Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Ecosystems are deeply interconnected – environmental research, policy and management should be too

News Feed
Monday, April 22, 2024

Shutterstock/S CurtisWhy are we crossing ecological boundaries that affect Earth’s fundamental life-supporting capacity? Is it because we don’t have enough information about how ecosystems respond to change? Or are we unable, even unwilling, to use that information better? We have a lot to learn still, but as we show in our research, using current ecological knowledge more effectively could deliver substantial environmental gains. Our work focuses on improving links between research and ecosystem management to identify key trigger points for action in a framework that joins land, freshwater and sea ecosystems. Specifically, we investigate solutions to environmental and societal problems that stem from the disparities between scientific research, policy and management responses to environmental issues. We need managers and policy makers to consider ecological tipping points and how they can cascade though ecosystems from land into rivers and lakes and, ultimately, the ocean. Gaps between social, political, ecological and management approaches between ecosystems contribute to difficulties in managing ecosystems. Author provided, CC BY-SA Our work’s standing among global research aimed at stopping ecosystem collapse has been recognised as one of 23 national champions in this year’s Frontiers Planet Prize. Read more: Our oceans are in deep trouble – a 'mountains to sea' approach could make a real difference More holistic solutions This issue came into focus when New Zealand set up research collaborations known as national science challenges a decade ago to solve “wicked” social and ecological problems. The challenges focused on environmental issues were deliberately created to concentrate on separate ecosystem and management domains (marine, freshwater and land). But all included research groups addressing ecological tipping points. This was our inspirational spark. Our research highlights the consequences of managing land, freshwater and sea ecosystems in socially constructed bubbles. We focus on solutions where social and ecological connections are at the forefront of environmental management practices and decisions. Microplastic pollution is a recognised threat to marine ecosystems. Shutterstock/SannePhoto An example is the movement of pollutants such as microplastics from the land to the sea. Most of the microplastics found along coasts and in harbours are blown or washed off the land. While this pollution is a well recognised environmental threat to the marine environment, we have not yet focused on strategies to reduce the load. Our work points to the ignored but critical issue that people’s impacts on land accumulate in the sea, but land management and consequent actions are not informed by these far-field effects. This leads to lags in decision making which create undesirable environmental outcomes that are difficult to return from. But if we act on these connections, the environmental gains could be substantial. Cyclones as a real-world example As a result of massive soil erosion on the east coast of the North Island during Cyclone Bola in 1988, steep hillsides were retired from grazing and converted to pine plantations to help stabilise the land. Fast forward three decades and a large proportion of the forest reached harvest at the same time. The exposed soil associated with clear felling was left draped in woody debris to protect it from rain. However, Cyclone Gabrielle hit in February last year, with extreme rainfall washing both soil and woody debris into streams. Cyclone Gabrielle washed tonnes of silt onto farms and orchards. Getty Images/STR/AFP This destroyed habitats, transported vast amounts of silt and wrecked lowland farms, orchards and critical infrastructure. The debris also clogged harbours and coastal beaches, smothered seafloor habitats, destroyed fisheries and affected cultural and recreational values. This real-world example demonstrates the severe consequences of lags in information flow and management responses. If land-use management decisions had considered the effects on other connected ecosystems and the potential for climate change to intensify those connections, the outcomes could have been different. We could have implemented more diverse strategies in land use and put emphasis on restoring native forest and coastal wetlands. Read more: Cyclone Gabrielle triggered more destructive forestry 'slash' – NZ must change how it grows trees on fragile land Living with nature, not off it Our vision is one where social and ecological connections across ecosystem domains are at the forefront of moving to a more sustainable future. Living within planetary boundaries requires a paradigm shift in behaviours, including the way we link science and management to on-the-ground action. Crucially, we need to increase the speed at which new research is taken up and rapidly transition this into action that improves environmental outcomes at local scales. This behavioural shift underpins the way to a more integrated, broad-scale ability to act and stay within planetary boundaries. Our research shows we can, with trust and open minds, transcend the disciplinary silos to support new forms of research organisation. The challenge now is to extend holistic approaches into new practices. Read more: NZ’s vital kelp forests are in peril from ocean warming – threatening the important species that rely on them This means identifying opportunities where connected research can alter behaviours across society, from individuals to global finance and governance. Central to this transition is recognising we are part of complex social and ecological systems and our actions have indirect effects and long-term consequences. We need new research to provide this evidence. It will inevitably lead to new questions about fundamental ecological and integrated Earth processes. We believe these holistic approaches will allow science to be more readily incorporated into decision making and ensure environmental perspectives are captured. This will lead to relevant, locally appropriate, integrated and robust environmental management actions. Rebecca Gladstone-Gallagher receives funding from philanthropy, Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE), including from the National Science Challenges, the Marsden Fund and the Rutherford Foundation Postdoctoral Fellowships. Conrad Pilditch receives funding from Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE), including the National Science Challenge Sustainable Seas, Marsden Fund and regional councils. He is a member of the Sustainable Seas Challenge Leadership Team.Simon Francis Thrush receives funding from MBIE, government agencies, international organisations and philanthropy. He is a fellow of the Royal Society of New Zealand.

