MSC

BIODIVERSITY
CONSERVATION
AND
SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT
IN THE
CARIBBEAN
FINAL PROJECT MAY 2019
FORMATTED FOR PNAS JOURNAL 2017-2019
Camille Guichard Student I.D 815011021 Final Project 2019

Integrating ecosystem services into land use planning in Trinidad

and Tobago: A case study of developing an inter-island ferry port
near an environmentally sensitive area in Toco.
Camille R. Guichard a,b
aDepartment of Life Sciences, University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago, b Town and Country Planning Division,
Ministry of Planning and Development, Trinidad and Tobago
by the 2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
(MEA) Framework as “the benefits people obtain
Recent academic rhetoric has expounded on the
from ecosystems” (MEA 2005). This very simple
necessity of evidence-based decisions pertaining
statement encompasses a myriad of valuable
to land use conversion and change resulting
resources, upon which humanity is dependent.
from policy makers and regulators in the urban
and rural planning environment. The clamour Ecologists argue that the ability of ecosystems to
for decision based on scientific data has arisen continue to provide these essential services, is
from the correlation between land use planning being directly impacted by a host of variables
decisions and the impact on ecosystems and including changes to climatic and environmental
ecosystem services. In Trinidad and Tobago, the conditions (Halpern et al. 2008; Pascual et al.
movement toward planning decisions that are 2010). The most prevalent extrinsic pressures
however, are those derived from anthropogenic
supported by scientific data has intensified. This
impacts on ecosystems and the services they
study proposes to explore the practical
provide; arguably the greatest concern of
application of the Stanford Natural Capital environmentalists, scientists and policy makers
Invest Software (Sharp, Tallis, and Ricketts alike (Hamilton, Bonneuil, and Gemenne 2015;
2018), as a means of integrating ecosystem and Steffen et al. 2011). There is growing anxiety that
ecosystem service analysis into the existing the earth’s increasing human population, and
regulatory framework for land use planning in consequent increasing demands and per capita
the Trinidad and Tobago. The approach focuses consumptions, will destroy the fragile balance of
on the use of the Invest Habitat Risk Assessment the capability of the natural environment to meet
[IHRA] Model within the Invest Suite of this demand and continue to be resilient (Rodriguez
Models, to assess a proposed Port development et al. 2006; Daily et al. 2009; Costanza et al. 2006;
along Trinidad’s environmentally sensitive Braat 2012).
north east coastline. The study shows the Significance
potential of the practical application of the
The current climate of legislative reform in land use
Model to inform and support the country’s land
planning in Trinidad and Tobago has created the
use planning approval process, by creating an
opportunity to incorporate ecosystem service
environment for evidence-based decisions. management into the development permitting
land use planning | habitat risk assessment | GIS modelling | process, through evidence-based decisions.
InVEST | Toco port | ecosystem services Ecosystem modelling tools are a key supporting
mechanism to this process. The InVEST suite of
The natural environment comprises terrestrial and software has only been used in Latin America and the
marine ecosystems that provide key services for the Caribbean once; in Belize to conduct a Habitat Risk
socio-economic well-being of humanity and the Assessment to inform the development of coastal
welfare of all biological lifeforms (Metzger et al management framework. This study presents a case
2006). Ecosystem Services (ES) has been defined study using the HRA model from this software, to
illustrate how such tools can be practically
incorporated into the land use permitting process in
Trinidad and Tobago.
1
Integrating ecosystem services into Land Use Planning in Trinidad and Tobago: A case study of developing an inter-island ferry port near an
ecologically sensitive area in Toco.
Camille Guichard Student I.D 815011021 Final Project 2019
One such anthropogenic pressure, is the impact of needed to support LUP decisions. Approaches such
land use planning [LUP] decisions on ecosystem as (i) the application of economic valuation
and ecosystem services (Metzger et al. 2006; techniques using payment for ecosystem services,
Goldstein et al. 2012; Barral and Oscar 2012). (ii) the development of the Millennium Ecosystem
Land use decisions often neglect the value of Assessment framework, and (iii) the creation of
ecosystem services and the impact of change on the tools that utilize a quantitative approach to decision
ecosystem’s ability to provide these services. making that impact the ecosystem, are examples of
(Bateman et al 2013) The “under-valuing” of ES in successful efforts (Chan et al, 2006).
decision making and their associated benefits and
costs related to their degradation and/or ES modelling tools are a favoured approach for
conservation has resulted in many missed providing evidence-based support data for land use
opportunities in policy creation. The risk to the planners, policy makers and decision makers
sustainability and resilience of the ecosystem and (Crossman et al. 2013; Castella et al. 2007). They
to the continued socioeconomic well-being of the provide a method by which ES can be quantified,
users, increase as land use decisions continue to be spatially mapped and valued economically; and on
made based on insufficient information on the which alternative management scenarios, and
impact of development outcomes on ES (GiZ proposals for development and land use changes
2012). can be evaluated and effective decisions made
(Crossman et al. 2013; Pagiola, Von Ritter, and
Despite the clear linkages between the land use and Bishop 2004).
