Aquatic Ecology

, Volume 33, Issue 1, pp 105–115 | Cite as

What is a healthy ecosystem?

  • Robert Costanza
  • Michael Mageau


Rapid deterioration of the world's major ecosystems has intensified the need for effective environmental monitoring and the development of operational indicators of ecosystem health. Ecosystem health represents a desired endpoint of environmental management, but it requires adaptive, ongoing definition and assessment. We propose that a healthy ecosystem is one that is sustainable – that is, it has the ability to maintain its structure (organization) and function (vigor) over time in the face of external stress (resilience). Various methods to quantify these three ecosystem attributes (vigor, organization, and resilience) are discussed. These attributes are then folded into a comprehensive assessment of ecosystem health. A network analysis based ecosystem health assessment is developed and tested using trophic exchange networks representing several different aquatic ecosystems. Results indicate the potential of such an ecosystem health assessment for evaluating the relative health of similar ecosystems, and quantifying the effects of natural or anthropogenic stress on the health of a particular ecosystem over time.

estuaries network analysis resilience vigor 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baird D and Ulanowicz RE (1993) Comparative study on the trophic structure, cycling and ecosystem properties of four tidal estuaries. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 99: 221–237Google Scholar
  2. Barber M, Patten B and Finn J (1979) Review and evaluation of I-O flow analysis for ecological applications. In: Matis J, Patten B and White G (eds.), Compartmental Analysis of Ecosystem Models. Vol. 10 of Statistical Ecology. Bertonsville, Md.: International Cooperative Publishing HouseGoogle Scholar
  3. Bayne BL (1987) The Effects of Stress and Pollution on Marine Animals. Praeger, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Christensen V (1995) Ecosystem maturity — Towards quantification. Ecol Model 77: 3–32Google Scholar
  5. Christensen V and Pualy D (1992) ECOPATH II — a software for balancing steady-state ecosystem models, and calculating netwok characteristics. Ecol Model 61: 169–185Google Scholar
  6. Costanza R (1992) Toward an operational definition of health. In: Costanza R, Norton B and Haskell B (eds.) Ecosystem Health: New Goals for Environmental Management. Island Press, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  7. Costanza R and Neill C (1984) Energy intensities, interdependence, and value in ecological systems: A linear programming approach. J Theor Biol 106: 41–57Google Scholar
  8. Costanza R, Norton B and Haskell BJ (1992) Ecosystem Health: New Goals for Environmental Management. Island Press, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  9. Costanza R and Maxwell T (1993) Resolution and predictability: an approach to the scaling problem. Landscape Ecol 9: 47–57Google Scholar
  10. Costanza R and Patten BC (1995) Defining and predicting sustainability. Ecol Econ 15: 193–196Google Scholar
  11. Costanza R and Sklar FH (1985) Articulation, accuracy, and effectiveness of mathematical models: A review of freshwater wetland applications. Ecol Model 27: 45–68Google Scholar
  12. Costanza R, Sklar FH and White ML (1990) Modeling coastal landscape dynamics. BioScience 40: 91–107Google Scholar
  13. Cumberland JH (1987) Need economic development be hazardous to the health of the Chesapeake Bay? Mar Resour Econ 4: 81–93Google Scholar
  14. Daly H (1968) On economics as a life science. J Political Econ 76: 392–406Google Scholar
  15. Field JG, Moloney CL and Attwood CG (1989) Network analysis of simulated succession after an upwelling event. In: Wulff F, Field JG and Mann KH (eds) Network analysis of marine ecosystems: methods and applications. Coastal and Estuarine Studies Series (Chapter 7) Springer-Verlag, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  16. Finn J (1976) The cycling index. J Theor Biol 56: 363–373Google Scholar
  17. Funderlic R and Heath M (1971) Linear Compartmental Analysis of Ecosystems. ORNL-IBP–71–4. Oak Ridge, Tenn.: Oak Ridge National LaboratoryGoogle Scholar
  18. Hannon B (1973) The structure of ecosystems. J Theor Biol 41: 535–546Google Scholar
  19. Hannon B (1976) Marginal product pricing in the ecosystem. J Theor Biol 56: 256–267Google Scholar
  20. Hannon B (1979) Total energy costs in ecosystems. J Theor Biol 80: 271–293Google Scholar
  21. Hannon B (1985a) Ecosystem flow analysis. Can Bull Fish Aquat Sci 213: 97–118Google Scholar
  22. Hannon B (1985b) Conditioning the ecosystem. Math Biol 75: 23–42Google Scholar
  23. Hannon B (1985c) Linear dynamic ecosystems. J Theor Biol 116: 89–98Google Scholar
  24. Hannon B and Ruth M (1994) Dynamic Modeling. Springer-Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Holling CS (1978) Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management. Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  26. Holling CS (1986) The resilience of terrestrial ecosystems: Local surprise and global change. In: Clark WC and Munn RE (eds) Sustainable Development of the Biosphere. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  27. Holling CS (1987) Simplifying the complex: The paradigms of ecological function and structure. Eur J Operat Res 30: 139–146Google Scholar
  28. Isard W (1972) Ecologic-Economic Analysis for Regional Development. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Karr JR (1991) Biological integrity: A long neglected aspect of water resource management. Ecol Appl 1: 66–84Google Scholar
  30. Leontief W (1941) The Structure of the American Economy, 1919–1939. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Mageau MT, Costanza R and RE Ulanowicz (1995) The development and initial testing of a quantitative assessment of ecosystem health. Ecosyst Health 1: 201–213Google Scholar
  32. Mageau MT, Costanza R and Ulanowicz RE (In press) Quantifying the trends associated with developing ecosystems. Ecol ModelGoogle Scholar
  33. Odum EP (1969) The strategy of ecosystem development. Science 164: 262–270Google Scholar
  34. Odum HT (1971) Environment, Power and Society. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Pimm SL (1984) The complexity and stability of ecosystems. Nature 307: 321–326Google Scholar
  36. Rapport DJ (1992) Evaluating ecosystem health. J. Aquat Ecosyst Health 1: 15–24Google Scholar
  37. Rapport DJ, Regier HA and Hutchinson TC (1985) Ecosystem behavior under stress. Am Nat 125: 617–640Google Scholar
  38. Science Advisory Board (1990) Reducing Risk: Setting Priorities and Strategies for Environmental Protection. SAB-EC–90–021. EPA, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  39. Turner MG, Costanza R and Sklar FH (1989) Methods to compare spatial patterns for landscape modeling and analysis. Ecol Model 48: 1–18Google Scholar
  40. Ulanowicz RE (1980) A hypothesis on the development of natural communities. J Theor Biol 85: 223–245Google Scholar
  41. Ulanowicz RE (1986) Growth and Development: Ecosystems Phenomenology. Springer-Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  42. Ulanowicz RE (1995) The propensities of evolving systems. In: Khalil EL and Boulding KE (eds) Social and Natural ComplexityGoogle Scholar
  43. Wulff F and Ulanowicz RE (1989) A comparative anatomy of the Baltic Sea and Chesapeake Bay ecosystems. In: Wulff F, Field JG and Mann KH (eds.) Network analysis of marine ecology: methods and applications. Coastal and Estuarine Studies Series (Chapter 11) Springer-Verlag, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  44. Wulff F, Field JG and Mann KH (1989) Network Analysis of Marine Ecosystems: Methods and Applications. Coastal and Estuarine Studies Series. Springer-Verlag, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert Costanza
    • 1
  • Michael Mageau
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Environmental Science and College of Life SciencesUniversity of Maryland Institute for Ecological EconomicsSolomonsUSA

Personalised recommendations