|
The Final Ecosystem Goods and Services (FEGS) Framework and MetricsSearch fields
Description and method logicMethod purposeThe FEGS Framework[1] is a beneficiary[2]-centric framework to identify, organise, and account for the subset of ecosystem services (services)[3] that are directly used, enjoyed, or appreciated by people (e.g. FEGS)[4]. The FEGS Framework begins with identifying the environmental class and beneficiary of a final ecosystem good or service (FEGS) and works backwards to identify the biophysical attributes of ecosystems (e.g. “final endpoints”) that are of greatest relevance to people who care about or depend on those ecosystems (e.g. beneficiaries).
SummaryThe FEGS Framework is a useful tool to communicate with stakeholders and policymakers about how people obtain benefits from biophysical attributes of an ecosystem. Individual FEGS are the biophysical attributes of an ecosystem that are used, enjoyed, or appreciated for a specific purpose.
Method logic
In the FEGS Framework, people are grouped into beneficiary classes (e.g. agricultural users) and sub-classes (e.g., livestock grazers, irrigators) that describe their interests (e.g. how they consume, use, or appreciate ecosystem goods or services, such as through farming or watering crops)[1]. Then, the ways that a beneficiary uses an ecosystem determines the biophysical FEGS (e.g. water for growing crops).
The FEGS Framework answers the following questions:
The steps for identifying FEGS are: 1. Understand how and where (in what ecosystem type (i.e. Environmental Class or Sub-class)) beneficiaries use, enjoy, or appreciate nature (e.g. identify what matters directly to the beneficiary – there may be several things) 2. Identify the beneficiary (e.g. individual (i.e. person, group, and/or firm) that enjoys, consumes, or uses nature) 3. Identify the FEGS (also referred to as ecological-end products (EEPs)[5]) that beneficiaries use, enjoy, and/or appreciate (e.g. a biophysical attribute, such as water) The FEGS Framework focuses on final goods and services and does not include the ecological components[6] or processes[7] that are necessary to produce it (e.g. intermediate processes)[8]. Additionally, FEGS for one beneficiary (e.g. water temperature for an aquaculturalist) may be an intermediate process for another (e.g. a recreational angler). Using a FEGS approach ensures that the full range of benefits provided by an ecosystem are considered. Metrics and indicators (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2020) can be used in a specific area to identify, quantify, and measure the EEPs, or the biophysical attributes produced by an ecosystem before it is used, appreciated, or enjoyed by a beneficiary. Metrics can be ideal (e.g. metrics consistent with FEGS that are in the right location for the relevant beneficiary) or available (e.g. surrogates for ideal metrics, can be intermediate ecosystem goods, economic goods or other social measures). For example, for the attribute of “water” in wetlands, an ideal metric for a kayaker who wants to ensure the water is safe for kayaking could be “wetland contamination metrics” and an available metric could be “levels of harmful bacteria” for the wetland they are kayaking in. Metrics are defined: Step 1. Ecosystem Delineation (i.e. The boundaries of an ecosystem) Step 2. Beneficiary Specification (i.e. describe the beneficiaries to be considered for each ecosystem) Step 3. Attribute Specification (i.e. identify the biophysical components of nature that links with the ecosystem service and beneficiaries’ interests) Step 4. Metric Specification (i.e. describe the units of the attribute and discuss the difference between ideal and available metrics) Step 5. Data Availability (i.e. consider the availability of appropriately scaled data for the proposed metric) Criteria groupings of the method
FEGS are grouped by:
Metrics and indicators for FEGS are grouped by (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2020):
Data required
Resources requiredExpertise required
Materials required
Method outputsOutputs
Uses
Criteria by category
Socio-culturalEcosystem/habitatReviewRecommended userUsers from the public sector, private sector, non-profit organisations, land managers, governments, environmental accountants, researchers, policymakers
Strengths
Limitations
Case studiesA Framework to Quantify the Strength of the Ecological Links Between an Environmental Stressor and Final Ecosystem ServicesA critical assessment of available ecosystem services data according to the Final Ecosystem Goods and Services frameworkDiatoms to human uses: linking nitrogen deposition, aquatic eutrophication, and ecosystem servicesEcosystem Goods and Services Case Studies and Models Support Community Decision Making using the EnviroAtlas and the Eco-Health Relationship BrowserEcosystem Services Indicators: Improving the Linkage between Biophysical and Economic AnalysesFY16 Output SHC 2.61- Ecosystem Goods and Services Production and Benefit Functions Case Studies ReportFY17 Output SHC 2.61 Practical Strategies for Assessing Final Ecosystem Goods and Services in Community Decision MakingLinking People to Coastal Habitats: A meta-analysis of final ecosystem goods and services on the coastWhat Data Should We Collect? A Framework for Identifying Indicators of Ecosystem Contributions to Human Well-BeingWho Benefits from National Estuaries? Applying the FEGS Classification System to Identify Ecosystem Services and their BeneficiariesLinks
References
Last updated: 9 December 2022 This page should be cited as: Department of Environment, Science and Innovation, Queensland (2022) The Final Ecosystem Goods and Services (FEGS) Framework and Metrics, WetlandInfo website, accessed 30 August 2024. Available at: https://wetlandinfo.des.qld.gov.au/wetlands/resources/tools/assessment-search-tool/the-final-ecosystem-goods-and-services-fegs-framework-and-metrics/ |