Faculty of Environment and Technology, University of the West of England (UWE), Coldharbour Lane, Frenchay Campus, Bristol BS16 1QY, UK.
Sci Total Environ. 2013 Sep 1;461-462:170-9. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.05.010. Epub 2013 May 28.
The environmental and financial costs of inputs to, and unintended consequences arising from narrow consideration of outputs from, water and environmental management technologies highlight the need for low-input solutions that optimise outcomes across multiple ecosystem services. Case studies examining the inputs and outputs associated with several ecosystem-based water and environmental management technologies reveal a range from those that differ little from conventional electro-mechanical engineering techniques through methods, such as integrated constructed wetlands (ICWs), designed explicitly as low-input systems optimising ecosystem service outcomes. All techniques present opportunities for further optimisation of outputs, and hence for greater cumulative public value. We define 'systemic solutions' as "…low-input technologies using natural processes to optimise benefits across the spectrum of ecosystem services and their beneficiaries". They contribute to sustainable development by averting unintended negative impacts and optimising benefits to all ecosystem service beneficiaries, increasing net economic value. Legacy legislation addressing issues in a fragmented way, associated 'ring-fenced' budgets and established management assumptions represent obstacles to implementing 'systemic solutions'. However, flexible implementation of legacy regulations recognising their primary purpose, rather than slavish adherence to detailed sub-clauses, may achieve greater overall public benefit through optimisation of outcomes across ecosystem services. Systemic solutions are not a panacea if applied merely as 'downstream' fixes, but are part of, and a means to accelerate, broader culture change towards more sustainable practice. This necessarily entails connecting a wider network of interests in the formulation and design of mutually-beneficial systemic solutions, including for example spatial planners, engineers, regulators, managers, farming and other businesses, and researchers working on ways to quantify and optimise delivery of ecosystem services.
投入到水和环境管理技术的产出以及由此产生的狭隘考虑所带来的环境和财务成本，突出了需要优化多种生态系统服务成果的低投入解决方案。对几种基于生态系统的水和环境管理技术的投入和产出进行案例研究，揭示了一系列从与传统机电工程技术差异不大的方法到集成人工湿地（ICWs）等明确设计为优化生态系统服务成果的低投入系统的方法。所有技术都为进一步优化产出提供了机会，从而为更大的累积公共价值提供了机会。我们将“系统解决方案”定义为“使用自然过程优化生态系统服务及其受益者的整个频谱的利益的低投入技术”。它们通过避免意外的负面影响并优化所有生态系统服务受益者的利益来促进可持续发展，从而增加净经济价值。零散地解决问题的遗留立法、相关的“专款专用”预算和既定的管理假设，代表着实施“系统解决方案”的障碍。然而，灵活执行传统法规，承认其主要目的，而不是盲目遵守详细的子条款，可能会通过优化生态系统服务的成果来实现更大的整体公共利益。如果仅仅将系统解决方案作为“下游”修复措施应用，它们并不是万能的，但它们是更广泛的文化变革的一部分，也是更可持续实践的加速手段。这必然需要在相互受益的系统解决方案的制定和设计中连接更广泛的利益网络，例如空间规划者、工程师、监管者、管理者、农业和其他企业以及研究人员，以寻找量化和优化生态系统服务提供的方法。
