An indicator-based approach for cross-realm coastal biodiversity assessments

被引:4
作者
Harris, L. R. [1 ]
Skowno, A. L. [2 ,3 ]
Sink, K. J. [1 ,2 ]
van Niekerk, L. [1 ,4 ]
Holness, S. D. [1 ]
Monyeki, M. [2 ,5 ]
Majiedt, P. [2 ]
机构
[1] Nelson Mandela Univ, Inst Coastal & Marine Res, Gqeberha, South Africa
[2] South African Natl Biodivers Inst SANBI, Kirstenbosch Res Ctr, Cape Town, South Africa
[3] Univ Cape Town, Dept Biol Sci, Cape Town, South Africa
[4] Council Sci & Ind Res CSIR, Stellenbosch, South Africa
[5] Univ Cape Town, Ctr Stat Ecol & Environm, Cape Town, South Africa
关键词
coastal management; ecological condition; ecological indicators; ecosystem protection level; ecosystem threat status; IUCN Red List of Ecosystems; MARINE ECOSYSTEMS; BEACH ECOSYSTEMS; CONSERVATION; VULNERABILITY;
D O I
10.2989/1814232X.2022.2104373
中图分类号
Q17 [水生生物学];
学科分类号
071004 ;
摘要
Ecosystem status assessments are generally separated into realm-specific analyses (terrestrial, freshwater, estuarine or marine), but without integrating these into a coherent assessment of coastal biodiversity across the land-sea interface. Trends in assessment indicators in coastal versus non-coastal areas have also rarely been considered. In this study we aimed to compile the first cross-realm national biodiversity assessment for the South African coast using three key indicators. The ecological condition, ecosystem threat status, and ecosystem protection level of coastal ecosystem types (n = 186) were determined and compared with those of non-coastal ecosystem types (n = 444). Nearly half (46.9%) of the South African coastal habitat has been degraded compared with 20% of non-coastal areas. Proportionately, there are three-times (60%) as many threatened coastal ecosystem types (or 55% by area) as there are threatened non-coastal ecosystem types (19%, 6% by area). Despite the impacted state of coastal biodiversity, protection levels are generally higher in the coastal zone (87% of ecosystem types have some protection) compared with non-coastal areas (75%), although fewer coastal ecosystem types have met their biodiversity targets (24%, vs 28% for non-coastal ecosystem types). These results illustrate the importance of using a cross-realm approach for status assessments, management and conservation of coastal biodiversity. The assessment methods described are flexible and widely applicable to other regions.
引用
收藏
页码:239 / 253
页数:15
相关论文
共 23 条
  • [21] The exposure, sensitivity and vulnerability of natural vegetation in China to climate thermal variability (1901-2013): An indicator-based approach
    Xu, Yue
    Shen, Ze-Hao
    Ying, Ling-Xiao
    Ciais, Philippe
    Liu, Hong-Yan
    Piao, Shi-long
    Wen, Cheng
    Jiang, You-Xu
    ECOLOGICAL INDICATORS, 2016, 63 : 258 - 272
  • [22] Integrating Ecosystem Services into Impact Assessments: A Process-Based Approach Applied to the Belgian Coastal Zone
    van der Biest, Katrien
    Staes, Jan
    Prigge, Laura
    Schellekens, Tim
    Bonte, Dries
    D'hondt, Bram
    Ysebaert, Tom
    Vanagt, Thomas
    Meire, Patrick
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2023, 15 (21)
  • [23] An indicator based approach to assess coastal communities' resilience against climate related disasters in Indian Sundarbans
    DasGupta, Rajarshi
    Shaw, Rajib
    JOURNAL OF COASTAL CONSERVATION, 2015, 19 (01) : 85 - 101