You are here:
What Information Do We Have to Identify and Evaluate Ecological Metrics and Indicators That Directly Matter to People?
Citation:
Ringold, P., M. WEBER, K. Winters, AND K. Hall. What Information Do We Have to Identify and Evaluate Ecological Metrics and Indicators That Directly Matter to People? A Community on Ecosystem Services 2016, Jacksonville, Florida, December 05 - 09, 2016.
Impact/Purpose:
EPA ORD research programs have embraced the use of final ecosystem goods and services (FEGS). The presentation describes the sources of information used in identifying metrics and indicators of FEGS and suggests some ways in which those choices can be evaluated. This research contributes to SHC 2.61.
Description:
The use of ecological metrics and indicators that matter directly to people makes ecological information more useful. By more useful we mean in communication with people and for social and economic analysis. While the need to specify these metrics and indicators is a view widely held, specific guidance on how to identify these indicators is lacking. The intersection of three factors – 1) beneficiary perspectives (perspectives on the ways in which people benefit from ecosystems often delineated with social science methodology), 2)economic theory especially on linked production functions, and 3) ecological understanding and practice -- provide a foundation to identify these indicators and then to evaluate the competence with which they have been identified. In our research we integrate multiple sources of information on beneficiary perspectives. This includes qualitative social science methods such as depth interviews and focus groups which provide insight into the information needed for decision making and the underlying values that are to be embodied in indicators. Linked production function theory provides a first principles foundation to refine or integrate those results. Integration with ecological understanding and practice then generates hypotheses about practical ecological indicators that matter directly to people. Other social science methods, e.g. experiments embedded in valuation studies, and biophysical methods, can provide for the evaluation of this integrated analysis. We illustrate our methods with stream data from the western United States. We recommend that such work continue and be conducted in partnerships between biophysical and social scientists