R16: A briefing/update/overview of the DPI Karen Astles risk assessment project
regarding threats from human induced disturbances, including projected
timeframes.
The ‘Qualitative Ecological Risk Assessment of Marine Biodiversity in NSW’ project (QERAMB)
was initiated in June 2010 and was the culmination of discussions held over several months
among Department of Primary Industry researchers and managers working in the areas of aquatic
ecosystems and marine protected areas. A working group was formed, chaired by Bob Creese, to
progress QERAMB. The working group comprises marine researchers, marine park managers,
marine protected areas policy staff and aquatic conservation managers. The collection, collation
and analysis of information for QERAMB is led by Karen Astles (who has previous experience in
this area; see also 25: Response to R4-5-6 - Managing threats.doc), assisted part-time by a
fisheries technician.
The most recent working group meeting was held on 2 November 2011, following which the
attached summary was developed. The first 7 steps of phase 1 are nearly complete. Step 8 is the
next major activity and it will seek expert input from marine scientists working in NSW, including
many affiliated with the Sydney Institute of Marine Science (SIMS).
1
Qualitative Ecological Risk Assessment of Marine Biodiversity in NSW (QERAMB)
Preamble
Australia has international obligations to conserve biodiversity. Federal and state legislation seeks
to enforce these obligations, and strategies have been developed to practically implement them
(Australia’s Biodiversity Conservation Strategy 2010-2030; Draft NSW Biodiversity Strategy 20102015). The second priority action area in the national strategy is “Building ecosystem resilience in
a changing climate” and this has three sub-priority actions areas – protecting diversity, maintaining
and re-establishing ecosystem functions and reducing threats to biodiversity. The “core
mechanism” by which NSW will provide conservation of marine biodiversity is through the marine
reserve system (i.e. marine protected areas) (Draft NSW Biodiversity Strategy 2010-2015, p.97).
Many human activities occur within, or in close proximity to, estuarine and marine ecosystems in
NSW. These activities can potentially have direct and indirect effects on marine biodiversity (MB)
because they can interact across a complex array of marine and estuarine habitats, ecological
processes and species. To effectively protect marine biodiversity, all human activities and their
effects on MB need to be identified, assessed, prioritized and issues clearly elucidated. Only then
can there be a systematic assessment of how current management regimes, such as marine park
zoning plans and coastal catchment action plans, address the issues to reduce the identified levels
of risk. The figure below illustrates the evaluation process to be used in this project.
Provide sustainable use of
marine environment
Conserve MB
Marine protected areas
(MPA)
Manage threats to MB
What are the threats
to MB?
What are the priorities for
managing these threats?
What are the issues
needing to be addressed to
manage/reduce these
threats?
How does the current
MPA address these issues?
How do current marine
research programmes
(including MER) address
these issues?
What changes to MPA are
needed to address issues?
What changes to research
is needed to address
issues?
How will addressing these issues improve the
conservation of MB and provide for sustainable use of
marine environment?
2
ERA is a tool that will be used to address the questions highlighted in red in the above diagram. At
the outset, it is important to recognize that ERA is a means to an end, not an end in itself. For ERA
to be useful, prior commitment to work towards implementing the results is required. The
qualitative ecological risk assessment (QERA) method developed by NSW DPI to assess
commercial fisheries and further developed to assess other human activities on estuarine habitats
will be used for the project (Astles et al, 2009, Astles, 2010). It is consistent with AS/NZS 4360.
Within a QERA framework, Risk Context identifies
the unacceptable consequences to MB that are to
be avoided or mitigated against. Risk
Identification identifies the sources of risk to MB.
Risk Characterization determines the levels of
risk to MB and therefore prioritises MB components
and the sources of risk contributing to those
components. Issues Arising identifies what needs
to be addressed by management and research to
reduce risk to MB. These issues can then be used
to assess the current management arrangements
and research programs to determine whether, and
how effectively, these issues are being addressed.
The information from these assessments can then
be fed back into improving research programs in
Marine Parks and NSW coastal ecosystems more
broadly. The overall test is whether the
improvements identified by QERA actually help
conserve MB and provide for the sustainable use of
the marine environment or simply ‘re-arrange the
deck chairs’.
RISK CONTEXT
PHASE I
RISK IDENTIFICATION
RISK CHARACTERISATION
PHASE II
ISSUES ARISING
MANAGEMENT EVALUATION
The QERAMB project
QERAMB will undertake an ecological risk assessment of the effects of human activities on marine
biodiversity along the NSW coast.
Aims
1. Identify all sources of risk from human activities to marine biodiversity in coastal NSW.
2. Assess the level of risk to marine biodiversity from the identified human activities.
3. Identify and prioritise the issues that need to be addressed to reduce the level of risk to marine
biodiversity
4. Assess how current marine park zoning and other natural resource management regimes in
NSW address these issues
5. Recommend appropriate management action and scientific research to enhance the
ecological resilience of coastal marine ecosystems to human activities to maintain and /or
improve the protection of marine biodiversity in NSW.
Two phases of the project
The project has two phases. The first phase will undertake the risk context and risk
identification stages of the QERA at a state-wide level. It will identify which human activities are
potential sources of risk to marine biodiversity. It will include breaking human activities into their
component stressors. This recognises that one type of human activity may have multiple stressors
on an ecosystem. Phase I will systematically document the information used to determine these
sources of risk and their stressors. It will also evaluate the scientific information used in terms of
its content, spatial and temporal scale and relevance to the NSW marine environment. This phase
will not be able to assign levels of risk to these activities.
The second phase will undertake the risk characterisation and issues arising stages, as well as
the evaluation of current management plans in the marine, estuarine and catchment environments.