Pollution on land inevitably ends up in the sea. Policy makers must stop working in silos and instead consider the indirect consequences human impacts on land have for marine environments.

Shutterstock/S Curtis

Why are we crossing ecological boundaries that affect Earth’s fundamental life-supporting capacity? Is it because we don’t have enough information about how ecosystems respond to change? Or are we unable, even unwilling, to use that information better?

We have a lot to learn still, but as we show in our research, using current ecological knowledge more effectively could deliver substantial environmental gains.

Our work focuses on improving links between research and ecosystem management to identify key trigger points for action in a framework that joins land, freshwater and sea ecosystems.

Specifically, we investigate solutions to environmental and societal problems that stem from the disparities between scientific research, policy and management responses to environmental issues.

We need managers and policy makers to consider ecological tipping points and how they can cascade though ecosystems from land into rivers and lakes and, ultimately, the ocean.

A graphic that shows the gaps between social, political, ecological and management approaches.
Gaps between social, political, ecological and management approaches between ecosystems contribute to difficulties in managing ecosystems. Author provided, CC BY-SA

Our work’s standing among global research aimed at stopping ecosystem collapse has been recognised as one of 23 national champions in this year’s Frontiers Planet Prize.


Read more: Our oceans are in deep trouble – a 'mountains to sea' approach could make a real difference


More holistic solutions

This issue came into focus when New Zealand set up research collaborations known as national science challenges a decade ago to solve “wicked” social and ecological problems.

The challenges focused on environmental issues were deliberately created to concentrate on separate ecosystem and management domains (marine, freshwater and land). But all included research groups addressing ecological tipping points.

This was our inspirational spark. Our research highlights the consequences of managing land, freshwater and sea ecosystems in socially constructed bubbles. We focus on solutions where social and ecological connections are at the forefront of environmental management practices and decisions.

Small bits of plastics on a sandy beach
Microplastic pollution is a recognised threat to marine ecosystems. Shutterstock/SannePhoto

An example is the movement of pollutants such as microplastics from the land to the sea. Most of the microplastics found along coasts and in harbours are blown or washed off the land. While this pollution is a well recognised environmental threat to the marine environment, we have not yet focused on strategies to reduce the load.

Our work points to the ignored but critical issue that people’s impacts on land accumulate in the sea, but land management and consequent actions are not informed by these far-field effects.

This leads to lags in decision making which create undesirable environmental outcomes that are difficult to return from. But if we act on these connections, the environmental gains could be substantial.

Cyclones as a real-world example

As a result of massive soil erosion on the east coast of the North Island during Cyclone Bola in 1988, steep hillsides were retired from grazing and converted to pine plantations to help stabilise the land.

Fast forward three decades and a large proportion of the forest reached harvest at the same time. The exposed soil associated with clear felling was left draped in woody debris to protect it from rain.

However, Cyclone Gabrielle hit in February last year, with extreme rainfall washing both soil and woody debris into streams.

