Valued Ecosystem Components Research Articles

Risk assessment framework for cumulative effects (RAFCE)

Introduction: Regional environmental risk assessment is a practical approach to understanding and proactively addressing the cumulative effects of resource development in areas of regional importance. However, regional assessment is methodologically complex, and frameworks to identify and prioritize regional risk issues to guide effective management decisions are lacking. This research develops a risk and impacts-based cumulative effects assessment framework for scoping regional cumulative effects issues to guide present and future project and regional assessment. We operationalized the framework dubbed Risk Assessment Framework for Cumulative Effects (RAFCE) to assess the risks and impacts of proposed mining development in the Ring of Fire region of Northern Ontario, Canada.Methods: Methodologically, we built on existing studies to understand the key valued ecosystem components (VECs) impacted by mining; organized an expert Bowtie Risk Assessment Tool workshop and interviews to identify regional risks and define the VECs impacted by mining; and developed an impact prioritization model that helped quantify and prioritize impacts of mining.Results and Discussion: RAFCE enabled us to: a) identify drivers and impacts of cumulative effects and potential preventive and mitigation measures for effective cumulative effects management and b) describe, quantify, and rank the major impact and components of regional interest. Using RAFCE, we can identify and prioritize impacts that are cross-cutting, multisector‐driven, synergistic, and relevant to a region, visualize and understand the risk management process, identify policy and management issues to prevent risks or mitigate impacts, and ultimately inform resource allocation for effective regional cumulative effects assessment outcomes. RAFCE is suitable for engaging diverse stakeholders in planning for regional cumulative effects assessment.

THE ASSESSMENT OF TECK'S CASTLE PROJECT BASED ON FIVE VALUED ECOSYSTEM COMPONENTS

Teck's Castle Project is the largest coal mine project to be mined in Canada. This article is an environmental assessment of Teck's Castle Project based on five valued ecosystem components (VECs) including: Surface Water Quality, Fish and Fish habitat, Vegetation, Local Employment, and Land Use. I proposed to use a surface water quality model to detect the degree of pollution of the water quality of the surrounding rivers and use an economic multiplier to measure the impact on local economic employment. Through research, I found that the water treatment facilities used by Teck Coal Limited can effectively alleviate the impact of the project on the water quality of the surrounding rivers, and I recommended that Teck Coal Limited wear protective equipment to protect their health when working.

ERA Acute – Extending an Environmental Risk Assessment Model to the Marginal Ice Zone

ERA Acute is a globally applicable method and software tool for environmental risk assessment (ERA) of acute oil spills (Stephansen et. al, 2017a and 2017b; Libre et al, 2018), and is to be implemented as the new industry standard ERA methodology on the Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS). This paper describes the proposed adaptation and further development of the established ERA Acute method to enhance the functionality for ERA of acute oil spills in the Marginal Ice Zone (MIZ). Due to the highly dynamic nature of the MIZ, the pilot ERA Acute MIZ proposes to use high temporal resolution data on ice concentrations and presence of Valued Ecosystem Components (VECs) in newly developed functions to calculate impacts in the MIZ. Based on literature and preliminary sensitivity tests; parameter values and risk functions have been proposed for the MIZ (ice concentrations in intervals between 10–80 %). The functions reflect that presence of ice reduces the available space for surface activities; foraging, diving, entering and exiting the water and concentrates the oil in the same space between ice floes. These functions will now be further revised, tested and implemented in a software tool. This paper presents the proposed ERA Acute MIZ methodology.

