Prioritizing Management for Cumulative Impacts

Determining where environmental management is best applied, either through regulating single sectors of human activities or across sectors, is complicated by interactions between human impacts and the environment. In this article, we show how an explicit representation of human-environment interactions can help, via “impact networks” including activities (e.g. shipping), stressors (e.g. ship strikes), species (e.g. humpback whales) or ecosystem services (e.g. marine recreation). Impact networks can enable the identification of “leverage nodes”, which, if present, can direct managers to the activities and stressors crucial for reducing risk to important ecosystem components. Exploring an impact network for a coastal ecosystem in British Columbia, Canada, we seek to identify these leverage nodes using a new approach employing Bayesian Belief Networks of risks to ecosystems. In so doing, we address three key questions: ([1][1]) Do leverage nodes exist? ([2][2]) Do management plans for species correctly identify leverage nodes? ([3][3]) Does the management of leverage nodes for certain species realize benefits for other species and ecosystem services? We show that there are several leverage nodes across all species investigated, and show that preconceptions about the regulation of risk to species can misidentify leverage nodes, potentially leading to ineffective management. Notably, we show that managing fisheries does not reduce overall risk to herring whereas managing diverse cumulative impacts including nutrient runoff, oil spills, and marine debris can reduce risk to herring, additional species, and related ecosystem services. Thus, by targeting leverage nodes, managers can efficiently mitigate risks for whole communities, ecosystems, and ecosystem services. ### Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. [1]: #ref-1 [2]: #ref-2 [3]: #ref-3