See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/271964103

Ecosystem Health Indicators

Chapter · July 2008

DOI: 10.1016/B978-008045405-4.00312-8

CITATIONS READS

24 7,160

3 authors, including:

Benjamin Burkhard Felix Müller

Leibniz Universität Hannover Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel
217 PUBLICATIONS   11,081 CITATIONS    200 PUBLICATIONS   9,958 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Ecosystem Services via the Ecosystem Services Partnership (ESP) -Regional Chapter South East Europe View project

book: mapping ecosystem services - Burkhard & Maes View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Benjamin Burkhard on 25 February 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Provided for non-commercial research and educational use.
Not for reproduction, distribution or commercial use.

This article was originally published in the Encyclopedia of Ecology, Volumes 1-5 published by
Elsevier, and the attached copy is provided by Elsevier for the author’s benefit and for the
benefit of the author’s institution, for non-commercial research and educational use including
without limitation use in instruction at your institution, sending it to specific colleagues who
you know, and providing a copy to your institution’s administrator.

All other uses, reproduction and distribution, including without limitation commercial reprints,
selling or licensing copies or access, or posting on open internet sites, your personal or
institution’s website or repository, are prohibited. For exceptions, permission may be sought
for such use through Elsevier’s permissions site at:

http://www.elsevier.com/locate/permissionusematerial

B Burkhard, F Müller, and A Lill. Ecosystem Health Indicators. In Sven Erik Jørgensen
and Brian D. Fath (Editor-in-Chief), Ecological Indicators. Vol. [2] of Encyclopedia
of Ecology, 5 vols. pp. [1132-1138] Oxford: Elsevier.
 Author's personal copy
1132 Ecological Indicators | Ecosystem Health Indicators

Ecosystem Health Indicators

B Burkhard, F Müller, and A Lill, University of Kiel, Kiel, Germany
ª 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Introduction Applied Methods of Ecosystem Health Assessment

Ecosystem Health Assessment and Indicators Conclusion
Categories of Ecosystem Health Indicators Summary
Commonly Applied Ecosystem Health Indicators Further Reading

Introduction needed to sustain life of the human community, have

become impaired. Consequently, ecosystem health has
The fundamentals of the ecosystem health concept have been changed significantly, that is, because it refers to
been set already in the eighteenth century with the ideas systems that are manipulated to satisfy human needs.
of the Scottish geologist James Hutton, who started to This makes the difference to other related concepts, for
describe the Earth as an integrated system. Later, the example some notions of ecological integrity, which
writings about land sickness of the pioneering ecologist refers to the functioning of ecosystems based on nat-
Aldo Leopold in 1941 created the first roots of the eco- ure-near, self-organized processes.
system health concept. Since then, the definition of Generally speaking, an ecosystem is often called
ecosystem health has been constantly evolving toward healthy if it is stable (respectively resilient) and sustain-
an integration of more and more human and societal able in the provision of goods and services used by human
contexts in order to understand what is considered to be societies (ecosystem services). This implies that it has the
healthy. In the United States and in Canada, the concept ability to maintain its structure (organization) and func-
of ecosystem health has been adopted in legislation and it tion (vigor) over time under external stress (resilience).
is part of international political programs, for example, Further ecological principles and theories like homeo-
the so-called Rio convention on sustainable development. stasis, diversity, complexity, emergent properties, or
Therefore, the assessment of ecosystem health does not hierarchy principles are closely related or included in
only take into account ecological components but also the concept of ecosystem health as it refers to complex
requires a comprehension of social, economic, and cul- adaptive systems. These systems are characterized by
tural dimensions. Hence, its definition is more certain dynamics including sudden reconfigurations
comprehensive than definition of human health. These from one state of organization to another. Some changes
facts have to be reflected while defining appropriate sets can be inherently unpredictable. Both positive and nega-
of indicators that can be applied within respective assess- tive feedback processes and cause and effect chains,
ments of ecosystem health. operating over a range of spatial and temporal scales,
Suitable indicator sets have to consider both the predominate these dynamics.
structure and the function of ecosystems on different Hence, ecosystem health represents the sustainability
spatial and temporal scales. As pointed out in various of an ecosystem as a whole that needs a minimal external
studies, ecosystems on our planet already are and will support by management measures. It comprises biophy-
continue to be degraded under the pressure of increasing sical, socioeconomic, cultural, and human dimensions of
human demands: anthropogenic impacts as deserti- the environment. This notion of ecosystem health is clo-
fication, acidification, forest decay, erosion, and sely interrelated to the ability of ecosystems to provide
eutrophication have become more and more evident and sustain ecosystem services.
during the last decades. There are no more ecosystems In the beginning of the article, a short review of the
on Earth which are not impacted by any human activity. historic development of ecosystem health assessment and
Hence, preventative and restorative strategies are indicators is given. Afterwards, different categories and
needed in order to achieve the health of regional and examples of corresponding ecosystem health indicators
global ecosystems on a long-term perspective. With are presented. This part is supplemented by several
regard to different well-known and established indicators examples of commonly applied ecosystem health indica-
for example species diversity or water quality, many of tors from lake as well as from terrestrial ecosystems. At
the ecosystems on our planet can be considered the end, some examples of applied methods of ecosystem
unhealthy. Several of their functions, especially those health assessment are given.
 Author's personal copy
Ecological Indicators | Ecosystem Health Indicators 1133