Quantified Exposures from Potential Deepwater Releases for Comparative Risk Assessment of Oil Spill Response Options Including Dispersant Use

ABSTRACT The goal of oil spill response is to mitigate the overall impacts of spilled oil on ecological and socioeconomic resources. Surface and subsea dispersant applications are effective tools that remain controversial after decades of research and discussion. The tradeoff that dispersants potentially increase effects on water column and benthic communities while reducing floating and nearshore/shoreline oil exposure is recognized, but inevitably are qualitatively considered when subjectivity and stakeholder interests prevail. To be objective and transparent, we developed a quantitative approach using oil spill modeling to evaluate response alternatives in a Comparative Risk Assessment (CRA) framework where the fractions of resources potentially exposed are compared, along with their recovery potential. The model quantifies exposure as water surface area, shoreline area and water volume exposed above thresholds of concern, multiplied by duration of exposure, in each environmental compartment. These exposure metrics (i.e., area-days or volume-days) are multiplied by relative densities across the environmental compartments to evaluate the fractions of the resources exposed in each modeled scenario. The fractions of resources exposed, along with their recovery potential, inform decisionmakers using a Spill Impact Mitigation Assessment (SIMA) approach with quantitative estimates of potential consequences, which they may consider along with stakeholder values. Previously, we evaluated a deepwater blowout in the Gulf of Mexico, assuming no intervention or various response options (mechanical recovery, in-situ burning, surface dispersant application, and subsea dispersant injection [SSDI]). The findings were that inclusion of SSDI reduced human and wildlife exposure to volatile organic compounds; dispersed oil into a large water volume at depth; enhanced biodegradation; and reduced surface water, nearshore and shoreline exposure to floating oil and entrained/dissolved oil in the upper water column. Tradeoffs included increased exposures at depth. However, since organisms are less abundant at depth, overall exposure of valued ecosystem components was minimized by use of SSDI. Follow-up modeling shows the benefits of SSDI are due to reduction of the oil droplet sizes released to the water column. Droplet sizes are sensitive to oil and gas release rates, release depth, orifice size and dispersant-to-oil ratio. The exposure metrics resulting from a matrix of scenarios varying these inputs and response actions are expected to be generally representative of the fate and behavior of oil and gas blowouts in the offshore areas of the Gulf of Mexico, as well as other regions with similar oceanographic conditions.

Conceptual Framework for Assessing Ecosystem Health.

ABSTRACTOver the past century, the environment of the Gulf of Mexico has been significantly altered and impaired by extensive human activities. A national commitment to restore the Gulf was finally initiated in response to the unprecedented Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010. Consequently, there is a critical need for an assessment framework and associated set of indicators that can characterize the health and sustainability of an ecosystem having the scale and complexity of the Gulf. The assessment framework presented here was developed as an integration of previous ecological risk– and environmental management–based frameworks for assessing ecosystem health. It was designed to identify the natural and anthropogenic drivers, pressures, and stressors impinging on ecosystems and ecosystem services, and the ecological conditions that result, manifested as effects on valued ecosystem components. Four types of societal and ecological responses are identified: reduction of pressures and stressors, remediation of existing stressors, active ecosystem restoration, and natural ecological recovery. From this conceptual framework are derived the specific indicators to characterize ecological condition and progress toward achieving defined ecological health and sustainability goals. Additionally, the framework incorporates a hierarchical structure to communicate results to a diversity of audiences, from research scientists to environmental managers and decision makers, with the level of detail or aggregation appropriate for each targeted audience. Two proof‐of‐concept studies were conducted to test this integrated assessment and decision framework, a prototype Texas Coastal Ecosystems Report Card, and a pilot study on enhancing rookery islands in the Mission‐Aransas Reserve, Texas, USA. This Drivers–Pressures–Stressors–Condition–Responses (DPSCR4) conceptual framework is a comprehensive conceptual model of the coupled human–ecological system. Much like its predecessor, the ecological risk assessment framework, the DPSCR4 conceptual framework can be tailored to different scales of complexity, different ecosystem types with different stress regimes, and different environmental settings. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2019;15:544–564. © 2019 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC)

Comparative risk assessment of oil spill response options for a deepwater oil well blowout: Part II. Relative risk methodology

