Exploring the risks and benefits of flexibility in biodiversity offset location in a case study of migratory shorebirds

Biodiversity offsets aim to counterbalance the residual impacts of development on species and ecosystems. Guidance documents explicitly recommend that biodiversity offset actions be located close to the location of impact because of higher potential for similar ecological conditions, but allowing greater spatial flexibility has been proposed. We examined the circumstances under which offsets distant from the impact location could be more likely to achieve no net loss or provide better ecological outcomes than offsets close to the impact area. We applied a graphical model for migratory shorebirds in the East Asian–Australasian Flyway as a case study to explore the problems that arise when incorporating spatial flexibility into offset planning. Spatially flexible offsets may alleviate impacts more effectively than local offsets; however, the risks involved can be substantial. For our case study, there were inadequate data to make robust conclusions about the effectiveness and equivalence of distant habitat-based offsets for migratory shorebirds. Decisions around offset placement should be driven by the potential to achieve equivalent ecological outcomes; however, when considering more distant offsets, there is a need to evaluate the likely increased risks alongside the potential benefits. Although spatially flexible offsets have the potential to provide more cost-effective biodiversity outcomes and more cobenefits, our case study showed the difficulty of demonstrating these benefits in practice and the potential risks that need to be considered to ensure effective offset placement.     

Probability analyses of combining background concentrations with model-predicted concentrations

In order to calculate total concentrations for comparison to ambient air quality standards, monitored background concentrations are often combined with model predicted concentrations. Models have low skill in predicting the locations or time series of observed concentrations. Further, adding fixed points on the probability distributions of monitored and predicted concentrations is very conservative and not mathematically correct. Simply adding the 99th percentile predicted to the 99th percentile background will not yield the 99th percentile of the combined distributions. Instead, an appropriate distribution can be created by calculating all possible pairwise combinations of the 1-hr daily maximum observed background and daily maximum predicted concentration, from which a 99th percentile total value can be obtained. This paper reviews some techniques commonly used for determining background concentrations and combining modeled and background concentrations. The paper proposes an approach to determine the joint probabilities of occurrence of modeled and background concentrations. The pairwise combinations approach yields a more realistic prediction of total concentrations than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) guidance approach and agrees with the probabilistic form of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

Implications: EPA's current approaches to determining background concentrations for compliance modeling purposes often lead to “double counting” of background concentrations and actual plume impacts and thus lead to overpredictions of total impacts. Further, the current Tier 1 approach of simply adding the top ends of the background and model predicted concentrations (e.g., adding the 99th percentiles of these distributions together) results in design value concentrations at probabilities in excess of the form of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.     

The role of digital data entry in participatory environmental monitoring

Many argue that monitoring conducted exclusively by scientists is insufficient to address ongoing environmental challenges. One solution entails the use of mobile digital devices in participatory monitoring (PM) programs. But how digital data entry affects programs with varying levels of stakeholder participation, from nonscientists collecting field data to nonscientists administering every step of a monitoring program, remains unclear. We reviewed the successes, in terms of management interventions and sustainability, of 107 monitoring programs described in the literature (hereafter programs) and compared these with case studies from our PM experiences in Australia, Canada, Ethiopia, Ghana, Greenland, and Vietnam (hereafter cases). Our literature review showed that participatory programs were less likely to use digital devices, and 2 of our 3 more participatory cases were also slow to adopt digital data entry. Programs that were participatory and used digital devices were more likely to report management actions, which was consistent with cases in Ethiopia, Greenland, and Australia. Programs engaging volunteers were more frequently reported as ongoing, but those involving digital data entry were less often sustained when data collectors were volunteers. For the Vietnamese and Canadian cases, sustainability was undermined by a mismatch in stakeholder objectives. In the Ghanaian case, complex field protocols diminished monitoring sustainability. Innovative technologies attract interest, but the foundation of effective participatory adaptive monitoring depends more on collaboratively defined questions, objectives, conceptual models, and monitoring approaches. When this foundation is built through effective partnerships, digital data entry can enable the collection of more data of higher quality. Without this foundation, or when implemented ineffectively or unnecessarily, digital data entry can be an additional expense that distracts from core monitoring objectives and undermines project sustainability. The appropriate role of digital data entry in PM likely depends more on the context in which it is used and less on the technology itself.     

Jellyfish jelly press and jelly perception

Since the early 2000’s, invasions and blooms of jellyfish have been increasingly reported in scientific literature as well as in the general media. Despite this increased coverage, the global jellification issue remains unsolved due to the scarcity of extended time series. The aim of this study was to determine to what extent the main messages about jellyfish (increase, causes, threats, solutions, etc.) in the Flemish (Belgian Dutch-language) media correspond with the knowledge and perception of recreational users, tourism-related professionals and local government officials on the Belgian coast. The number of articles in the Flemish media (140) increased from <5 in 2000 to 27 in 2010, with half of them reporting on jellyfish in the Belgian Part of the North Sea. Almost 75 % of these articles reported on the causes (overfishing being mentioned as the main cause) and economic consequences of jellyfish blooms. Articles about the dramatic consequences of stinging, poisonous and non-indigenous species were also common. A questionnaire-based survey carried out on the Belgian coast in summer 2012 indicated that jelly perception is only partly driven by the general media, while personal experience seemed at least equally important as driver. Information on causes, threats, consequences and solutions for problems caused by jellyfish corresponded to a large extent with the answers given by recreational users and tourism-related professionals. Respondents generally agreed that all underlying causes of a potential jellification problem should be addressed and tackled at an international level. With keywords like “pain”, “smell” and “slime” used to describe jellyfish, they have little sympathy from most actors, and most recreational users of beaches and coastal waters are extremely careful with any type of jellyfish, especially when children are involved. Species-specific knowledge (names, ecology, stinging vs. harmless species) presented in the media is not assimilated by most recreational users or local officials, except for divers, who have a very different perception of jellyfish than most recreational users. This lack of knowledge appeared to be a key issue in perception among recreational users. As public perception is a key driver in policy decisions, integrated coastal zone management and measures should provide good and easily understandable information, for example by distributing leaflets and putting up warning signs on the beach. This will result in a better understanding and acceptance of jellyfish as well as generating high-quality data from citizen science programs. Better and more information on jellyfish will thus benefit all the actors and sectors potentially affected by jellification.