Environmental Management

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 135–145

Ecosystem approaches to environmental quality assessment

  • Maarten J. Nip
  • Helias A. Udo de Haes
Environmental Auditing

Abstract

Environmental quality assessment has to focus more on the quality of whole ecosystems, instead of focusing on the direct effects of a specific stressor, because of a more integrated environmetal policy approach. Yet, how can the ecosystem quality be measured? Partly this is a normative question, a question of what is considered good and bad. At the same time, it is a scientific question, dealing with the problem of low the state of a system as complex as an ecosystem could be measured. Measuring all abiotic and biotic components, not to mention their many relationships, is not feasible. In this article we review several approaches dealing with this scientific question. Three approaches are distinguished; they differ in type of variable set and ecosystem model used. As a result of this, the information about the state of the ecosystem differs: ultimate breadth, comprising information about the whole ecosystem, is at the expense of detail, while ultimate detail is at the expense of breadth. We discuss whether the resultant quality assessments differ in character and are therefore suitable to answer different policy questions.

Key Words

Environmental quality assessment impact assessment Ecosystem model Ecosystem analysis Ecological indicators Ecosystem health 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Anonymous. 1990a. Environmental monitoring and assessment program. EMPA—surface waters monitoring and research strategy—fiscal year 1991. Environmental Research Laboratory—Corvallis. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Las Vegas, Nevada.Google Scholar
  2. Anonymous. 1990b. Ecologische beoordeling van kleine wateren in Zuid Holland. Provincie Zuid Holland, Dienst Water en Milieu.Google Scholar
  3. Anonymous. 1990c. De meetlat. Een beoordelingsysteem voor het oppervlaktewater in Gelder land. Provincie Gelderland, Dienst Milieu en Water, Arnhem.Google Scholar
  4. Bailey, R. G., S. C., Zoltai and E. B. Wiken. 1985. Ecologigical Regionalization in Canada and the United States.Geoform 16 (3): 265–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bird, P. M., and D. J. Rapport. 1986. State of the Environment Report for Canada. Canadian Government Publishing Centre, Ottawa.Google Scholar
  6. Bromberg, S. M. 1990. Identifying ecological indicators: An environmental monitoring and assessment program.Journal of the Air Waste Management Association 4: 976–978.Google Scholar
  7. Brown, R. M., N. I. McClelland, R. A. Deininger, and M. F. O'Conner. 1972. A water quality index— crashing the psychological barrier. Pages 173–182in W. A. Thomas (ed.), Indicators of environmental quality. Proceedings of a symposium held during the AAAS meeting in Philadelphia, 26–31 December 1971. Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Cairns, J., Jr. 1974. Indicator species vs. the concept of community structure as an index of pollution.Water Ressource Bulltein 10: 338–347.Google Scholar
  9. Cairns, J., Jr. 1990. Biological Monitoring of Water Quality. Pages. 338–346in R. C. Ward, J. C. Loftis, and G. B. McBride (ed.), Proceedings of the international sysmposium on the design of water quality information systems. Colorado Water Resource Research Institute Information Series no. 61, Colorado State University, 7–9 June 1989, Ft. Collins, Colorado.Google Scholar
  10. Chorley, R. J., and B. A. Kennedy. 1971. Physical geography. A system approach. Prentice-Hall International, London.Google Scholar
  11. Claassen, T. H. L. 1987. Typologie en normstellign. Een aquatisch-oecologisch onderzoek in Friesland. Proefschrift, Nijmegen. Krip Repro Meppel.Google Scholar
  12. Dankers, N., K. S. Dijkema, P. J. H. Reijnders, and C. J. Smit. 1990. De Waddenzee in de toekomst-waarom en hoe te bereiken. RIN rapport 90/19 Texel.Google Scholar
  13. Gardeniers, J. J. P., R. M. M. Roijackers, S. P. Klapwijk, and C. Roos. 1991. Ontwikkelingen van ecologische beoordelingsmethoden voor Nederlandse oppervlaktewatern.H 2 O 4 (24): 84–87 and 93.Google Scholar
  14. Goldsmith, B. 1991. Monitoring for conservation and ecology. Chapman/Hall, London.Google Scholar
  15. Hellawell, J. M. 1986. Biological indicators of freshwater pollution and environmental management. Elsevier Applied Science Publishing, London.Google Scholar
  16. Hovenkamp Obbema, I. R. M., S. P. Klapwijk, and J. E. F. Landman. 1982. Biologische beoordeling van de water-kwaliteit in Noord Holland en Zuid Holland.H 2 O 16 (15): 406–412.Google Scholar
  17. Hunsaker, C. T., and D. E. Carpenter (ed.), 1990. Ecological indicators for the environmental monitoring and assessment program. EPA 600/3-90/060. US Environmental Protection Agency, Atomospheric Research and Exposure Assessment Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.Google Scholar
  18. Hunsaker, C. T., D. E. Carpenter, and J. Messer. 1990. Ecological Indicators for regional monitoring.Ecology Society of America Bulletin 71: 165–172.Google Scholar
  19. Kutz, F. W., and R. A. Linthurst. 1990. A system-level approach to environmetal assessment.Toxicological and Environmental Chemistry 28: 105–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Latour, J. B., and C. L. G. Groen. 1994. Environmental quality assessment in multi functional regions.Environmental metnal Management (accepted).Google Scholar
  21. Ministry of Public Housting, Physical Planning, and Environment. 1989. National environmental policy plan. The Hague.Google Scholar
