Using expert judgment to estimate marine ecosystem vulnerability in the California Current

• DOI: 10.1890/09-1173.1
• Publication Date: 2010-06-22T21:35:54Z
• Authors: Sarah J. Teck; Benjamin S. Halpern; Carrie V. Kappel; Fiorenza Micheli; Kimberly A. Selkoe; Caitlin M. Crain; Rebecca Martone; Christine Shearer; Joe Arvai; Baruch Fischhoff; Grant Murray; Rabin Neslo; Roger Cooke
• Keywords: Vulnerability; Marine ecosystem; Ecosystem Management; Ecosystem-Based Management; Salt marsh

As resource management and conservation efforts move toward multi‐sector, ecosystem‐based approaches, we need methods for comparing the varying responses of ecosystems to impacts human activities in order prioritize efforts, allocate limited resources, understand cumulative effects. Given number variety affecting ecosystems, relatively few empirical studies are adequately comprehensive inform these decisions. Consequently, often turns expert judgment information. Drawing on from decision science, offer a method eliciting (1) quantitatively estimate relative vulnerability stressors, (2) help stressors across multiple (3) evaluate how experts give weight different criteria characterize anthropogenic (4) identify key knowledge gaps. We applied this California Current region 19 marine 53 associated with activities, based surveys 107 experts. When judging found that primarily considered two criteria: ecosystem's resistance stressor species or trophic levels affected. Four intertidal (mudflat, beach, salt marsh, rocky intertidal) were judged most vulnerable suite evaluated here. The highest rankings coastal invasive species, ocean acidification, sea temperature change, level rise, habitat alteration engineering, while offshore assessed be demersal destructive fishing, shipwrecks. These results provide quantitative, transparent, repeatable assessment any ongoing emerging activity. Combining data spatial distribution intensity provides systematic foundation management.