Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
David Martin (2017)
Ecological restoration should be redefined for the twenty‐first centuryRestoration Ecology, 25
Johannes Langemeyer, E. Gómez‐Baggethun, D. Haase, S. Scheuer, T. Elmqvist (2016)
Bridging the gap between ecosystem service assessments and land-use planning through Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA)Environmental Science & Policy, 62
Julien Martin, M. Runge, J. Nichols, Bruce Lubow, W. Kendall (2009)
Structured decision making as a conceptual framework to identify thresholds for conservation and management.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America, 19 5
K. Hubacek, Jakub Kronenberg (2013)
Synthesizing different perspectives on the value of urban ecosystem servicesLandscape and Urban Planning, 109
David Martin, Marisa Mazzotta (2018)
Non-monetary valuation using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis: Sensitivity of additive aggregation methods to scaling and compensation assumptionsEcosystem services, 29
R. Gregory, Lee Failing, M. Harstone, G. Long, T. McDaniels, Dan, Ohlson (2012)
Structured Decision Making: A Practical Guide to Environmental Management Choices
A. Ogden, J. Innes (2009)
Application of Structured Decision Making to an Assessment of Climate Change Vulnerabilities and Adaptation Options for Sustainable Forest ManagementEcology and Society, 14
J. Lyons, M. Runge, H. Laskowski, W. Kendall (2008)
Monitoring in the Context of Structured Decision-Making and Adaptive Management, 72
M Zeleny (1973)
Multiple Criteria Decision Making
FC Golet, DHA Myshrall, NA Miller, MP Bradley (2003)
Wetland restoration plan for the Woonasquatucket River watershed, Rhode Island
L. Wainger, D. King, R. Mack, Elizabeth Price, Thomas Maslin (2010)
Can the concept of ecosystem services be practically applied to improve natural resource management decisionsEcological Economics, 69
T. McDonald, George Gann, Justin Jonson, K. Dixon, J. Aronson, K. Decleer, J. Hallett, K. Keenleyside, Cara Nelson, B. Walder, Levi Wickwire (2016)
International standards for the practice of ecological restoration – including principles and key concepts.
K. Bagstad, D. Semmens, S. Waage, Robert Winthrop (2013)
A comparative assessment of decision-support tools for ecosystem services quantification and valuationEcosystem services, 5
J. Kozak, Bryan Piazza (2015)
A proposed process for applying a structured decision‐making framework to restoration planning in the Atchafalaya River Basin, Louisiana, U.S.A.Restoration Ecology, 23
H. Tallis, C. Kennedy, M. Ruckelshaus, J. Goldstein, J. Kiesecker (2015)
Mitigation for one & all: An integrated framework for mitigation of development impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem servicesEnvironmental Impact Assessment Review, 55
R. Keeney (2004)
Making Better Decision MakersDecis. Anal., 1
M Healy, S Secchi (2016)
A comparative analysis of ecosystem service valuation decision support tools for wetland restoration
L. Wainger, M. Mazzotta (2011)
Realizing the Potential of Ecosystem Services: A Framework for Relating Ecological Changes to Economic BenefitsEnvironmental Management, 48
Stephen Posner, E. Mckenzie, T. Ricketts (2016)
Policy impacts of ecosystem services knowledgeProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113
D. Griggs, M. Stafford-Smith, O. Gaffney, J. Rockström, M. Öhman, P. Shyamsundar, W. Steffen, G. Glaser, N. Kanie, I. Noble (2013)
Policy: Sustainable development goals for people and planetNature, 495
Gregory Verutes, K. Arkema, Chantalle Clarke-Samuels, S. Wood, Amy Rosenthal, Samir Rosado, Maritza Canto, N. Bood, M. Ruckelshaus (2017)
Integrated planning that safeguards ecosystems and balances multiple objectives in coastal BelizeInternational Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management, 13
M. Potschin, R. Haines-Young (2011)
Ecosystem servicesProgress in Physical Geography, 35
K. Hychka, C. Druschke (2017)
Adaptive Management of Urban Ecosystem Restoration: Learning From Restoration Managers in Rhode Island, USASociety & Natural Resources, 30
H. Saarikoski, J. Mustajoki, D. Barton, D. Geneletti, Johannes Langemeyer, E. Gómez‐Baggethun, M. Marttunen, P. Antunes, H. Keune, Rui Santos (2016)
Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis and Cost-Benefit Analysis: Comparing alternative frameworks for integrated valuation of ecosystem servicesEcosystem services, 22
L. Olander, R. Johnston, H. Tallis, James Kagan, Lynn Maguire, S. Polasky, D. Urban, J. Boyd, L. Wainger, M. Palmer (2018)