Ecosystem Health Assessment and be carried out thoroughly, especially while dealing with
Indicators holistic and highly aggregated indicators.

The idea of ecosystem health assessment (EHA) has started

in the late 1980s. Since then, there have been wide discus- Commonly Applied Ecosystem Health
sions about adequate concepts and methodologies. As the Indicators
individual ecosystems are never identical with reference to
basic features, it is challenging to find general and repro- In the following, some examples out of the huge amount
ducible approaches instead of case-specific techniques. of specific indicators and sets of indicators are given.
Furthermore, appropriate assessments have to bridge the
gaps between natural, socioeconomical, and health sciences
Indicators Based on the Abundance of Selected
and to integrate human norms and values with the aim to
Species
support sustainable management of natural resources.
As ecosystem health cannot be measured or observed These biological indicators cover the presence or absence
directly, surrogate measures (indicators) have to be applied of selected species. Indicator species have to be selected in
to assess it. These indicators should be backed by ecological order to be representative for a certain phenomenon or to
principles and systems theory. They should be suitable for be sensitive to distinct changes. Hence, their appearance
applications on varying temporal and spatial scales. and dominance is associated with a certain environmental
Parameters needed for their quantification have to be situation. The usage of this kind of indices implies on the
obtainable and reproducible within ecological assessments. one hand a certain level of uncertainty; on the other, the
Moreover, indicators have to give adequate information results can directly be linked to biological phenomena
about ecosystem quality trends, useful for managers and which is useful for proper management of resources. In
scientists that take into account the complex cause and the following, some examples will be outlined.
effect chains in human–environmental systems. Different
values and processes have to be integrated in order to assess Saprobic classification
the health of an ecosystem in relation to economic and The saprobe system is a collection of organisms, that gives
social aspects, regional and global environmental changes, information about the degree of water pollution. The
and alteration in the provision of ecosystem services and different pollution intensities (saprogenic stages) are related
their consequences for human well-being. to certain indicator organisms (e.g., bacteria, fungi, algae,
amoeba, mussels, worms, insect larvae, and fishes) and range
from polysaprobic (very highly polluted), -mesosaprobic
Categories of Ecosystem Health (highly polluted), -mesosaprobic (medium polluted) to
Indicators oligosaprobic (rather clean and clear water).

