Integrated social-ecological data for regional natural resource management.

Natural resource managers need information about both human and natural systems and interactions between those systems. Much data is available, but mostly from disparate sources and data have often been collected at different time steps and at different geographic scales. We used insights from the literature to select 270 relevant variables, available at national scale, from 33 unique (Australian) data sources. There were numerous with repeat measures, so in total we have 425 variables: 143 specific to 2016, 148 specific to 2021, and 134 available for both periods. We used GIS to summarize the variables spatially based on two geographic boundaries: one describes 63 Natural Resource Management Regions; the other describes 419 (sub) bioregions (formally, IBRA - Interim Biogeographic Regionalisation for Australia). Data deficiencies prevented us from being able to report on all variables for all regions. In the NRM dataset many regions are offshore islands, about which data are not generally available. Moreover, many IBRA regions are small and household level data are not always available at that scale. For analyses requiring a complete dataset at a single time step, our 2021 dataset for NRM regions includes 270 unique variables that describe 56 regions. Our IBRA data includes 214 variables describing 409 regions. To help managers select appropriate data for specific problems/contexts, the metadata file also categorises variables according to (a) whether they pertain to the social or ecological system, or interactions; (b) the segment of society described (where relevant); and (c) the frequency with which data are updated.

Piecemeal stewardship activities miss numerous social and environmental benefits associated with culturally appropriate ways of caring for country.

Prior research has identified both the contribution that people make to nature and the contribution that nature makes to people (by enhancing wellbeing) - with clear conceptual models to describe the interactions. Prior research has also made a clear case for incorporating insights from multiple perspectives and knowledge systems when seeking to better understand this interactive system. What is lacking, is guidance on how to operationalise some of these ideas to provide bespoke advice to environmental managers. Arguably, we have an adequate, albeit imperfect, understanding of how to operationalise (measure, value and/or otherwise account for) some parts of the conceptual model. There is, for example, abundant literature that describes different ways of valuing Ecosystem services, and a growing body of literature that describes and quantifies the ecological benefits of various stewardship activities, which will subsequently also generate an indirect benefit to people (since improved ecological conditions will improve Ecosystem services). In comparison, we know relatively little about the way in which stewardship activities directly benefit people - and it is on this gap that our paper focuses. We partially fill that knowledge gap by first reaching out to and learning from some of Australia's First Nations People. Key learnings underscore the inter-connectedness of the system, and the need for resource managers to not only monitor the extent and condition of natural system but also the extent and condition of an inextricably connected human system, in addition to the human-nature interactions. We clearly identify ways in which those insights can be used to improve and extend accounting frameworks, such as SEEA Ecosystem Accounts developed by the United Nations that are often used by natural resource managers. In so doing, we generate new insights about Indigenous stewardship (Caring for Country) and methods of accounting for and monitoring stewardship activities. As such, our work provides a practical illustration of one way to populate conceptual models with 'real world' data that also incorporates different world views, to support decision makers for improved social and environmental outcomes.

Ecosystem health, ecosystem services, and the well-being of humans and the rest of nature.

An ecosystem is healthy if it is active, maintains its organization and autonomy over time, and is resilient to stress. Healthy ecosystems provide human well-being via ecosystem services, which are produced in interaction with human, social, and built capital. These services are affected by different ecosystem stewardship schemes. Therefore, society should be aiming for ecosystem health stewardship at all levels to maintain and improve ecosystem services. We review the relationship between ecosystem health and ecosystem services, based on a logic chain framework starting with (1) a development or conservation policy, (2) a management decision or origin of the driver of change, (3) the driver of change itself, (4) the change in ecosystem health, (5) the change in the provision of ecosystem services, and (6) the change in their value to humans. We review two case studies to demonstrate the application of this framework. We analyzed 6,131 records from the Ecosystem Services Valuation Database (ESVD) and found that in approximately 58% of the records data on ecosystem health were lacking. Finally, we describe how the United Nations' System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA) incorporates ecosystem health as part of efforts to account for natural capital appreciation or depreciation at the national level. We also provide recommendations for improving this system.