An upturned tractor in a flooded field
Cyclone Gabrielle washed tonnes of silt onto farms and orchards. Getty Images/STR/AFP

This destroyed habitats, transported vast amounts of silt and wrecked lowland farms, orchards and critical infrastructure. The debris also clogged harbours and coastal beaches, smothered seafloor habitats, destroyed fisheries and affected cultural and recreational values.

This real-world example demonstrates the severe consequences of lags in information flow and management responses. If land-use management decisions had considered the effects on other connected ecosystems and the potential for climate change to intensify those connections, the outcomes could have been different.

We could have implemented more diverse strategies in land use and put emphasis on restoring native forest and coastal wetlands.


Read more: Cyclone Gabrielle triggered more destructive forestry 'slash' – NZ must change how it grows trees on fragile land


Living with nature, not off it

Our vision is one where social and ecological connections across ecosystem domains are at the forefront of moving to a more sustainable future.

Living within planetary boundaries requires a paradigm shift in behaviours, including the way we link science and management to on-the-ground action. Crucially, we need to increase the speed at which new research is taken up and rapidly transition this into action that improves environmental outcomes at local scales.

This behavioural shift underpins the way to a more integrated, broad-scale ability to act and stay within planetary boundaries.

Our research shows we can, with trust and open minds, transcend the disciplinary silos to support new forms of research organisation. The challenge now is to extend holistic approaches into new practices.


Read more: NZ’s vital kelp forests are in peril from ocean warming – threatening the important species that rely on them


This means identifying opportunities where connected research can alter behaviours across society, from individuals to global finance and governance. Central to this transition is recognising we are part of complex social and ecological systems and our actions have indirect effects and long-term consequences.

We need new research to provide this evidence. It will inevitably lead to new questions about fundamental ecological and integrated Earth processes.

We believe these holistic approaches will allow science to be more readily incorporated into decision making and ensure environmental perspectives are captured. This will lead to relevant, locally appropriate, integrated and robust environmental management actions.

The Conversation

Rebecca Gladstone-Gallagher receives funding from philanthropy, Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE), including from the National Science Challenges, the Marsden Fund and the Rutherford Foundation Postdoctoral Fellowships.

Conrad Pilditch receives funding from Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE), including the National Science Challenge Sustainable Seas, Marsden Fund and regional councils. He is a member of the Sustainable Seas Challenge Leadership Team.

Simon Francis Thrush receives funding from MBIE, government agencies, international organisations and philanthropy. He is a fellow of the Royal Society of New Zealand.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Brazil Prosecutors Sue Agencies Over Haidar Shipwreck, Environmental Risk

By Ana ManoSAO PAULO (Reuters) -Brazilian federal prosecutors in Para state have filed a lawsuit to demand the removal of the hull and oily...

SAO PAULO (Reuters) -Brazilian federal prosecutors in Para state have filed a lawsuit to demand the removal of the hull and oily residues from the Haidar ship, which sank 10 years ago near Vila do Conde port, Brazil's biggest for live cattle shipments.In a statement on Wednesday, Para federal prosecutors recalled the Haidar wreck caused the death of 5,000 cattle and a spill of 700,000 liters of oily residues.A subsequent spill from the Haidar wreck was reported in 2018, prosecutors said, showing that remaining residues inside the hull represent "a constant threat."Some 215,000 liters of oil, diesel, fuel, and lubricant could still be inside the ship, prosecutors added, warning of potentially "catastrophic water pollution" if new spills occur.The sunken vessel still contains carcasses and skeletal remains of the cattle drowned in 2015, they said. Prosecutors are seeking at least 5 million reais ($936,873) in compensation, in addition to 91,400 reais for environmental damages related to the 2018 spill.Defendants include the federal infrastructure department DNIT, Para's environment agency SEMAS, the Para Port Authority CDP, and the companies that owned the ship.They did not immediately comment on the lawsuit.Para, Brazil's biggest live cattle-exporting state, shipped 370,000 head of cattle worth $344 million mainly to Egypt, Morocco, and Algeria in the year through July, according to trade data compiled by state authorities.Beefpacker Minerva owned the cattle ferried on the Haidar in 2015, but it is not a defendant, according to court filings.       (Reporting by Ana ManoEditing by Rod Nickel)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

Data centers are putting new strain on California’s grid. A new report estimates the impacts

A new report estimates that California’s data centers are driving increases in electricity use, water demand and pollution even as lawmakers stall on oversight.

