title: Using ecological production functions to link ecological processes to ecosystem services.
abstract: Ecological production functions (EPFs) link ecosystems, stressors, and management actions to ecosystem services (ES) production. Although EPFs are acknowledged as being essential to improve environmental management, their use in ecological risk assessment has received relatively little attention. Ecological production functions may be defined as usable expressions (i.e., models) of the processes by which ecosystems produce ES, often including external influences on those processes. We identify key attributes of EPFs and discuss both actual and idealized examples of their use to inform decision making. Whenever possible, EPFs should estimate final, rather than intermediate, ES. Although various types of EPFs have been developed, we suggest that EPFs are more useful for decision making if they quantify ES outcomes, respond to ecosystem condition, respond to stressor levels or management scenarios, reflect ecological complexity, rely on data with broad coverage, have performed well previously, are practical to use, and are open and transparent. In an example using pesticides, we illustrate how EPFs with these attributes could enable the inclusion of ES in ecological risk assessment. The biggest challenges to ES inclusion are limited data sets that are easily adapted for use in modeling EPFs and generally poor understanding of linkages among ecological components and the processes that ultimately deliver the ES. We conclude by advocating for the incorporation into EPFs of added ecological complexity and greater ability to represent the trade-offs among ES. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2017;13:52-61. © 2016 SETAC.
authors.affiliation: US Environmental Protection Agency, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Ecological Exposure Research Division, Cincinnati, Ohio.
authors.forename: Randall Jf
authors.initials: RJ
authors.lastname: Bruins
authors.affiliation: US Environmental Protection Agency, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Ground Water and Ecosystems Restoration Division, Ada, Oklahoma.
authors.forename: Timothy J
authors.initials: TJ
authors.lastname: Canfield
authors.affiliation: Ecological Society of America, Washington, DC, USA.
authors.forename: Clifford
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Duke
authors.affiliation: LK Consultancy, Turner Valley, Alberta, Canada.
authors.forename: Larry
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Kapustka
authors.affiliation: Kenyon College, Department of Biology, Gambier, Ohio, USA.|on detail with cooperative status at US Environmental Protection Agency, Western Ecology Division, Corvallis, Oregon.
authors.forename: Amanda M
authors.initials: AM
authors.lastname: Nahlik
authors.affiliation: Quantitative Landscape Ecology, Institute for Environmental Sciences, University Koblenz-Landau, Landau, Germany.
authors.forename: Ralf B
authors.initials: RB
authors.lastname: Schäfer
mesh_terms: D003247:Conservation of Natural Resources; D003657:Decision Making; D055669:Ecological and Environmental Phenomena; D017753:Ecosystem; D004784:Environmental Monitoring / Q000379:methods*; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D018570:Risk Assessment
keywords: Decision making; Ecological model; Final ecosystem services; Pesticides; Stressors