Understanding feedback relationships between resources, functionings and well-being: A case study of seaweed farming and artisanal processing in Indonesia.

Sen's Capability Approach is one of the most significant theoretical contributions to welfare analysis across a range of disciplines. A part of the literature argues that its conceptual linear flow-from resources to 'functionings', which result in well-being-potentially ignores more complex relations with the feedback loops where a single item could be viewed as having a different role by different people, in different contexts. We explore perceptions of existing feedback relationships in interviews with 74 women from nine seaweed farming villages in Indonesia, engaged in two distinct activities: seaweed farming and artisanal seaweed processing. We find that capability sets required for farming and for processing are distinct and in both cases we observe feedback loops. Several factors, notably social networks and transportation (motorbikes), were mentioned in almost all contexts indicating that not all resources are of equal 'value' and might yield different levels of well-being.

Indigenous Land and Sea Management Programs (ILSMPs) Enhance the Wellbeing of Indigenous Australians.

Conservation and environmental management have been reported as offering opportunities to substantially improve the wellbeing of Indigenous people. Using the holistic wellbeing impact evaluation (W-IE) approach-well suited for use in Indigenous communities-we interviewed 190 Indigenous Australians across four communities. All communities were involved in the Indigenous land and sea management programs (ILSMPs). Our study explored the conceptualisation of 'wellbeing' by participants. In particular, we were interested in the aspects of wellbeing perceived to be affected by ILSMPs. Out of the 26 wellbeing factors explored, 'Health centres'; 'Language'; 'Schools'; and 'Safe community' emerged as being of highest importance to the largest percentage of the respondents. When grouped using principle components analysis (PCA), the 'Community and society' domain emerged as the most important; accounting for 52% of the overall importance of all wellbeing factors. The second most important domain was the 'Country and culture', contributing 31%. Lastly, 'Economic aspects' contributed only 17%. Respondents believed that ILSMPs have played a considerable causal role in improving wellbeing, by positively changing factors most important to them. Specifically, 73% of perceived causal links were related to improvements in the 'Country and Culture' and 23% to 'Community and Society' domain. We thus conclude that land management for Indigenous people is much more than ecological or environmental management with ILSMPs, perceived to cause a wide range of cultural and social benefits. We also propose ways in which the future design of such programs could be improved to further increase benefits.

Using measures of wellbeing for impact evaluation: Proof of concept developed with an Indigenous community undertaking land management programs in northern Australia.

Combining insights from literature on the Theory of Change, Impact Evaluation, and Wellbeing, we develop a novel approach to assessing impacts. Intended beneficiaries identify and rate factors that are important to their wellbeing, their satisfaction with those factors now, and before an intervention. Qualitative responses to questions about perceived changes and causes of change are linked to quantitative data to draw inferences about the existence and/or importance of impact(s). We use data from 67 Ewamian people, in a case study relating to Indigenous land management, to provide proof of concept. 'Knowing that country is being looked after' and 'Having legal right/access to the country' were identified as important to wellbeing, with perceptions that Native Title determination, declared Indigenous Protected Area and associated land management programs have had a significant and positive impact on them. Further method testing might determine the utility of this approach in a wide range of settings.

Correction to: Using measures of wellbeing for impact evaluation: Proof of concept developed with an Indigenous community undertaking land management programs in northern Australia.

The article "Using measures of wellbeing for impact evaluation: Proof of concept developed with an Indigenous community undertaking land management programs in northern Australia" written by "Silva Larson, Natalie Stoeckl, Diane Jarvis, Jane Addison, Sharon Prior and Michelle Esparon", was originally published electronically on the publisher's internet portal (currently SpringerLink) on 05 May 2018 without open access.

The Value of Ecosystem Services from Giant Panda Reserves.