Subsea dispersant injection (SSDI) was a new oil spill response (OSR) technology deployed during the Deepwater Horizon accident. To integrate SSDI into future OSR decisions, a hypothetical deepwater oil spill to the Gulf of Mexico was simulated and a comparative risk assessment (CRA) tool applied to contrast three response strategies: (1) no intervention; (2) mechanical recovery, in-situ burning, and surface dispersants; and, (3) SSDI in addition to responses in (2). A comparative ecological risk assessment (CRA) was applied to multiple valued ecosystem components (VECs) inhabiting different environmental compartments (ECs) using EC-specific exposure and relative VEC population density and recovery time indices. Results demonstrated the added benefit of SSDI since relative risks to shoreline, surface wildlife and most aquatic life VECs were reduced. Sensitivity of results to different assumptions was also tested to illustrate flexibility of the CRA tool in addressing different stakeholder priorities for mitigating the impacts of a deepwater blowout.

Comparative Risk Assessment of spill response options for a deepwater oil well blowout: Part 1. Oil spill modeling

Oil spill model simulations of a deepwater blowout in the Gulf of Mexico De Soto Canyon, assuming no intervention and various response options (i.e., subsea dispersant injection SSDI, in addition to mechanical recovery, in-situ burning, and surface dispersant application) were compared. Predicted oil fate, amount and area of surfaced oil, and exposure concentrations in the water column above potential effects thresholds were used as inputs to a Comparative Risk Assessment to identify response strategies that minimize long-term impacts. SSDI reduced human and wildlife exposure to volatile organic compounds; dispersed oil into a large water volume at depth; enhanced biodegradation; and reduced surface water, nearshore and shoreline exposure to floating oil and entrained/dissolved oil in the upper water column. Tradeoffs included increased oil exposures at depth. However, since organisms are less abundant below 200 m, results indicate that overall exposure of valued ecosystem components was minimized by use of SSDI.

Rivers are social–ecological systems: Time to integrate human dimensions into riverscape ecology and management

Incorporation of concepts from landscape ecology into understanding and managing riverine ecosystems has become widely known as riverscape ecology. Riverscape ecology emphasizes interactions among processes at different scales and their consequences for valued ecosystem components, such as riverine fishes. Past studies have focused strongly on understanding the ecological processes in riverscapes and how human actions modify those processes. It is increasingly clear, however, that an understanding of the drivers behind actions that lead to human modification also merit consideration, especially regarding how those drivers influence management efficacy. These indirect drivers of riverscape outcomes can be understood in the context of a diverse array of social processes, which we collectively refer to as human dimensions. Like ecological phenomena, social processes also exhibit complex interactions across spatiotemporal scales. Greater emphasis on feedbacks between social and ecological processes will lead scientists and managers to more completely understand riverscapes as complex, dynamic, interacting social–ecological systems. Emerging applications in riverscapes, as well as studies of other ecosystems, provide examples that can lead to stronger integration of social and ecological science. We argue that conservation successes within riverscapes may not come from better ecological science, improved ecosystem service analyses, or even economic incentives if the fundamental drivers of human behaviors are not understood and addressed in conservation planning and implementation.This article is categorized under: Water and Life > Stresses and Pressures on Ecosystems Human Water > Water Governance Engineering Water > Planning Water

Criteria-based ranking (CBR): A comprehensive process for selecting and prioritizing monitoring indicators

Resources allocated to natural resource management often fluctuate, requiring the types and numbers of parameters used in monitoring programs (e.g., indicators of ecosystem health) to be frequently reassessed. Conventional approaches to selecting monitoring indicators are often biased and non-inclusive. A new Criteria-based Ranking (CBR) process for selecting and/or prioritizing indicators was tested in the Muskoka River Watershed (Ontario, Canada). The CBR process is based on two environmental assessment tools, Simple Weighted and Leopold matrices. It incorporates environmental components and criteria for assessing each indicator, which generate a score per indicator. The process tested in this study was concluded to be an effective way to prioritize and/or select environmental monitoring indicators. A different set of indicators emerged when a common set of criteria was used to assess monitoring indicators. Benefits of the CBR process include:•`Standardization of indicator selection process with less bias and lower cost (e.g., time and human resources).•Indicators that are representative of the community and more relevant for decision-making (e.g., more resilient to socio-political change).•Adaptability: (1) to other goals, e.g., selecting from a list of Valued Ecosystem Components (VECs), and (2) to any context through localized scoring criteria. Easily integrated into existing practice.

