Search results

Over the last two decades, there has been increasing public and political recognition of society's dependency upon natural habitat complexity and ecological processes to sustain provision of crucial ecosystem services, ranging from supplying potable water through to climate regulation. How has the ecosystem-services perspective been integrated into strategies for aquatic habitat conservation? Literature on conservation of diverse freshwater and marine habitats was reviewed to assess the extent to which past and current strategies specifically targeted ecosystem services, and considered ecosystem functions, potential trade-offs and social issues when formulating protection measures for conserving aquatic habitats. Surprisingly few published examples exist where comprehensive assessment of ecosystem services supported development of conservation plans. Seldom were aquatic habitat conservation objectives framed in terms of balancing trade-offs, assessing social values and evaluating suites of ecosystem services under different strategies. Time frames for achieving these objectives were also rarely specified. There was no evidence for fundamental differences between marine and freshwater habitats with respect to their ecosystem services that should be considered when setting targets for their conservation. When an ecosystem-service perspective is used for setting objectives in aquatic habitat conservation, the following actions are recommended: (1) explicitly listing and evaluating full suites of ecosystem services to be conserved; (2) identifying current and future potential trade-offs arising from conservation; (3) specifying time frames within which particular strategies might protect or enhance desired services; and (4) predicting how different proposed strategies might affect each ecosystem function, service flow and public benefit. This approach will help ensure that less-apparent ecosystem services (e.g. regulating, supporting) and their associated ecosystem functions receive adequate recognition and protection in aquatic conservation of freshwater and marine habitats. However, conservation objectives should not focus solely on protecting or enhancing ecosystem services but complement current strategies targeting biodiversity and other conservation goals. ; Peer Reviewed

Human impacts to aquatic ecosystems often involve changes in hydrologic connectivity and flow regime. Drawing upon examples in the literature and from our experience, we developed conceptual models and used simple bivariate plots to visualize human impacts and restoration efforts in terms of connectivity and flow dynamics. Human-induced changes in longitudinal, lateral, and vertical connectivity are often accompanied by changes in flow dynamics, but in our experience restoration efforts to date have more often restored connectivity than flow dynamics. Restoration actions have included removing dams to restore fish passage, reconnecting flow through artificially cut-off side channels, setting back or breaching levees, and removing fine sediment deposits that block vertical exchange with the bed, thereby partially restoring hydrologic connectivity, i.e., longitudinal, lateral, or vertical. Restorations have less commonly affected flow dynamics, presumably because of the social and economic importance of water diversions or flood control. Thus, as illustrated in these bivariate plots, the trajectories of ecological restoration are rarely parallel with degradation trajectories because restoration is politically and economically easier along some axes more than others.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a continuous and robust impact on world health. The resulting COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating physical, mental and fiscal impact on the millions of people living with noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). In addition to older age, people living with CVD, stroke, obesity, diabetes, kidney disease, and hypertension are at a particularly greater risk for severe forms of COVID-19 and its consequences. Meta-analysis indicates that hypertension, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and thrombotic complications have been observed as both the most prevalent and most dangerous co-morbidities in COVID-19 patients. And despite the nearly incalculable physical, mental, emotional, and economic toll of this pandemic, forthcoming public health figures continue to place cardiovascular disease as the number one cause of death across the globe in the year 2020. The world simply cannot wait for the next pandemic to invest in NCDs. Social determinants of health cannot be addressed only through the healthcare system, but a more holistic multisectoral approach with at its basis the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is needed to truly address social and economic inequalities and build more resilient systems. Yet there is reason for hope: the 2019 UN Political Declaration on UHC provides a strong framework for building more resilient health systems, with explicit calls for investment in NCDs and references to fiscal policies that put such investment firmly within reach. By further cementing the importance of addressing circulatory health in a future Framework Convention on Emergency Preparedness, WHO Member States can take concrete steps towards a pandemic-free future. As the chief representatives of the global circulatory health community and patients, the Global Coalition for Circulatory Health calls for increased support for the healthcare workforce, global vaccine equity, embracing new models of care and digital health solutions, as well as fiscal policies on unhealthy commodities to support these investments.