indicators to assess the restoration efforts. A team of scientists and managers identified eleven ecological indicators from a field of several hundred through a selection process using 12 criteria to determine their applicability as part of a system-wide suite. The 12 criteria are: (1) is the indicator relevant to the ecosystem? (2) Does it respond to variability at a scale that makes it applicable to the entire system? (3) is the indicator feasible to implement and is it measureable? (4) Is the indicator sensitive to system drivers and is it predictable? (5) Is the indicator interpretable in a common language? (6) Are there situations where an optimistic trend with regard to an indicator might suggest a pessimistic restoration trend? (7) Are there situations where a pessimistic trend with regard to an indicator may be unrelated to restoration activities? (8) Is the indicator scientifically defensible? (9) Can clear, measureable targets be established for the indicator to allow for assessments of success? (10) Does the indicator have specificity to be able to result in corrective action? (11) What level of ecosystem process or structure does the indicator address? (12) Does the indicator provide early warning signs of ecological change? In addition, a two page stoplight report card was developed to assist in communicating the complex science inherent in ecological indicators in a common language for resource managers, policy makers and the public. The report card employs a universally understood stoplight symbol that uses green to indicate that targets are being met, yellow to indicate that targets have not been met and corrective action maybe needed and red to represent that targets are far from being met and corrective action is required. This paper presents the scientific process and the results of the development and selection of the criteria, the indicators and the stoplight report card format and content. The detailed process and results for the individual indicators are presented in companion papers in this special issue of Ecological indicators. Published by Elsevier Ltd.