As ecosystems are extremely complex, any single indicator Bellan’s pollution index
cannot be completely representative with reference to all Bellan considers aquatic species like Platynereis dumerilii,
possible demands, features, and conditions. Nevertheless, Theosthema oerstedi, Cirratulus cirratus, and Dodecaria
there is a wide spectrum of indicators that can be used for concharum as water pollution indicators. Clear water is
the assessment of ecosystem health. They can be classified indicated by species like Syllis gracillis or Typosyllis prolifera.
into different categories that include varying levels of The equation of the Bellan’s pollution index can be for-
integration, ranging from rather reductionistic to holistic mulated as follows:
indicators, integrating a broad range of environmental X
information: IP ¼ dominance of pollution indicator species=dominance
of pollution ðclearÞ water indicators:
• indicators based on the abundance of selected species;
• elements; based on the concentration of selected
indicators If the index value is bigger than 1, a pollution disturbance
in the community is indicated.
• indicators based on ratios between different classes of
organisms or elements; AZTI Marine Biotic Index
• indicators based on ecological strategies or processes; For this indicator the soft bottom macrofauna is distin-
• indicators
ture; and
based on ecosystem composition and struc- guished into five groups in accordance to their sensitivity
to increasing stress:
• systems theoretical holistic indicators. 1. species that are very sensitive to organic enrichment
The identification of appropriate indicator-indicandum and eutrophication and that are only present under
(the phenomenon that has to be assessed) relations has to unpolluted conditions;
 Author's personal copy
1134 Ecological Indicators | Ecosystem Health Indicators

2. species that are indifferent to organic enrichment, Indicators Based on Concentration of Selected
occur always in low densities and show no significant Elements
variations over time;
Many assessments are based on measurements or mon-
3. species tolerant to excess organic matter enrichment
itoring of concentrations or densities of selected elements
(these species can also be found under normal condi-
that can be linked with altering systems states. In the
tions but usually their populations are supported by
context of environmental management, a link to anthro-
organic enrichment);
pogenic activities is convenient for example done with the
4. second-order opportunist species, very often small
estimation of the level of eutrophication on the basis of
polychaetes; and
the total phosphorus concentration. Another typical
5. first-order opportunist species (deposit feeders).
measurement is the pH value, referring to the activity of
 hydrogen ions, which for instance can be linked to effects
AMBI ðbiotic coefficientÞ ¼ ð0  % IÞ þ ð1:5  % IIÞ of air pollution (acid rain).

þ ð3  % IIIÞ þ ð4:5  % IVÞ þ ð6  % VÞ =100

Indicators Based on Ratios between Different

The AZTI marine biotic index (AMBI) results can be
Classes of Organisms or Elements
classified as: normal (AMBI coefficient between 0.0 and
1.2), slightly polluted (1.2 and 3.2), moderately polluted Increase or decrease of one species in relation to another
(3.2 and 5.0), highly polluted (5.0 and 6.0), or very can give useful information about changes in systems.
highly polluted (6.0 and 7.0). The AMBI has been Depending on the problem and the system that has to
considered useful in terms of the application of the be investigated, different indices are applicable.
European Water Framework Directive to coastal eco-
systems and estuaries. Nygard’s algal index
This index is used to evaluate the nutritional status of
Bentix lake ecosystems and their fertility. The index can be
The Bentix is based on the AMBI but has only three calculated as a compound quotient out of:
groups in order to avoid errors in the grouping of species
Myxophycean þ chlorococcales þ centric
and to make the calculation of the index easier:
þ Euglenophyceae=desmids
• Group I. Species generally sensitive to disturbances.
Oligotrophic systems have a quotient between 0.01 and 1.0,
• bance. II.Populations
Group Species that are tolerant to stress or distur-
may respond to organic enrichment
eutrophic systems between 1.2 and 2.5. Further Nygard’s
indices are based on ratios between Myxophyceae
or other source of pollution.
and desmids, chlorococcales and desmids, centric and
• Group III. First-order opportunistic species (pioneer,
colonizers or species which are tolerant to hypoxia).
pinnate diatoms or Euglenophyta and Myxophyceae þ
chlorococcales.