ERA Acute – A Multi-Compartment Quantitative Risk Assessment for Oil Spills

Awareness of environmental risk and the demand for oil spill response planning associated with offshore marine operations has increased during the last decades. Environmental Risk Assessments (ERAs) are a crucial part of planning and execution of oil and gas (O&G) activities offshore. A sound ERA can support the O&G industry in environmental risk management (ERM) of operations. Authorities and Operating companies have requested updated methodology based on more recent research from oil spill events such as the Deep Water Horizon incident, with the possibility to perform more detailed analyses in e.g. sensitive areas. ERA Acute is developed to meet these requirements. It is a transparent method of quantitative analysis for environmental screenings, ERAs and Net Environmental Benefit Analyses (NEBAs) of oil spills in four compartments: Sea surface, shoreline, water column and sea floor. The methodology is grid-cell based and results can therefore be shown in a geographical information system (GIS) for any region globally. The user can identify areas of high risk - for use in decision support and spill response planning - independently of the region. Three levels of detail are defined, depending on availability of VEC data, suitable for screening purposes or more detailed studies. Calculations are carried out in two main steps: First, ERA Acute uses input from an oil spill fate and distribution model of choice to calculate exposure and impact to Valued Ecosystem Components (VECs) in each grid cell and for each simulation. Calculations follow a common methodology framework, applying different mechanisms of impact and recovery for each compartment. Impacts are summarised, and in the second step, potential lag-and/or restitution time and risk are calculated for each VEC. The resulting resource impact factor (RIF) is an index that combines the extent of impact and recovery time. A statistical approach is used, based on numerous oil spill simulations covering each season in order to capture variations in spill drift and fate, species abundance and vulnerability. This paper describes the method. ERA Acute methodology is validated in sensitivity studies, field validations, comparison to relevant ERA methods, and documented in several dissemination steps including a guideline for best industry practice. The ERA Acute project is carried out by a consortium of industry partners (Statoil, Total, Norwegian Oil and Gas Association) and experts in environmental risk analysis (Acona, Akvaplan-niva (project manager), DNV-GL and SINTEF), supported by the Research Council of Norway.

Supporting Risk Assessment: Accounting for Indirect Risk to Ecosystem Components

The multi-scalar complexity of social-ecological systems makes it challenging to quantify impacts from human activities on ecosystems, inspiring risk-based approaches to assessments of potential effects of human activities on valued ecosystem components. Risk assessments do not commonly include the risk from indirect effects as mediated via habitat and prey. In this case study from British Columbia, Canada, we illustrate how such “indirect risks” can be incorporated into risk assessments for seventeen ecosystem components. We ask whether (i) the addition of indirect risk changes the at-risk ranking of the seventeen ecosystem components and if (ii) risk scores correlate with trophic prey and habitat linkages in the food web. Even with conservative assumptions about the transfer of impacts or risks from prey species and habitats, the addition of indirect risks in the cumulative risk score changes the ranking of priorities for management. In particular, resident orca, Steller sea lion, and Pacific herring all increase in relative risk, more closely aligning these species with their “at-risk status” designations. Risk assessments are not a replacement for impact assessments, but—by considering the potential for indirect risks as we demonstrate here—they offer a crucial complementary perspective for the management of ecosystems and the organisms within.

