Abstract

In the marine sciences an increasing number of studies on environmental changes, their causes, and environmental assessments emerged in recent years. Often authors use non-uniform and inconsistent definitions of key terms like driver, threats, pressures etc. Although all of these studies clearly define causal dependencies between the interacting socio-economic and environmental systems in an understandable way, still an overall imprecise wording could induce misunderstanding at higher policy levels when it comes to integrated ecosystems assessments. Therefore we recommend using unified definitions for a better communication between science and management within national, regional and international environmental policies, for example the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). With this article we provide definitions compatible with the driver-pressure-state-impact-response (DPSIR) approach. Although most examples are MSFD related and thus have a marine focus the definitions are intended to be equally applicable for other systems and are usable world-wide. We suggest sticking to these definitions for an easy and simplified knowledge transfer from science to management, since DPSIR model is already accepted as a helpful tool for structuring and communicating ecosystem analyses.

Highlights

  • Worldwide human population is increasing while natural resources remain limited

  • The ecosystem approach is vital for understanding causal dependencies between human activities and their various impacts on marine ecosystems, which has been identified as a major challenge within the contemporary marine science (Borja, 2014)

  • In conclusion we want to highlight that an isolate definition and usage of the terms ‘driver’, ‘pressure’, ‘state’, ‘impact’ and ‘response’ does not make any sense and that an integrative understanding and communication of the causal links and mechanisms involved are essential

Read more

Summary

Discussion

Often authors use non-uniform and inconsistent definitions of key terms like driver, threats, pressures etc. All of these studies clearly define causal dependencies between the interacting socio-economic and environmental systems in an understandable way, still an overall imprecise wording could induce misunderstanding at higher policy levels when it comes to integrated ecosystems assessments. We recommend using unified definitions for a better communication between science and management within national, regional and international environmental policies, for example the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). We suggest sticking to these definitions for an easy and simplified knowledge transfer from science to management, since DPSIR model is already accepted as a helpful tool for structuring and communicating ecosystem analyses

Introduction
Examples of inconsistent usage of the terms ‘driver’ and ‘pressure’
Proposal for consistent definitions within the DPSIR framework
Example 2: non-indigenous species
Example 3: constructions
Example 4: climate change
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call