Ecosystem services (the benefits to humans from ecosystems) are estimated globally at $125 trillion/year [1, 2]. Similar assessments at national and regional scales show how these services support our lives [3]. All valuations recognize the role of biodiversity, which continues to decrease around the world in maintaining these services [4, 5]. The giant panda epitomizes the flagship species [6]. Its unrivalled public appeal translates into support for conservation funding and policy, including a tax on foreign visitors to support its conservation [7]. The Chinese government has established a panda reserve system, which today numbers 67 reserves [8, 9]. The biodiversity of these reserves is among the highest in the temperate world [10], covering many of China's endemic species [11]. The panda is thus also an umbrella species [12]-protecting panda habitat also protects other species. Despite the benefits derived from pandas, some journalists have suggested that it would be best to let the panda go extinct. With the recent downlisting of the panda from Endangered to Vulnerable, it is clear that society's investment has started to pay off in terms of panda population recovery [13, 14]. Here, we estimate the value of ecosystem services of the panda and its reserves at between US$2.6 and US$6.9 billion/year in 2010. Protecting the panda as an umbrella species and the habitat that supports it yields roughly 10-27 times the cost of maintaining the current reserves, potentially further motivating expansion of the reserves and other investments in natural capital in China.

Social capital as a key determinant of perceived benefits of community-based marine protected areas.

Globally, marine protected areas (MPAs) have been relatively unsuccessful in meeting biodiversity objectives. To be effective, they require some alteration of people's use and access to marine resources, which they will resist if they do not perceive associated benefits. Stakeholders' support is crucial to ecological success of MPAs, and their support is likely to depend on their capacity to adapt to and benefit from MPAs. We examined the influence of social adaptive capacity (SAC) on perceived benefits of MPAs in Siquijor, Philippines, in the Coral Triangle. This region has substantial biodiversity and a population of over 120 million people, many of them dependent on marine resources for food and income. The region has many MPAs, most of which are managed under decentralized governance systems. We collected survey data from 540 households in 19 villages with associated MPAs. We evaluated the influence of multiple SAC variables (e.g., occupational multiplicity and social capital) on perceived benefits with decision trees (CHAID) and qualitatively analyzed this relationship with respect to types and recipients of benefits. Our models revealed the key role of social capital, particularly trust in leadership, in influencing perceptions of benefits (χ2 = 14.762, p = 0.000). A path analysis revealed that perceptions of distributional equity were a key mechanism through which social capital affected perceived MPA benefits (root mean-square error of approximation = 0.050). Building social capital and equity within communities could lead to more effective management of MPAs and thus to expenditure of fewer resources relative to, for example, regulation enforcement.

Linking ecosystem services and human-values theory.

Understanding why people make the decisions they do remains a fundamental challenge facing conservation science. Ecosystem service (ES) (a benefit people derive from an ecosystem) approaches to conservation reflect efforts to anticipate people's preferences and influence their environmental behavior. Yet, the design of ES approaches seldom includes psychological theories of human behavior. We sought to alleviate this omission by applying a psychological theory of human values to a cross-cultural ES assessment. We used interviews and focus groups with fish workers from 28 coral reef fishing communities in 4 countries to qualitatively identify the motivations (i.e., human values) underlying preferences for ES; quantitatively evaluate resource user ES priorities; and identify common patterns among ES motivations and ES priorities (i.e., trade-offs and synergies). Three key findings are evident that align with human values theory. First, motivations underlying preferences for individual ESs reflected multiple human values within the same value domain (e.g., self-enhancement). Second, when averaged at community or country scales, the order of ES priorities was consistent. However, the order belied significant variation that existed among individuals. Third, in line with human values theory, ESs related to one another in a consistent pattern; certain service pairs reflected trade-off relationships (e.g., supporting and provisioning), whereas other service pairs reflected synergistic relationships (e.g., supporting and regulating). Together, these findings help improve understanding of when and why convergence and trade-offs in people's preferences for ESs occur, and this knowledge can inform the development of suitable conservation actions.