Increased taxonomic resolution of Laurentian Great Lakes ichthyoplankton through DNA barcoding: A case study comparison against visual identification of larval fishes from Stokes Bay, Lake Huron

Ichthyoplankton can be difficult to identify due to a lack of morphological differences among closely-related species. Traditional visual identification of ichthyoplankton requires special knowledge to employ morphological keys. Accurate species-level identification is often required to support monitoring programs for those taxa that are considered valued ecosystem components in environmental assessments. DNA-based methods are gaining in popularity as an alternative to visual identification techniques, but direct comparisons of methodological performance between identification techniques are lacking. The goal of this study was to evaluate and explore the consistency between visual and DNA barcoding species-level identification methods, using a case study of larval fish caught in plankton tows at Stokes Bay, Lake Huron during the spring of 2011. Four participants served as Identifiers (3 Novice, 1 Expert) for visual identification of this multi-species set of larval fishes; including Lake Whitefish, Lake Herring, Yellow Perch, Iowa Darter, Ghost Shiner, and Rainbow Smelt. Barcoding successfully identified 51/55 (92.7%) of the larval fishes, while visual identification using a dichotomous key showed substantial variation between observers, and across family/species. There was a 93.7% consistency between visual and barcoding identification at the family level, and a 71.5% consistency level between visual and barcoding at the species level. Potential sources of error are discussed for both identification methods, leading to a recommendation for the coordinated use of both visual and barcoding identification methods to improve species-level assessments for wild ichthyoplankton samples.

Looking up, down, and sideways: Reconceiving cumulative effects assessment as a mindset

Despite all the effort that has gone into defining, researching and establishing best practices for cumulative effects assessment (CEA), understanding remains weak and practice wanting. At one extreme of implementation, CEA can be described as merely an irritant to the completion of a project-specific environmental assessment (EA). At the other extreme, the conceptual view is that all effects in EA should be deemed cumulative unless demonstrated otherwise. Our purpose here is to consider how we might reconceive CEA as a mindset that is at the heart of absolutely every assessment of valued ecosystem component (VEC) to ensure that we understand the relative contributions of various stressors and can decide when cumulative effects may foreclose future activities due to impacts on VECs. Conceptually, we ground the CEA mindset in the context of three lenses that must all be functioning and working together for the mindset to be operative: a technical lens; a law and policy lens; and a participatory lens. Our arguments are based on a review of the CEA, strategic effects assessment (SEA) and regional effects assessment literatures, an examination and consideration of Canadian EA and SEA case practice, and our combined professional experiences. Through using the Bay of Fundy in Canada as a case example, we establish the concept of the CEA mindset and an approach for moving forward with implementation.

Following-Up on Uncertain Environmental Assessment Predictions: The Case of Offshore Oil Projects and Seabirds Off Newfoundland and Labrador

Environmental assessments (EAs) predict project environmental effects with varying degrees of certainty. Articulating prediction uncertainty and linking it to EA follow-up is a best practice for reducing uncertainty. This study examines predictions from Canadian oil projects off Newfoundland and Labrador between 1985 and 2012 concerning seabirds, the valued ecosystem component identified as the most vulnerable to oil exploitation in an area frequented by millions of migratory birds. We asked if these EA predictions: (a) reported uncertainty ratings; (b) for those reporting medium and high uncertainty ratings whether the predictions were addressed by EA follow-up; and (c) if prediction uncertainty was reduced by EA follow-up and reflected in subsequent EAs. Prediction uncertainty reporting was rare and uncertainties were not resolved through EA follow-up. Assumptions of negligible or low environmental effects on seabirds off Newfoundland and Labrador from offshore oil and gas extraction have been supported through decades by sustaining uncertainty.