Bentix ¼ fð6  % IÞ þ 2ð% II þ % IIIÞg=100 Diatoms/nondiatoms ratio

In the context of altering nutrient charges in aquatic
The Bentix results can be classified as: normal (4.5–6.0), systems, the ratio of the major phytoplankton groups
slightly polluted (3.5–4.5), moderately polluted (2.5–3.5), diatoms versus flagellates (diatoms–nondiatoms ratio)
highly polluted (2.0–2.5), or very highly polluted can be used as indicator. Regarding for example eutro-
(Bentix ¼ 0). phication, nutrient reductions can be seen in a decrease in
flagellate abundance.
Macrofauna monitoring index
This index comprises 12 indicator species. Each of them is
assigned a score, based primarily on the ratio of its abun- Indicators Based on Ecological Strategies or
dance in control versus impacted samples. The index Processes
value is the average score of those indicator species Regarding ecosystems as entities of complex processes
which are present in the sample. and interactions, varying strategies and processes are
related to altering system’s conditions caused by human
Benthic response index activities or different stages of natural development.
The Benthic response index (BRI) is calculated as abun-
dance weighted average pollution tolerance of species Process and rate indicators
that occur in a sample. This is similar to the weighted One functional way to assess the health of ecosystems is to
average approach used in gradient analysis. measure or model indicators that represent important
 Author's personal copy
Ecological Indicators | Ecosystem Health Indicators 1135

processes in the ecosystem from which conclusions for the n1, n2, n3, and n4 are the number of individuals that are
whole system can be drawn. Primary production or sampled in each of the four species groups. If the ITI
growth rates are among the most commonly used indica- value approaches 100, suspension feeders are dominant
tors. The cycling of matter, water, or energy between the what indicates an environmental disturbance.
different components of a system and the transformation
of matter, water, or energy into different forms are main
processes in natural systems. Examples are cycling of Indicators Based on Ecosystem Composition
nitrogen or phosphorus, the fixation of energy by plant and Structure
photosynthesis or the water cycle based on precipitation,
runoff, and evapotranspiration. Ecosystems are dynamic systems that show varying com-
positions and structures during their different stages of
Indicators based on ecological strategies development or due to perturbations. Different indicators
Further indices consider the distinct behavior of different to describe systems’ composition and structure are
taxonomic groups under environmental stress situations, existing.
for example, the nematodes/copepods index. Some
authors have criticized these indices because of their Shannon–Wiener index
dependence on parameters such as water depth and sedi- Indices based on the diversity values are very common.
ment particle size and also because of their unpredictable One of the most often used is the Shannon–Wiener index,
pattern of variation depending on the type of pollution. developed by C. E. Shannon and W. Wiener. This index
More recently, indices for example the polychaetes/ originates in information theory and assumes that indivi-
amphipods ratio or the index of r/K strategists, which duals are sampled at random out of a community which is
consider all the benthic taxa, were developed. indefinitely large, and that all the species are represented
in the sample.
Index of r/K strategists
The Shannon–Wiener index is calculated by the
In a rather stable system with infrequent disturbances, the following equation:
X
competitive dominants in most communities are H9 ¼ – pi log 2 pi
k-selected or conservative species with the attributes of
large body size and long life span. They are usually In this equation, pi is the proportion of individuals found
dominant in terms of total biomass, but not dominant in in species i. The values of this index can vary between 0
number. R-selected or opportunistic species with shorter and 5. H9 reaches a maximum value if the individuals of
life spans are usually numerically dominant but do not all species occur with the same density. Other indices
represent a large proportion of the total biomass of the based on the diversity value are for example the Pielou
community. After a more significant disturbance, con- Evenness index, the Brilloun index, the Margalef
servativespecies are usually less favored and the index, the Berger–Parker index, the Simpson index, and
opportunistic species can become dominant as well inbio- K-dominance curves.
mass as in number. Thus, the analyses of r- and K-
strategists’ distributions can be used for the indication of Food webs
ecosystem health. Food webs describe the connection of plants and animals
Often, different feeding strategies of organisms are which depend upon each other referring to the flow of
used to describe ecosystem conditions and developments. energy. Organisms are assigned to different trophic levels
that classify their position in the food chain which is
Infaunal index determined by the number of energy transfer steps to
For the assessment of the trophic infaunal index, the that level. In general, food webs become more complex
macrobenthos species are divided into four groups: during the development of a system. Hence, their struc-
ture and composition can be used to assess the condition
1. suspension feeders, and stage of development of a system. Network theory
2. interface feeders, plays an important role for the interpretation of food web
3. surface deposit feeders, and structures.
4. subsurface deposit feeders.
The infaunal index is calculated with the following Ascendency
equation: Ascendency and related indices are abstract concepts for
the quantification of the size and organization of flows in
systems using information-theoretic terms. Ascendency
ITI ¼ 100  ð100=3Þ values indicate the overall status of dynamic systems in
 ð0n1 þ 1n2 þ 2n3 þ 3n4Þ=ðn1 þ n2 þ n3 þ n4Þ a quantitative fashion and show the limits of system
 Author's personal copy
1136 Ecological Indicators | Ecosystem Health Indicators