This is similar to the process for the environmental impact assessments of the fishery management
3
strategies for NSW commercial fisheries. This phase will be done at the bioregional, marine park,
CMA and/or estuarine scale if it is to be useful for evaluating relevant management regimes.
Risk contexts to be assessed
Risk context 1: The likelihood that human activities in NSW will lead to the degradation of marine
habitats such that they are unable to support viable marine biodiversity in the next 20 years.
Risk context 2: The likelihood that human activities in NSW will lead to the degradation of
ecological processes such that they are unable to support viable marine biodiversity in the next
20 years.
Risk context 3: The likelihood that human activities in NSW will lead to the degradation of
populations of marine species/communities such that they are unable to maintain their current
abundance and distribution or improve to a more natural condition in the next 20 years.
Risk context 4: The likelihood that human activities in NSW will lead to the degradation of
threatened marine species/communities such that they are unable to maintain their current
abundance and distribution or improve to a more natural condition in the next 20 years.
Outline of Process and timelines for Phase I
Step
1. Clarification of the QERA method and process – Clarify the
QERA method being used among researchers to ensure key
people understand the approach being taken, the rationale for
such an approach, the different types of information required
for the study and how this information will be used. Clarify the
process to build, analyse and integrate the information.
2. Conceptual model of marine biodiversity - Formulate a working
conceptual model of the relationships between the components
of marine biodiversity (MB) and the potential influences of
human perturbations on them. This is an essential step that
will underpin how we identify sources of risks to marine
biodiversity. Often in QERA processes these conceptual
models are not clearly articulated at the beginning and can be
sources of discrepancies among researchers because of
differences in their working models of how the components
relate to each other. This can be particularly problematic when
interacting with stakeholders who have may have a very
different understanding of the relationships between human
perturbations and marine biodiversity.
3. Conceptual model of human disturbances – Formulate a
working conceptual model of the relationship between a human
pressure, its stressors, appropriate measures of the stressors
and potential outcomes on marine biodiversity. For similar
reasons to (1) this is an essential step in determining how and
what to identify as the external pressures being exerted on the
components of marine biodiversity.
4. Definition of key terms – Define key terms that will be used
throughout the project to ensure clarity among researchers,
consistency of use and eliminating unhelpful and confusing
language. It will also aid in identifying the different types of
linguistic uncertainty in the risk characterisation stage and
strategies to address these.
Status/Timeframe
Completed
Completed
Completed
(see Diagrams 1 & 2
below)
Being refined
4
5. Determination of marine biodiversity components – Determine
the MB components that will be assessed and how they will be
categorised. Determine a preliminary spatial scale for these
components (e.g. CMAs)
Being refined
6. Determine characteristics of resilience of marine biodiversity
components – Determine the biological, ecological,
geomorphological, biochemical and/or oceanographic
characteristics of resilience relevant to each component of MB.
Being developed
7. Identification of main human activities – Identify the main types
of human activities that will be the pressures being exerted on
marine biodiversity. These types will form the basis of
identifying the appropriate domain expert from which to elicit
information about these pressures and their stressors on MB.
Being refined
8. Determination of knowledge domains and experts – Determine
knowledge domains for each human pressure and associated
MB components and the domain experts who can provide
information on these pressures. Prepare sets of knowledge
elicitation questions, tailored for each knowledge domain, and
instructions for experts.
To be developed, 3rd
week Nov.
9. Elicitation of knowledge from domain experts – Invite knowledge
domain experts to provide information. Explain the process to
each expert and send them appropriate knowledge sets
Provide one-to-one follow-up.
3rd week Dec.
10. Collation and analysis of information from experts – Collate
information from all domain experts. Analyse for knowledge
gaps, differences and interactions. Prepare an initial risk
identification table for each human perturbation interacting with
each relevant component of MB. Summarise information and
analysis and circulate among all domain experts. Obtain
feedback from experts on summary. Assess if a workshop is
required to resolved differences and prioritise pressures.
11. Finalisation of risk identification – Based on analysis of
information determine the interactions between human
pressures and MB components. Prioritise human pressures
based on their potential level of influence on MB components.
12. Report on Phase I – Prepare report on the sources of risk to
MB components in NSW, including recommendations for
Phase II.
1st week Feb., 2012
4th week Feb, 2012
4th week Mar, 2012
5
Diagram 1 – Concept map for determining sources of risk
Human disturbance
(= Human pressure)
Yes
Blue – literature/experts
Black – risk analyst
Is it regulated ?
Is regulation legislatively
adequate?
No
No
Yes
Is regulation implemented
adequately?
No or
Unknown
Potential source of risk
What are the outcomes on MB
component?
Yes
Inert
Resilient
No
perturbation
Stable
Not
resilient/
unstable
Short term
perturbation
Not a source of risk
Unk
Perturbation
Source of risk
What are the stressors that act on
the MB component?
Unk
What is the magnitude
of these stressors?
What aspects of the MB
component that respond
to these stressors?
What is the timeframe over which
these stressors act on the MB
component – press, pulse, ramp?
What is the timeframe of the
response of the MB component to
the stressors - press, pulse, ramp?
Unk
Input into ERA
6
Diagram 2 – A simplified conceptual model of MB & human perturbations
HUMAN PERTURBATIONS
HUMAN PERTURBATIONS
HUMAN PERTURBATIONS
HABITATS
Ecological
processes
Biogenic
Geomorphic
Pelagic/
Aquatic
Oceanic/Estuarine/Catchment
processes
Geomorphic
processes
Spp./Assemblages/
Genotypes/Habitat types
Direct effect
Indirect effect
7