Changes in migratory fish communities and their health, hydrology, and water chemistry in rivers of the Athabasca oil sands region: a review of historical and current data

The long-lived migratory fish in the lower Athabasca region (including the Athabasca oil sands region) are valued ecosystem components and good bio-indicators of changes in habitat condition, water quality and quantity over the entire stream network. Changes in this region may have been caused by a variety of human activities including oil sands development, forestry, urban development, and recreational activities. We reviewed existing data to examine whether community composition and health of migratory fish (such as northern pike, walleye, and suckers) in the lower Athabasca region have changed over the past 40 years and whether these could be explained by changes in hydrology or water chemistry. Declines of 53%–100% in the abundance of three migratory fish species were detected in the Muskeg watershed (15% land change). Significant changes in fish health were detected. The largest decreases in body condition of fish in the region occurred in the late 1990s and coincided with elevated levels of fin erosion, the most frequently occurring external abnormality, and with extreme discharge conditions. Fish habitat can be affected by both increases and decreases in discharge, and the most pronounced changes were increases in some watersheds of up to 20% of average discharge post-development. In contrast, decreases in discharge post-development in the Muskeg and Steepbank rivers correlated with a decrease in precipitation. Our results show that climatic events and landscape features such as wetlands are important for understanding changes in the system. Further research is needed to examine potential ecological consequences of the observed changes in hydrology for fish and to explore what caused the changes in migratory fish communities and fish health. This will require a better understanding of the trophic structure of the system and a better monitoring program for migratory fish.

Selection of valued ecosystem components in cumulative effects assessment: lessons from Canadian road construction projects

Valued ecosystem component (VEC) selection is a core component of cumulative effects assessment (CEA) and gives direction to impact analysis, mitigation and monitoring. Yet little is known about CEA VEC selection practices. This paper examines 11 Canadian road infrastructure project CEAs completed between 1995 and 2011 to determine how VEC selection in CEA is performed, and whether these practices are sensitive to the linear project development context. Document review and semi-structured interviews reveal an absence of VEC selection guidance, late timing of cumulative effects considerations in impact assessment, lack of sensitivity in CEA VEC selection to the unique, linear nature of the road construction projects and a general lack of insightful, creative approaches to CEA VEC selection – ones that better reflect potential impacts to social and economic aspects of the environment – despite it being shown to be a values-driven, subjective process. There is a clear need for regional databases to support consistent CEA VEC selection processes, and the development of CEA-specific VEC selection guidance.

Uncovering lines of evidence hidden in complex problems: using conceptual models to inform ecosystem-based management of the Missouri River cottonwoods

Unintended consequences arising from the damming and regulation of large multi-state river systems have generated complex socioecological conflicts that must now be addressed to facilitate ecosystem-based management in a holistic, sustainable, and resilient fashion. In these situations, the involvement of numerous stakeholders with disparate and often conflicting values, mindsets, and agendas generate a dynamic decision-making environment riddled with critical knowledge gaps, teeming with uncertainty, and driven by high stakes negotiations perpetuated by a sense of institutional urgency to embrace quick fixes. The system complexity calls for a transparent and prescriptive approach grounded in creative problem solving, transformative design, and collaborative adaptive management. Here, a spiral-based approach to ecosystem modeling is presented emphasizing system conceptualization while encouraging reflection, active learning, and hypothesis-driven monitoring. A case study on the Missouri River focuses on the development of a conceptual model for the cottonwood forest community lining the banks of this highly regulated river system. Between 2006 and 2010, eighty local stakeholders were engaged in six, week-long interactive workshops to integrate their existing knowledge of the cottonwood ecosystems and to synthesize this information into critical drivers, stressors, and valued ecosystem components using conceptual diagramming and tabular crosswalks. The final product has exposed clear lines of evidence tying essential ecosystem responses to measureable endpoints that are now being used to establish performance measures for both alternative comparisons and adaptive management thresholds that will trigger future management responses.

WHAT INFLUENCES VALUED ECOSYSTEM COMPONENT SELECTION FOR CUMULATIVE EFFECTS IN IMPACT ASSESSMENT?

