Setting reference levels and limits for good ecological condition in terrestrial ecosystems – Insights from a case study based on the IBECA approach

Abstract Effective evidence-based nature conservation and habitat management relies on developing and refining our methodological toolbox for detecting critical ecological changes at an early stage. This requires not only optimizing the use and integration of evidence from available data, but also optimizing methods for dealing with imperfect knowledge and data deficiencies. For policy and management relevance, ecological data are often synthesized into indicators, which are assessed against reference levels and limit values. Here we explore challenges and opportunities in defining ecological condition in relation to a reference condition reflecting intact ecosystems, as well as setting limit values for good ecological condition, linked to critical ecological thresholds in dose–response relationships between pressures and condition variables. These two concepts have been widely studied and implemented in aquatic sciences, but rarely in terrestrial systems. In this paper, we address practical considerations, theoretical challenges and possible solutions using different approaches to determine reference and limit values for good ecological condition in terrestrial ecosystems, based on empirical experiences from a case study in central Norway. We present five approaches for setting indicator reference values for intact ecosystems: absolute biophysical boundaries, reference areas, reference communities, ecosystem dynamics based models, and habitat availability based models. We further present four approaches for identifying indicator limit values for good ecological condition: empirically estimated values, statistical distributions, assumed linear relationships, and expert judgement-based limits. This exercise highlights the versatile and robust nature of ecological condition assessments based on reference and limit values for different management purposes, for situations where knowledge of the underlying relationships is lacking, and for situations limited by data availability.

[1]  Emilio Hernández-García,et al.  Ecological thresholds and regime shifts: approaches to identification. , 2009, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[2]  John L Stoddard,et al.  Setting expectations for the ecological condition of streams: the concept of reference condition. , 2005, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[3]  David B. Lindenmayer,et al.  Synthesis: Thresholds in conservation and management , 2005 .

[4]  Chris J. Johnson,et al.  Identifying ecological thresholds for regulating human activity: Effective conservation or wishful thinking? , 2013 .

[5]  J. Summers,et al.  MACROBENTHIC RESPONSES TO NATURAL AND CONTAMINANT-RELATED GRADIENTS IN NORTHERN GULF OF MEXICO ESTUARIES , 1997 .

[6]  J. Pennanen Forest age distribution under mixed-severity fire regimes : a simulation-based analysis for middle boreal Fennoscandia , 2002 .

[7]  R. Biggs,et al.  A biodiversity intactness index , 2005, Nature.

[8]  P. Soranno,et al.  Quantifying regional reference conditions for freshwater ecosystem management: A comparison of approaches and future research needs , 2011 .

[9]  K. Gaston,et al.  Shifting baseline syndrome: causes, consequences, and implications , 2018 .

[10]  R. Marrs,et al.  Using compositional and functional indicators for biodiversity conservation monitoring of semi-natural grasslands in Scotland , 2014 .

[11]  H. D. Cooper,et al.  A mid-term analysis of progress toward international biodiversity targets , 2014, Science.

[12]  E. Bayne,et al.  A new method to estimate species and biodiversity intactness using empirically derived reference conditions , 2007 .

[13]  J. Garcia-Ulloa,et al.  Conceptualizing Forest Degradation. , 2015, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[14]  M. Araújo,et al.  The concept of potential natural vegetation: an epitaph? , 2010 .

[15]  B. Jonsson,et al.  Modeling dead wood in Fennoscandian old-growth forests dominated by Norway spruce , 2004 .

[16]  B. Collen,et al.  Choice of baseline affects historical population trends in hunted mammals of North America , 2020 .

[17]  C. Johnston,et al.  Properties and performance of the Floristic Quality Index in Great Lakes coastal wetlands , 2006, Wetlands.

[18]  Juha Siitonen,et al.  Forest management, coarse woody debris and saproxylic organisms: Fennoscandian boreal forests as an example , 2001 .

[19]  J. Randers,et al.  The Living Planet Index: using species population time series to track trends in biodiversity , 2005, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.