the conservation and sustainable use of ecosystems
and their services, policy makers have found it Such tools are now being used around the world, at
difficult to incorporate the practical application of a range of spatial scales, to address a wide variety
these principles into decision making (Chan et al, of policy and management questions. For example,
2006). Yet, the trending environmental rhetoric they have been used to investigate the possible
continues to emphasize the necessity of integrating effects of climate change on water provisioning and
the management of ecosystem services into land erosion control in a Mediterranean basin (Bangash
use planning decisions (Daily et al. 2009; Goldstein et al., 2013), to provide guidelines for water
et al. 2012). resource management in China (Fu et al., 2014),
and to examine the potential impact of agricultural
A significant reason for this difficulty stems from expansion on biodiversity and carbon storage in
the lack of evidence- based methods to support Brazil (Chaplin-Kramer et al., 2015)
decisions. Policy makers are often faced with
complex issues and decisions regarding the This paper attempts to explore how the utilization
environment and use of its resources (Spruijt et al. of the Stanford’s Natural Capital Project Integrated
2014). The demand for evidence-based Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Trade-offs
environmental and natural resource land use [InVEST] Habitat Risk Assessment [IHRA] model
planning policy/decisions by conservationists, specifically, can be practically integrated into the
citizens, decision-makers, politicians and scientists regulatory LUP decision making framework in
alike, is largely based on concerns regarding the Trinidad and Tobago. The InVEST models
quality of complex policy decisions, particularly combine land use and land cover data with
those involving land use change (Steel et al. 2004; habitat/species data and ES information to provide
Spruijt et al. 2014). The likelihood of any policy output data in biophysical and/or economic terms
decision being successful depends on its ability to (Sharp et al., 2015, 2017). The IHRA model can be
withstand rigorous analysis and evaluation used as stand-alone application and is written in
(Sabatier 1991); an evaluation that will be vastly Python and has been utilized globally in numerous
improved by the inclusion of evidence based, areas of conservation and management research
quantitative, scientific information (Steel et al. and policy creation (Duggan et al. 2015; Wyatt et
2004). al. 2017; Cabral et al. 2015). This study focuses on
the application of the IHRA model and existing
Recent advances in the ecosystem service GIS spatial data for the country, to a proposed
assessment discourse has seen the use of various development that has been granted cabinet
methodologies to provide the scientific background approval for a land use change, will provide a
2
Integrating ecosystem services into Land Use Planning in Trinidad and Tobago: A case study of developing an inter-island ferry port near an
ecologically sensitive area in Toco.
Camille Guichard Student I.D 815011021 Final Project 2019
template for how evidence-based data can support Authority 2001; IMA 2016b) in Trinidad and
the planning permitting process of Trinidad and Tobago. The research contained within this paper,
Tobago. focuses on conducting a risk assessment of a
coastal habitat proposed for land use change in
Land Use Planning in Trinidad and Tobago. Trinidad.
LUP in Trinidad and Tobago is presently regulated
by the Central Government. The Town and Coastal Development in Trinidad and Tobago.
Country Planning Division [TCPD] was Coastal ecosystems are ecologically, economically
established to carry out the mandate of the 1960 and socially significant; yet these fragile systems
Town and Country Planning Act, Chapter 35:04. continue to be one of the most negatively impacted
Through the Act, the TCPD is responsible for the zones due to anthropogenic activity (Hughes et al.