growth and development. The response of a system to eutrophic ecosystem has a very high exergy due to the
perturbations can be measured which is useful in the high concentration of biomass, but the specific exergy is
context of ecosystem health. low as the biomass is dominated by algae with low
-values. The combination of exergy index and the
specific exergy index gives usually a more satisfactory
description of ecosystem health than the exergy index
Systems Theoretical Holistic Indicators
alone, because it considers the diversity and the life
Indicators based on systems theory have high potentials to conditions for higher organisms.
represent complex issues in a holistic manner, but they
tend to be rather abstract and difficult to communicate.
The holistic ecosystem health indicator
The holistic ecosystem health indicator (HEHI) was devel-
Vigor, organization, and resilience (V-O-R model) oped in 1999 in Costa Rica as an integrative indicator
Measures of vigor, organization (or performance), and which might be an appropriate tool for assessing
resilience are often used to assess ecosystem health. and evaluating health of managed ecosystems. The HEHI
However, they are more easily described in theory than follows a hierarchical structure starting with three main
quantified in practice. Vigor is usually represented by branches: ecological, social, and interactive. Measures
activity, metabolism, or primary productivity. A study of about the condition and trend of the ecosystems are
the Great Lakes Basin (North America) showed the organized within the ecological branch. Socioeconomic
decline in the abundance of fish and infertility of agricul- measures concerning the community dependent on
tural soils within the basin as an example of reduced vigor. the ecosystem or affected by management decisions are
Organization represents the diversity and number of organized within the social branch. The interactive
interactions between system components. An example, branch includes measures relating to land-use and
also from the Great Lakes, is the reduced morphological management decisions that characterize the interactions
and functional diversity of fish associations that occurs between the human communities and the ecosystem.
under multiple stresses. Resilience is normally under- Furthermore, each branch is subdivided into categories
stood as a system’s capacity to maintain structure and or criteria.
function in the presence of (external) stress. When resi- The indicators belonging to the categories serve as
lience is exceeded, the system can shift to an alternate measures for the performance of each category. If we for
state. A prime example is the shift from benthic to pelagic example take soil quality, this is a category within the
dominated fish associations in the Laurentian Lower ecological branch and it can be measured using indicators
Great Lakes Basin. In this approach ecosystem health is such as microbial biomass, water infiltration, compaction,
closely related to the concepts of stress ecology where etc. Each category is given a target or a benchmark, which
vigor, systems organization, resilience and the absence of is based on references available in scientific literature,
signs of ecosystems distress are the main factors for the policies, etc. For example, a water-quality indicator can
health of a system. have a target defined by legal limits specified by the
administrative authority in charge, while a target for a
productivity indicator may be defined by a combination
Exergy indices
of the capacity of the system and objectives set by
Further holistic indicators are the exergy index and the
stakeholders.
specific exergy index. Exergy is derived from thermody-
namics and measure the energy fraction that can be
transformed into mechanical work. In ecosystems, the NRCS indicator selection model
captured exergy is used to build up biomass and struc- The National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
tures during succession. Hence, exergy can be used as a of the US Department of Agriculture assigned an NRCS
measure of biomass, structure, energy, and information indicators action team in 1994 which developed an
stored in the biomass. Therefore, more complex organ- indicator selection model for the use of indicators in
isms and systems also have more built in exergy than evaluations of ecosystem conditions.
simpler ones. Specific exergy is defined as exergy per The team identified framing questions for four differ-
biomass. Both exergy and specific exergy can be used as ent ecosystem aspects namely: ecosystem processes,
indicators for ecosystem health. Relations between the recovery processes, landscape and community structure,
exergy values and other ecosystem health characteristics and abiotic features. The framing questions represent a
like diversity, structure, or resilience can be found. For minimum set of diagnostic questions, which need to be
example, specific exergy expresses the dominance of the answered when doing comprehensive evaluations of eco-
higher organisms as they per unit of biomass carry more system conditions or health. The questions are asked at all
information (they have higher -values). A very scales of ecosystem evaluation:
 Author's personal copy
Ecological Indicators | Ecosystem Health Indicators 1137