The role the Great Barrier Reef plays in resident wellbeing and implications for its management.

Improvements in human wellbeing are dependent on improving ecosystems. Such considerations are particularly pertinent for regions of high ecological, but also social and cultural importance that are facing rapid change. One such region is the Great Barrier Reef (GBR). Although the GBR has world heritage status for its 'outstanding universal value', little is known about resident perceptions of its values. We surveyed 1545 residents, finding that absence of visible rubbish; healthy reef fish, coral cover, and mangroves; and iconic marine species, are considered to be more important to quality of life than the jobs and incomes associated with industry (most respondents were dissatisfied with the benefits they received from industry). Highly educated females placed more importance on environmental non-use values than other respondents; less educated males and those employed in mining found non-market use-values relatively more important. Environmental non-use values emerged as the most important management priority for all.

Estimating landholders' probability of participating in a stewardship program, and the implications for spatial conservation priorities.

The need to integrate social and economic factors into conservation planning has become a focus of academic discussions and has important practical implications for the implementation of conservation areas, both private and public. We conducted a survey in the Daly Catchment, Northern Territory, to inform the design and implementation of a stewardship payment program. We used a choice model to estimate the likely level of participation in two legal arrangements--conservation covenants and management agreements--based on payment level and proportion of properties required to be managed. We then spatially predicted landholders' probability of participating at the resolution of individual properties and incorporated these predictions into conservation planning software to examine the potential for the stewardship program to meet conservation objectives. We found that the properties that were least costly, per unit area, to manage were also the least likely to participate. This highlights a tension between planning for a cost-effective program and planning for a program that targets properties with the highest probability of participation.

Social factors and private benefits influence landholders' riverine restoration priorities in tropical Australia.

Private land conservation is an essential component of conservation that requires organizing both protection and restoration actions accordingly. Yet private land conservation programs are often formulated to generate public benefits, with inadequate consideration of costs or benefits to private landholders. Landholders' willingness to participate in conservation programs depends on a complex set of social factors, and the benefits they expect from participation. However, these two attributes are commonly evaluated independent of one another. We addressed this limitation through interviews aimed at determining landholders': 1) willingness to participate in restoration programs; 2) barriers to participation; 3) prioritization of proposed riverine restoration actions; 4) expected public or private benefits for undertaking proposed riverine restoration actions; and 5) most preferred incentive for undertaking proposed restoration actions on their land. Our results revealed four main findings. First, landholders stated that biases towards ecological rather than production outcomes, impractical programs, and government mistrust (structural factors) were the major barriers that prevented them from participating in riverine restoration on their land. Second, private benefits influenced landholders' willingness to engage riverine restoration. Third, 'a sense of stewardship and improved landscape aesthetics' (an internal factor) was the most commonly reported private benefit. Fourth, the most preferred incentives for high priority restoration actions were cash for on-ground works, extension and community recognition. We highlight the importance of designing private land conservation programs that align with landholders' priorities and deliver public benefits.

The economic value of ecosystem services in the Great Barrier Reef: our state of knowledge.

This article reviews literature relating to the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) and aims to assess the current state of knowledge about (1) the "value" of ecosystem services (ES) provided by the GBR and (2) the way in which activities that are carried out in regions adjacent to the GBR affect those values. It finds that most GBR valuation studies have concentrated on a narrow range of ES (e.g., tourism and fishing) and that little is known about other ES or about the social, temporal, and spatial distribution of those services. Just as the reef provides ES to humans and to other ecosystems, so too does the reef receive a variety of ES from adjoining systems (e.g., mangroves). Yet, despite the evidence that the reef's ability to provide ES has been eroded because of recent changes to adjoining ecosystems, little is known about the value of the ES provided by adjoining systems or about the value of recent changes. These information gaps may lead to suboptimal allocations of resource use within multiple realms.