In summary A new report estimates that California’s data centers are driving increases in electricity use, water demand and pollution even as lawmakers stall on oversight. California is a major hub for data centers — the facilities that store and transmit much of the internet. But just how much these power-hungry operations affect the state’s energy use, climate and public health remains an open question for researchers. A new report released this week by the environmental think tank Next 10 and a UC Riverside researcher attempts to quantify that impact — but its authors say the report is only an estimate without harder data from the centers themselves. “We are just making these reports pretty much in the dark — since there’s almost zero information,” said Shaolei Ren, an AI researcher at UC Riverside and co-author of the report. “We have extremely little information about data centers in California.” Ren and his coauthors conclude that between 2019 and 2023, electricity use and carbon emissions by California data centers nearly doubled, while on-site water consumption slightly more than doubled. Much of the increases were attributable to the electricity required to run artificial intelligence computations. But many of the report’s estimates, including its health impacts, are based on limited data — a key issue researchers said they encountered repeatedly when crafting the report. The report underscores a growing tension in the industry: advocates who support clean energy and experts who study energy demand agree the days of steady, flat energy use at data centers are over, but there’s far less consensus on just how sharply electricity demand will climb. “In very simple terms, a lot of the uncertainty comes from: what is our life going to look like with AI in the next five years, 10 years, 20 years — how integrated is it going to become?” said Maia Leroy, a Sacramento-based advocate who focuses on clean energy and the grid.  “Are we reaching a point where the use is going to plateau, or is it going to continue?” Experts say more transparency is essential to better understand what resources data centers demand in California. Liang Min, who manages the Bits and Watts Initiative at Stanford University, says the state should improve its forecasts for energy demand to support clean energy goals. Min, who investigates AI’s growing strain on the electric grid, told CalMatters that demand at power centers rises in rapid, unpredictable phases and can shift quickly with each new generation of hardware. The California Energy Commission, which plans for energy use and the growth in demand, “can play a pivotal role,” in understanding and adapting to the demands of AI. As demand grows, policy responses lag In Sacramento, efforts to add transparency and guardrails around data centers have struggled this year. California lawmakers shelved most consumer and environmental proposals aimed at data centers, even as they approved a plan to regionalize California’s power grid to help meet demand from the sector. They set aside two bills focused on curbing data centers’ energy use — one requiring operators to disclose their electricity use and another that offered clean power incentives. Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a separate proposal that would have required data center operators to report their water use, even after the bill was weakened. In the end, Newsom — who has often highlighted California’s dominance in the artificial intelligence sector — signed only one measure, allowing regulators to determine whether data centers are driving up costs. Mark Toney, who leads The Utility Reform Network and supported the transparency measure, has questioned whether data centers justify the costs they’re pushing onto ratepayers. He warned of the centers’ “voracious consumption of energy and water, increased carbon emissions, and jacking up ratepayer bills.” Hard facts about data centers are tough to find in California because most rent out power, cooling and floor space to other companies, said Ren, the UC Riverside researcher. Such colocation facilities don’t run their own servers or technology, so they report less information publicly than data centers built by major tech companies in other states. While estimates vary, California has the third-most data centers in the country, after Texas and Virginia. DataCenterMap, a commercial directory that tracks data centers worldwide, lists 321 sites across the state. More in California are expected in coming years. The centers operate around the clock and often rely on diesel backup generators to maintain service during power failures — a practice that adds both greenhouse gases and local air pollutants. They also consume energy and water depending on their cooling methods. Rising data-center demand, and rising questions F. Noel Perry, the businessman and philanthropist who founded Next 10, said his organization’s report shines light on what is fundamentally a black box. “To solve a problem, we have to understand what the problem is,” he said.  “We’ve seen the proliferation of data centers in California, in the U.S. and across the world — and we also are seeing major implications for the environment,” Perry told CalMatters. “The real issue has to do with transparency — and the ability of elected officials and regulators to create some rules that will govern reductions in emissions, water consumption.” The report estimated that data centers used 10.8 terawatt-hours of electricity in 2023, up from 5.5 terawatt-hours in 2019, accounting for 6% of the nation’s total data center energy use. Unless growth is curbed or better managed, the report’s authors project demand could rise to as high as 25 terawatt-hours by 2028, equal to the power use of roughly 2.4 million U.S. homes. Carbon emissions from the sector nearly doubled during the same period, climbing from 1.2 million to 2.4 million tons, researchers estimated, while on site water use grew from 1,078 acre feet in 2019 to 2,302 acre feet in 2023. That’s enough to meet the annual water needs of almost seven thousand California households. The report’s authors also estimated the public health costs from air pollution associated with data centers have potentially risen, from $45 million in 2019 to more than $155 million in 2023, with the burden expected to reach as high as $266 million by 2028. Most of those costs stem from indirect pollution produced by fossil-fueled power plants that supply the grid. But authors pointed out that regions dense with data centers — particularly Santa Clara County, home to Silicon Valley — could face higher localized risks from diesel backup generators. Dan Diorio, vice president of state policy for the Data Center Coalition, said the report exaggerates the impact of backup diesel generators, which are tightly regulated and rarely used in California, minimizing their contributions to air pollution. Data centers don’t control the water used in electricity generation, said Diorio. Since those water impacts don’t happen on site, it’s not fair to blame that on the centers themselves.  “It paints a skewed picture of this critical 21st-century industry,” Diorio said in a statement. Diorio said the report also overlooks how cooling technology varies by region and has become more efficient in recent years. But the authors say their findings underscore the need for uniform reporting standards for data centers’ energy and water use. The report said California should establish ongoing local monitoring and review of data centers — and make the findings public. Ren, the UC Riverside researcher, said that California’s cleaner grid and stricter pollution rules are helping blunt some environmental impacts of data centers already. “California — versus the national average — is doing a better job due to the cleaner grid,” he said.