System processes. The questions asked at ‘system pro- trend of a given ecosystem attribute or component. The
cesses’ are as follows: underlying assumption for the use of such indicators is
that relationships can be inferred between a relatively
1. Are precipitation and groundwater resources captured,
easily measured ecosystem attribute (i.e., litter distribu-
stored, used and released in a safe and stable manner?
tion and amount) and the more difficult to measure
2. Are kinds and flows of chemicals (minerals, nutrients,
ecosystem components or processes (i.e., energy flow
other) and energy in balance and optimized for plant
and nutrient cycling).
and animal communities and biomass production
requirements?
3. Are annual cash flows, technical assistance, and con-
servation incentives timely and adequate for desired
Applied Methods of Ecosystem Health
community and land user incomes?
Assessment
Recovery processes. The questions asked at ‘recovery pro-
cesses’ are as follows: The concept of ecosystem health has been criticized for
being too fuzzy and not concrete enough for practical
1. Are soil, water, air, plant, and animal resources and
application. Nevertheless, it found entry in different man-
biophysical processes in place and in a condition to agement strategies and definitions of political targets. For
allow timely and full recovery from stresses and dis- example, in principle 7 of the Rio declaration of 1992, it
turbances and to meet management objectives? has been claimed that ‘‘States shall cooperate in a spirit of
2. Are social and economic systems available to allow global partnership to conserve, protect and restore the
land users and communities and the resources they health and integrity of the Earth’s ecosystem.’’ More
manage to recover from environmental and socioeco- recently, the consideration of ecosystem health was
nomic stresses? integrated into the ecosystem approach of the convention
3. Are there human and animal resource health concerns on biological diversity (CBD) and in connection to the
associated with the management of present or planned precautionary principle which is part of the environ-
enterprises? mental and nature conservation strategies in different
Landscape and community structure. The questions asked countries. Furthermore, the ecosystem health concept
at ‘Landscape and community structure’ are as follows: was implemented in the strategies of the OSPAR and
the HELCOM commissions for the protection of marine
1. Do landscape features and patterns facilitate use, environments or in the European Union Water
protection and optimization of ecosystem processes? Framework Directive. The development of appropriate
2. Do commodity markets, investment capital and public monitoring and indicator systems and methods to assess
programs encourage land uses, enterprises and ecosystem health in practice are main targets of these
resource management that are compatible with initiatives.
ecosystem processes? Three examples for methods for possible ways of eco-
3. Are decision-making processes available to commu- system health assessment applications are given in the
nities and individuals to resolve conflicts regarding following. The first one, the ecosystem health index
current and desired uses, management and protection method (EHIM) is based on a combination of different
of natural resources? subindicators which are synthesized into index values
4. Does the social infrastructure (healthcare, education, using individual weighting factors. Whereas in the ecolo-
multicultural recognition, etc.) support and promote gical model method (EMM), modeling procedures are
the desired quality of life for the communities and used to quantify indicator values, the direct measurement
individuals? method (DMM) is based on values that are measured
Abiotic features. The question asked at this scale is: Are directly or calculated indirectly for the assessment of
current and planned land uses and desired future condi- ecosystem health.
tions suited to the abiotic conditions (e.g., stream
temperature, flow velocities, riffle/pool ratios, riparian Ecosystem Health Index Method
shading, climate, topography, soils, and geology)?
For this method, a synthetic ecosystem health index
Within the next step, for all ecosystem components (EHI) in a scale of 0–100 has been developed in order to
(environmental, ecological, socioeconomic, cultural, or quantitatively assess the state of ecosystem health. The
political factors), which are considered to be necessary worst health state exists when EHI is zero. To make
elements of the respective system, appropriate indicators description easier, the EHI was divided into five cate-
are listed. These indicators are the quantitative or quali- gories: 0–20% (worst health state), 20–40% (bad health
tative tools in this model to assess the status, condition, or state), 40–60% (middle health state), 60–80% (good
 Author's personal copy
1138 Ecological Indicators | Ecosystem Health Indicators