Benefit relevant indicators: Ecosystem services measures that link ecological and social outcomesEcological Indicators, 85
M. Schwartz, C. Cook, R. Pressey, A. Pullin, M. Runge, N. Salafsky, W. Sutherland, M. Williamson (2018)
Decision Support Frameworks and Tools for ConservationConservation Letters, 11
MB Potschin, RH Haines-Young (2011)
Ecosystem services: exploring a geographical perspectiveProgress Phys Geogr, 35
J. Aronson, J. Blignaut, S. Milton, D. Maitre, K. Esler, A. Limouzin, C. Fontaine, M. Wit, W. Mugido, P. Prinsloo, Leandri Elst, N. Lederer (2010)
Are Socioeconomic Benefits of Restoration Adequately Quantified? A Meta‐analysis of Recent Papers (2000–2008) in Restoration Ecology and 12 Other Scientific JournalsRestoration Ecology, 18
M. Martínez‐Harms, B. Bryan, P. Balvanera, Elizabeth Law, J. Rhodes, H. Possingham, K. Wilson (2015)
Making decisions for managing ecosystem servicesBiological Conservation, 184
C. Perrings, S. Naeem, F. Ahrestani, D. Bunker, P. Burkill, G. Canziani, T. Elmqvist, J. Fuhrman, Fabian Jaksic, Z. Kawabata, A. Kinzig, G. Mace, H. Mooney, A. Prieur‐Richard, J. Tschirhart, W. Weisser (2011)
Ecosystem services, targets, and indicators for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversityFrontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 9
NA Miller, FC Golet (2001)
Development of a statewide freshwater wetland restoration strategy. Final research report prepared for RI DEM Office of Water Resources and U.S. EPA Region 1
M. Doyle, F. Shields (2012)
Compensatory Mitigation for Streams Under the Clean Water Act: Reassessing Science and Redirecting Policy 1JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 48
S. Cutter, B. Boruff, W. Shirley (2003)
Social Vulnerability to Environmental HazardsSocial Science Quarterly, 84
P. Balvanera, G. Daily, P. Ehrlich, T. Ricketts, S. Bailey, S. Kark, C. Kremen, H. Pereira (2001)
Conserving Biodiversity and Ecosystem ServicesScience, 291
D. King, L. Wainger, C. Bartoldus, J. Wakeley (2000)
Expanding wetland assessment procedures : linking indices of wetland function with services and values
RT Lackey (2016)
Keeping science and scientists credible: avoid stealth policy advocacyBull Ecol Soc Aust, 46
P. Gobster (2001)
Visions of nature: conflict and compatibility in urban park restorationLandscape and Urban Planning, 56
P. Kremer, E. Andersson, T. McPhearson, T. Elmqvist (2015)
Advancing the frontier of urban ecosystem services researchEcosystem services, 12
Neele Larondelle, D. Haase (2013)
Urban ecosystem services assessment along a rural-urban gradient: a cross-analysis of European cities.Ecological Indicators, 29
A. Guerrero, L. Shoo, G. Iacona, R. Standish, C. Catterall, Libby Rumpff, K. Bie, Zoe White, Virginia Matzek, K. Wilson (2017)
Using structured decision‐making to set restoration objectives when multiple values and preferences existRestoration Ecology, 25
Accounting for ecosystem services in environmental decision making is an emerging research topic. Modern frameworks for ecosystem services assessment emphasize evaluating the social benefits of ecosystems, in terms of who benefits and by how much, to aid in comparing multiple courses of action. Structured methods that use decision analytic-approaches are emerging for the practice of ecological restoration. In this article, we combine ecosystem services assessment with structured decision making to estimate and evaluate measures of the potential benefits of ecological restoration with a case study in the Woonasquatucket River watershed, Rhode Island, USA. We partnered with a local watershed management organization to analyze dozens of candidate wetland restoration sites for their abilities to supply five ecosystem services—flood water retention, scenic landscapes, learning opportunities, recreational opportunities, and birds. We developed 22 benefit indicators related to the ecosystem services as well as indicators for social equity and reliability that benefits will sustain in the future. We applied conceptual modeling and spatial analysis to estimate indicator values for each candidate restoration site. Lastly, we developed a decision support tool to score and aggregate the values for the organization to screen the restoration sites. Results show that restoration sites in urban areas can provide greater social benefits than sites in less urban areas. Our research approach is general and can be used to investigate other restoration planning studies that perform ecosystem services assessment and fit into a decision-making process.
Environmental Management – Springer Journals
Published: Apr 10, 2018
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.