Can Peru Reboot Its Amazon Oil? Pollution Fallout and Local Opposition Loom

By Alexander VillegasSANTA ROSA, Peru (Reuters) -Near a remote bend of the Patoyacu River in Peru's northern Amazon, Wilmer Macusi stood atop a...

SANTA ROSA, Peru (Reuters) -Near a remote bend of the Patoyacu River in Peru's northern Amazon, Wilmer Macusi stood atop a rusty pipeline cutting through the jungle, swirling a branch in the pool of stagnant water surrounding it.“They say this is clean,” said Macusi, a 25-year-old Indigenous Urarina leader, pointing to the spot where an oil spill occurred in early 2023. “But if you move the water, oil still comes out.”Black droplets bubbled to the surface as plastic barriers meant to contain the spill drooped into the water. The pipeline links a nearby oilfield, Block 8, to the larger government-owned North Peruvian Pipeline (ONP). Macusi's community of Santa Rosa lies a short walk away.Peru’s northern Amazon holds hundreds of millions of barrels of crude, according to government data. But Indigenous groups say oil extraction over the past half-century brought pollution, not progress, and are opposed to a fresh wave of development.The region once pumped more than half of Peru's oil, peaking at about 200,000 barrels a day in the 1980s before environmental liabilities and community opposition drove production below 40,000 bpd. Key blocks went dormant in 2020.Now, the region's modest reserves are again central to state oil firm Petroperu's plans. The company has spent $6.5 billion upgrading its Talara refinery into a 95,000-bpd complex aimed at producing high-grade fuels for export. Heavily indebted with a CCC+ junk credit rating from ratings agency Fitch, Petroperu wants to revive Amazon oil output to supply Talara.The state firm estimated last month that proven and probable reserves in the region were worth $20.9 billion, which Petroperu said could deliver $3.1 billion in tax revenues for local governments and communities. While the amount of oil at stake is relatively small, the plans have fueled tensions over past spills, stoking Indigenous opposition at a time Brazil, Ecuador and Guyana are trying to expand their Amazon oil frontiers.Frustration about climate action and forest protection boiled over at the COP30 climate summit this week, when dozens of Indigenous protesters forced their way into the venue and clashed with security guards.Petroperu is also planning to import oil to the refinery by linking the 1,100-km ONP to neighboring Ecuador, which aims to boost production in its own Amazon region as part of a $47 billion oil expansion plan. Hailed as an engineering marvel when it was built in the 1970s, the ONP has since become a lightning rod for leaks, protests and sabotage. Indigenous groups in both countries are resisting the pipeline link-up.The government is weighing options for how best to run the pipeline, including through a joint venture or outsourcing its management.  Petroperu failed to attract an international partner to run its largest oilfield, Block 192, which produced more than 100,000 bpd at its peak but has recently been the focus of Indigenous protests demanding remediation for damage to the forest, soil and waterways.Petroperu's former chairman Alejandro Narvaez, who was fired last month, estimated Block 192 could produce at least 20,000 bpd with investment and overall Amazon production could hit 100,000 bpd.The state oil firm selected domestic firm Upland Oil & Gas to operate the block, but Peru's state oil regulator disqualified Upland last month on the grounds it did not demonstrate financial capacity. Upland