health state), and 80–100% (best health state). Five steps social, economic, and land-use data can give valuable
are necessary to calculate the EHI: information with regard to the effects of human action
on the state of ecosystems.
1. selection of basic and additional ecosystem indicators;
2. calculation of sub-EHIs for all selected indicators;
3. determination of weighting factors for all selected
indicators; Summary
4. calculation of synthetic EHI using sub-EHIs and
weighting factors for all selected indicators; and Ecosystem health is a concept that integrates environ-
5. assessment of ecosystem health based on synthetic EHI mental conditions with the impacts of anthropogenic
values. activities in order to give information for a sustainable
use and management of natural resources. Therefore,
related indicators have to reflect these anthropogenic
Ecological Model Method impacts to represent the complex cause and effect rela-
Five steps are applied when using EMM: tions in human–environmental systems. Different
indicator concepts and exemplary sets of indicators are
1. determination of the model structure and complexity presented within the text. The focal categories are indi-
according to ecosystem structure; cators based on: the abundance of selected species, the
2. establishment of an ecological model by creating a concentration of selected elements, ratios between differ-
conceptual diagram, developing model equations as ent classes of organisms or elements, ecological strategies
well as estimating model parameters; or processes, and ecosystem composition and structure
3. calibration of the model in order to assess its suitability and systems theoretical holistic indicators.
in application to ecosystem health assessment process;
4. calculation of the ecosystem health indicators; and
See also: Average Taxonomic Diversity and Distinctness;
5. assessment of the ecosystem health using the values of
Benthic Response Index; Berger–Parker Index;
the indicators.
k-Dominance Curves; Margalef’s Index; Shannon–Wiener
Index; Simpson Index; Specific Exergy as Ecosystem
Direct Measurement Method Health Indicator.
The DMM is used by applying the following three steps:
1. identification of relevant indicators which are needed Further Reading
for the assessment process;
Callicott JB (1995) A review of some problems with the concept of
2. direct measurement or indirect calculation of the
ecosystem health. Ecosystem Health 1(2): 101–112.
selected indicators; and Costanza R and Mageau M (1999) What is a healthy ecosystem?
3. assessment of ecosystem health based on the resulting Aquatic Ecology 33: 105–115.
Costanza R, Norton BG, and Haskell BD (eds.) (1992) Ecosystem
indicator values. Health: New Goals for Environmental Management. Washington,
DC: Island Press.
Jørgensen SE, Costanza R, and Xu F-L (2005) Handbook of Ecological
Conclusion Indicators for the Assessment of Ecosystem Health. London:
CRC Press.
Lackey RT (2001) Values, policy, and ecosystem health. BioScience
There is a broad range of ecosystem health indicators 51: 437–444.
available. Depending on the questions to investigate, Muñoz-Erickson TA and Aguilar-Gonzalez BJ (2003) The use of
ecosystem health indicators for evaluating ecological and social
such indicator sets can be combined and used to supple- outcomes of the collaborative approach to management: The case
ment each other in order to carry out holistic ecosystem study of the Diablo Trust. Proceedings of National Workshop
health assessments. Indicators applicable for all different Evaluating Methods and Environmental Outcomes of Community-
Based Collaborative Processes. Utah: Snowbird Center.
kinds of research and management questions have not Patil GP, Brooks RP, Myers WL, Rapport DJ, and Taillie C (2001)
been developed so far. Another critical point is the avail- Ecosystem health and its measurement at landscape scale: Toward
ability of data for the quantification of respective the next generation of quantitative assessments. Ecosystem Health
4(7): 307–316.
indicators on suitable spatial and temporal scales. If eco- Rapport DJ (ed.) (2003) Managing for Healthy Ecosystems. Boca Raton:
system health indicators are linked to existing monitoring Lewis Publisher.
networks, appropriate data sets should be on-hand. Rapport DJ and Singh A (2006) An ecohealth-based framework for state
of environment reporting. Ecological Indicators 6: 409–428.
Further data can be derived by modeling or appropriate Ulanowicz RE (1997) Ecology, the Ascendant Perspective. NewYork:
surrogates have to be found. Especially, the linkage with Columbia University Press.

View publication stats