SS4H.04: Aggregating multiple indicators for a holistic integrated approach, in assessing the environmental status of Saronikos Gulf, Eastern Mediterranean Angel Borja (AZTI), Alexandra Pavlidou (HCMR), Nomiki Simboura (HCMR)
medcis.eu
Introduction
NEAT (Nested Environmental status Assessment Tool)
OBJECTIVES
• Aggregate multiple indicators from different ecosystem components in a unique assessment • Produce a holistic integrative health assessment of ample marine areas • Test NEAT in an area with pressure gradients, both spatial and temporal, and validate its response against human pressures and management measures
ASSESSMENT METHOD
• • • • • •
NEAT is a software for environmental assessment Integrative assessment across indicators Database with >600 indicators Customizable by the user Tested in 10 case-studies across Europe and Caspian Sea Available free of charge http://www.devotes-project.eu/neat
ASSESSMENT METHOD
SARONIKOS CASE STUDY
• • • • •
Wastes of ~5 million people Until 1994, sewage untreated 1994–2004 primary treatment Since 2004 secondary treatment Much data available
Pressure Index classification S7-Psittalia Sewage Outfall: Heavily Polluted Inner Saronikos Gulf: Moderately Polluted Outer Saronikos: Slightly Polluted Western Saronikos: Moderately Polluted Elefsis Bay: Heavily Polluted
SARONIKOS CASE STUDY
• 24 indicators have been used, covering 9 ecosystem components: physico-chemistry of sediments and waters, alien species, phytoplankton, benthic fauna, macroalgae, seagrasses, fish and mammals • Each indicator is associated to a Spatial Assessment Unit (SAU), an habitat and a descriptor of the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) • The analyses include different scenarios: • Spatial (weighting and un-weighting by SAU) • Temporal (three periods: before secondary treatment, and two periods after that) • Filtering by different descriptors (i.e. biodiversity, alien species, fishing, food-webs, eutrophication, and contamination)
RESULTS: Spatial analysis
STATUS High Good Moderate Poor Bad
RESULTS: Spatial analysis, by descriptor
STATUS High Good Moderate Poor Bad
RESULTS: Temporal analysis (without weighting)
STATUS High Good Moderate Poor Bad
RESULTS: Temporal analysis, by descriptor
STATUS High Good Moderate Poor Bad
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
• With NEAT is possible to integrate data from different sources, spatial and temporal scales and from different ecosystem components into a unique value; • This integration has permitted to undertake a real EBA assessment; • Despite the integration in NEAT there is not a loss in tracking the problems that should be addressed at the indicator, ecosystem component, descriptor or smaller spatial levels; • This track of the problems is clearly related with the pressures identified and the pressure index used to validate the assessment undertaken using NEAT; • The NEAT assessment demonstrates also the temporal changes due to the management measures taken, showing the recovery of the system in respect to the time needed for each ecosystem component and area; • All of these findings and conclusions could be very useful for managers, policy makers and scientists when deciding the method to use in assessing and communicating the health status
Thank You!
Dr Ángel Borja (
[email protected]) Twitter: @AngelBorjaYerro ResearchGate Profile: www.researchgate.net/profile/Angel_Borja