  22. Ministry of Transport and Public Works. 1989. Third national policy document on water management. The Hauge.Google Scholar
  23. Nieuwenhuis, J. W., J. W. Siffels, and A. Barendregt. 1991. Hydroecological research for water management in the proving of Noord-Holland, The Netherlands. Pages 269–278in H. P. Nachthebel, K. Kovar (eds.), Hydroecological basis of ecologically sound management of soil and groundwater. Proceedings of the Vienna symposium. August 1991. International Association of Hydoecological Sciences publications 202.Google Scholar
  24. Nip, M. I., J. B. Latour, F. Klijn, P. K. Koster, C. L. G. Groen, H. A. Udo de Haes, and H. A. M. de Kruijf. 1992. Environmental quality assessment of ecodistricts: A comprehensive method for environmental policy. Pages 865–882in D. H. McKenzie, D. E. Hyatt, V. J. McDonad (ed.), Ecological indicators, Proceedings of an international symposium on ecological indicators, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 16–19 October 1990. Elsevier Applied Science, London.Google Scholar
  25. Rapport, D. J. 1983. The stress-response environmental statistical system and its applicability to the Laurentian Lower Great Lakes.Statistical Journal of the United Nations ECE 1: 377–405.Google Scholar
  26. Rapport, D. J., 1989a. Symptoms of pathology in the Gulf of Bothnia (Baltic Sea): Ecosystem response to stress from human activity.Biological Journal of the Linnaean Society 37: 33–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rapport, D. J. 1989b. What constitutes ecosystem health?Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 33 (1): 120–132.Google Scholar
  28. Rapport, D. J. 1992. Evolution of indicators of ecosystem health. Pages 121–134in D. H. McKenzie, D. E. Hyatt, V. J. McDonald (ed.), Ecological indicators. Proceedings of an international symposium on ecological indicators, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 16–19 October 1990. Elsevier Applied Science, London.Google Scholar
  29. Rapport, D. J., H. A. Regier, and T. C. Hutchinson. 1985. Ecosystem behaviour under stress.The American Naturalist 125: 617–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. RIVM. 1991. Nationale milieuverkenning 2 1990–2010 Samsom H.D./Tjeenk Willink, Alphen a/d Rijn.Google Scholar
  31. Rowe, J. S. 1961. The level of integration concept and ecology.Ecology 42: 420–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Runhaar, J., C. L. G. Groen, and H. A. Udo de Haes. 1994. The ecotope system: An ecosystem classification based on botic and abiotic habitat factors (in preparation).Google Scholar
  33. Schaeffer, D. J., E. E. Herricks, and H. W. Kerster. 1988. Ecosystem health: I. Measuring ecosystem health.Environmental Management 12 (4): 445–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schultz, A. M. 1967. The ecosystem as a conceptual tool in the management of natural resources. Pages 139–161in S. V. Ciriacy-Wantrup and J. J. Parsons (eds.), Natural resources: Quality and quantity: Papers presented before a faculty seminar at the University of California, Berkeley, 1961–1965. University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  35. Suter, G. W., II. 1990. Endpoints for regional ecological risk asessments.Environmental Management 14: 9–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ten Brink, B. J. E., S. H. Hosper, and F. Colijn. 1991. A quantiative method for description & assessment of ecosystems: The AMOEBA approach.Maritime Pollution Bulletin 23: 265–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Vanclay, J. K. 1990. Integrated resource monitoring and asessment: The Australian perspective of current trends and future needs. Pages 650–658in G. Lund (ed.), Proceedings of the conference on global natural resource monitoring and assessments: Preparing for the 21st century, International Union of Forestry Research Organization and the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization. 24–30 September 1989, Venice, Italy.Google Scholar
  38. Vanhemelrijk, J. A. M., and A. L. M. Van Broekhoven. 1990. Ecologicsche ontwikkelings richting grote revieren. Aanzet tot kwantitatieve uitwerking van ecologische doel-stellingen voor de grote rivieren in Nederland DBW/RIZA.Google Scholar
  39. Verdonschot, P. F. M. 1990. Ecological characterization of surface waters in the province of Overijssel (the Netherlands). Province of Overijssel, Research Institute for Nature Management.Google Scholar
  40. Ward, D. V. 1978. Biological environmental impact studies, theory and methods. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  41. Ward, R. C. 1990. Water quality monitoring—a systems approach to design. Pages 37–46in R. C. Ward, J. C. Loftis, G. B. McBride (eds.), Proceedings of the international symposium on the deisgn of water quality information systems, Colorado Water Resource Research Institute Information Series No. 61, Colorado State Univerity, 7–9 June 1989, Ft. Collins, Colorado.Google Scholar
  42. Witte, J. Ph. M., F. Kljin, F. A. M. Claessen, C. L. G. Groen and R. Van der Meijden. 1992. A model to predict and assess the impacts of hydrologic changes on terrestrial ecosystems in The Netherlands, and its use in a climate scenario.Wetlands Ecology and Management 2 (1/2): 69–83.Google Scholar
  43. Woodley, S., G. Francis, and J. Kay. (eds.). 1993. Ecological integrity and the management of ecodsystems. St. Lucie Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maarten J. Nip
    • 1
  • Helias A. Udo de Haes
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre of Environmental SciencesLeiden UniversityLeidenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.AmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations