Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMurawski, Steven A.  Concept link
dc.contributor.authorSteele, John H.  Concept link
dc.contributor.authorTaylor, Phillip  Concept link
dc.contributor.authorFogarty, Michael J.  Concept link
dc.contributor.authorSissenwine, Michael P.  Concept link
dc.contributor.authorFord, Michael  Concept link
dc.contributor.authorSuchman, Cynthia  Concept link
dc.date.accessioned2009-12-14T15:01:34Z
dc.date.available2009-12-14T15:01:34Z
dc.date.issued2009-08-30
dc.identifier.citationICES Journal of Marine Science: Journal du Conseil 67 (2009): 1-9en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1912/3092
dc.descriptionThis paper is not subject to U.S. copyright. The definitive version was published in ICES Journal of Marine Science: Journal du Conseil 67 (2010): 1-9, doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsp221.en_US
dc.description.abstractEffective marine ecosystem-based management (EBM) requires understanding the key processes and relationships controlling the aspects of biodiversity, productivity, and resilience to perturbations. Unfortunately, the scales, complexity, and non-linear dynamics that characterize marine ecosystems often confound managing for these properties. Nevertheless, scientifically derived decision-support tools (DSTs) are needed to account for impacts resulting from a variety of simultaneous human activities. Three possible methodologies for revealing mechanisms necessary to develop DSTs for EBM are: (i) controlled experimentation, (ii) iterative programmes of observation and modelling ("learning by doing"), and (iii) comparative ecosystem analysis. We have seen that controlled experiments are limited in capturing the complexity necessary to develop models of marine ecosystem dynamics with sufficient realism at appropriate scales. Iterative programmes of observation, model building, and assessment are useful for specific ecosystem issues but rarely lead to generally transferable products. Comparative ecosystem analyses may be the most effective, building on the first two by inferring ecosystem processes based on comparisons and contrasts of ecosystem response to human-induced factors. We propose a hierarchical system of ecosystem comparisons to include within-ecosystem comparisons (utilizing temporal and spatial changes in relation to human activities), within-ecosystem-type comparisons (e.g. coral reefs, temperate continental shelves, upwelling areas), and cross-ecosystem-type comparisons (e.g. coral reefs vs. boreal, terrestrial vs. marine ecosystems). Such a hierarchical comparative approach should lead to better understanding of the processes controlling biodiversity, productivity, and the resilience of marine ecosystems. In turn, better understanding of these processes will lead to the development of increasingly general laws, hypotheses, functional forms, governing equations, and broad interpretations of ecosystem responses to human activities, ultimately improving DSTs in support of EBM.en_US
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherOxford University Pressen_US
dc.relation.urihttps://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsp221
dc.subjectComparative marine ecosystem analysisen_US
dc.subjectDecision-support toolsen_US
dc.subjectEAMen_US
dc.subjectEBMen_US
dc.subjectEcological modellingen_US
dc.subjectEcosystem approaches to managementen_US
dc.subjectEcosystem-based managementen_US
dc.titleWhy compare marine ecosystems?en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/icesjms/fsp221


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record