Despite the central role of valued ecosystem component (VEC) selection to project impact assessment (IA) and cumulative effects assessment (CEA), little is known about what influences it. To potentially improve the efficacy of CEA, a look into the "black box" of VEC selection is warranted. An investigation of eleven road construction project IAs in Canada completed between 1995 and 2011 via document analysis and interviews with project informants reveals a heavy reliance on residual effects analysis for CEA VEC selection, such that project VEC list are often exactly or nearly the same as CEA VEC lists. The process of VEC selection is highly subjective, lacking in scientific inputs, and not as sensitive to cumulative effects issues as it perhaps should be given the nature of road projects. The study concludes that a "residual effects analysis—plus" approach to CEA VEC selection is desirable, along with explicit, possibly sector-specific, guidance.

Valued ecosystem components for watershed cumulative effects: An analysis of environmental impact assessments in the South Saskatchewan River watershed, Canada

The accumulating effects of human development are threatening water quality and availability. In recognition of the constraints to cumulative effects assessment (CEA) under traditional environmental impact assessment (EIA), there is an emerging body of research dedicated to watershed-based cumulative effects assessment (WCEA). To advance the science of WCEA, however, a standard set of ecosystem components and indicators is required that can be used at the watershed scale, to inform effects-based understanding of cumulative change, and at the project scale, to inform regulatory-based project based impact assessment and mitigation. A major challenge, however, is that it is not clear how such ecosystem components and indicators for WCEA can or should be developed. This study examined the use of aquatic ecosystem components and indicators in EIA practice in the South Saskatchewan River watershed, Canada, to determine whether current practice at the project scale could be "scaled up" to support ecosystem component and indicator development for WCEA. The hierarchy of assessment components and indicators used in a sample of 35 environmental impact assessments was examined and the factors affecting aquatic ecosystem component selection and indicator use were identified. Results showed that public environmental impact statements are not necessarily publically accessible, thus limiting opportunities for data and information sharing from the project to the watershed scale. We also found no consistent terminology across the sample of impact statements, thus making comparison of assessment processes and results difficult. Regulatory compliance was found to be the dominant factor influencing the selection of ecosystem components and indicators for use in project assessment, rather than scientific reasoning, followed by the mandate of the responsible government agency for the assessment, public input to the assessment process, and preexisting water licensing arrangements external to the assessment process. The current approach to project-based assessment offered little support for WCEA initiatives. It did not provide a standard set of aquatic ecosystem components and indicators or allow the sharing of information across projects and from the project to the watershed scale. We suggest that determining priority assessment parameters for WCEA requires adoption of a standardized framework of component and indicator terminology, which can then be populated for the watershed of concern based on both watershed-based priorities and project-specific regulatory requirements.

Promoting environmental sustainability via an expert elicitation process

Environmental sustainability (ES) planning was applied to the 981-mile, commercially navigable Ohio River. Navigation improvement needs were identified within the broad study along with actions to restore aquatic and riparian ecological resources to a higher state of sustainability. The actions were identified via an Expert Elicitation Process (EEP) involving aquatic and riparian/terrestrial experts knowledgeable of Ohio River resources. The received information was synthesized into goals for the selected resources (Valued Ecosystem Components — or VECs), actions or measures to attain the goals, and monitoring to evaluate conditions. Finally, 26 types of ES actions were identified and classified into three ES alternatives. These alternatives were then evaluated relative to key decision criteria, and such evaluations, based on pertinent decision criteria, were also conducted for four navigation improvement alternatives. Finally, the best combination of ES and navigation alternatives was identified. The key lessons derived from this use of EEP were that: (1) EEP can support the preliminary identification of ES measures; however, more detailed study of specific designs and cost evaluations will be necessary; (2) the method promotes collaboration between key scientists and policymakers from governmental agencies and private sectors, and such collaboration will ultimately provide the foundation for implementation of sustainability actions; and (3) an effective EEP does not occur by accident, it requires careful planning, implementation, and documentation.