disputes the decision and has asked for a review.Petroperu also partnered with Upland to revive production at the smaller Block 8, which produced 5,000 bpd last month.Upland's CEO Jorge Rivera, son of one of Peru's early oil prospectors, told Reuters that Upland has offered Indigenous communities training, jobs and funding."We've dedicated ourselves to understanding the complexities behind operating these fields,” he said.Rivera visited Santa Rosa in March, gifting a Starlink terminal and requesting a report on the community's needs.The community's main demand was the cleanup of the nearby spill, but questions remain over who bears responsibility.Though the operator is responsible for the 108-km stretch of pipeline that runs through Block 8 connecting it to the ONP, Upland's contract exempts it from liability for past pollution.The previous operator, an Argentine subsidiary named Pluspetrol Norte, was fined a record number of times by Peru's environmental regulator OEFA before it filed for liquidation and left the area in late 2020. Eight Indigenous federations and non-governmental organizations filed a complaint to the OECD's Dutch National Contact Point, a mechanism to implement OECD guidelines for businesses, which concluded in September that Pluspetrol had violated Indigenous communities' rights in Peru's Amazon and urged the company to address the environmental damage.In a response to Reuters, Pluspetrol said it already had complied with environmental and human rights regulations and that the NCP statement was "without merit" for not reflecting the "breadth and complexity of the evidence presented and the extent of actions taken by the company."  Decades of scientific research have found high levels of lead, mercury, cadmium and arsenic in wildlife and Indigenous people living near Peru's oilfields. Estimated cleanup costs for Block 192 alone stand at $1.5 billion.OEFA registered over 560 environmental infractions including oil spills and others from the ONP or other oil infrastructure in Blocks 192 and 8 from 2011 through September 2025.Petroperu has said any damage is "temporary and reversible" and blamed unspecified "economic and rural-domestic activities" by local communities as the main driver of water pollution.In late 2023, Peru's prosecutor's office said it had broken up a network of businessmen, local Indigenous leaders and a Petroperu employee that it said was orchestrating oil spills to secure lucrative cleanup contracts.  In an interview with Reuters before his dismissal, Narvaez said Petroperu had prioritized cleaning up spills under the regulator's supervision.The government of Peru's interim President Jose Jeri, who took power last month, replaced Narvaez with Petroperu board vice president Fidel Moreno and said it will soon replace Petroperu's entire board of directors.Moreno did not reply to an interview request.Macusi said communities had yet to access a fund from Upland promising 2.5% of oil sales. Meanwhile, meetings with the oil regulator, Perupetro, to discuss funding for community projects have been delayed.After an oil spill from the Block 8 connector pipeline in 2022, Urarina communities held a strike, taking over oil facilities, fields and blockading a river to demand a better state response. Macusi, who as a teen worked hauling buckets of spilled oil, says communities are ready to take action again."If the promised benefits don't come soon, we'll take measures," he said.(Reporting by Alexander Villegas; Additional reporting by Marco Aquino; Editing by Nia Williams and Katy Daigle)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.