“orderly and progressive development of land”. 2005; Carr et al. 2003; Halpern et al. 2008). The
Development is categorized by the Act as the coastal zone around Trinidad and Tobago is the
carrying out of building, engineering, mining, focus of much of the islands' built-development,
change of use, subdivision of or other operations but it is also the home of much of the islands' rich
on, over and under any land (GoRTT 1960). The marine and terrestrial biodiversity (Laydoo, 1991;
Division is the only national regulatory body with Richardson, 1975; Rooks, 2001). Important marine
the authority to issue planning permissions and bionetworks such as the coral reef ecosystems and
approvals for development on land. It is therefore the designated RAMSAR wetland sites such as the
the first port of call for assessment and evaluation Nariva and Caroni mangroves, facilitate the
of applications and proposals for development. country’s local economic livelihoods and generate
Unfortunately, the decision-making process at the national revenue; chiefly as tourism centres and
TCPD is unsupported by evidence based or fisheries (Mohammed 2017). These ecosystems are
scientific data and characterized by outdated land also biodiverse habitats, rich in species; of which
use policies. some, like the West Indian manatee, are
environmentally sensitive and protected under the
LUP in Trinidad and Tobago is currently Conservation of Wildlife Act, Ch 61:01. In
undergoing legislative reform through the Planning Trinidad and Tobago, fish-processing plants,
and Facilitation of Development [PAFT] Act, infrastructural development such as ports, roads,
partially proclaimed in 2014 and amended in 2018 airports, and residential or tourism developments,
(GoRTT 2014). It proposes the devolution of the compete for coastal space with rare bird species,
current framework for planning permission from leatherback turtles, and other forms of aquatic life
central government to the fourteen local authorities (Mohammed 2017). Rice farmers in need of
(municipalities) in the country and emphasise the agricultural land are encroaching on the
need for transparency and accountability through ecologically important Nariva mangrove swamps
evidence-based planning. in eastern Trinidad. Coastal lands are being cleared
Trinidad and Tobago’s economic development is in Tobago for tourism development. Most of
intimately tied with built development; and Trinidad’s heavy industrial refineries, power plants
development is directly linked to environmental and significant Port facilities have been well
degradation. There are several ecosystems that are established along the country’s western coast, and
adversely affected by the drive for built an increase in applications for planning permission
development in the country. However, as a small at the TCPD seeking development in the coastal
island developing state, the most negatively zone has been observed. Economic growth in
impacted of these habitats being Forests and Trinidad and Tobago is intimately linked to the
Coastal Habitats (Mangroves, Coral Reefs. utilisation of these coastal resources (Mohammed
Beaches) (IMA 2016b). Land use conversions 2017; Espinasa 2016; Tompkins, Adger, and
because of agriculture, development or expansion Brown 2002; GoRTT 2016). The Marine
of cities, towns and informal settlements, or for environment is therefore under significant threat
economic growth, have been cited as directly due to these varied anthropogenic factors. Land use
responsible for deforestation, loss of mangroves change emanating from land use planning
and swamplands, destruction of fisheries and coral approvals resulting from economic development
in the country (Environmental Management pressures, is the key driver posing a risk to the
3
Integrating ecosystem services into Land Use Planning in Trinidad and Tobago: A case study of developing an inter-island ferry port near an
ecologically sensitive area in Toco.
Camille Guichard Student I.D 815011021 Final Project 2019
coastal ecosystems, their biodiversity and the and Tobago. The proposal is a historical one dating
habitat’s continued resilience (IMA 2016b). back to the late 1990s when a team of consultants
produced the ‘Galleon’s Passage’ proposal for a sea
In 2016, the Institute of Marine Affairs (IMA) bridge between the twin island republic. This
produced a report entitled ‘The State of the Marine proposal was based on a 1988 report from the
Environment in Trinidad and Tobago’ that Institute of Marine Affairs that recommended Toco
highlighted many challenges to the marine and Bay as the optimal location for a multi-purpose
coastal environment/s. Three (3) major threats cited ferry port (Ministry of Works and Transport 2017).
were extensive coastal pollution, habitat The development of the Toco Port is currently at its
destruction and deterioration and loss of conceptual design stage and is expected to proceed
biodiversity through land use pressure (IMA to the securing of necessary statutory approvals for
2016a). The causative factors of these threats are the construction phase of its development. The
noted as population pressure and incentives for Ministry of Works and Infrastructure, in its Toco
economic growth. The Report notes that 70% of the Port Masterplan, lists as key to the port
country’s population is located on the coast and construction: -
80% of all socio-economic activities occur along
the coast(IMA 2016a). - creation of a 340m Breakwater
- reclamation of 9.8ha of land
Materials and Methodology - dredging up to nine (9) meters to accommodate
Study Area and Selected Development Proposal. creation of safe shipping channels into berthing
The Toco Bay is on the north-eastern coast of area.
Trinidad, approximately 4 km west of the Galera (Ministry of Works and Transport 2017)
Point which is north-eastern extremity of the
island. Toco Bay has about 1 km of crenulated The development of Toco Bay to facilitate the
beach along the bay with a narrow strip of sand and proposed Port, is expected to directly impact the
shingle (Belford and Phillip 2011). The Bay is ecosystems and their services. Yet, no studies on
home to a rural fishing community of the predicted impacts have been forthcoming. This
approximately 1300 persons and has an established study utilizes a habitat risk assessment model of
fish depot. Surrounding the bay is the Northern named habitats within the site boundaries that is
Forest Range of Trinidad, home to an eclectic mix expected to be affected by port construction, to
of biodiversity. Studies carried in 2006-2008 support the planning permitting process for the
revealed evidence of a coral population in the Bay proposed development.
(Belford and Phillip 2011)
Methodology Workflow Chart. The overall
methodological workflow for assessing the risk to
Map Showing Study Area the Toco habitat/s and the ES provided is illustrated
in Fig. 2 below and explained in subsequent
sections.
Figure 1: Workflow Process for this Study

The Government of Trinidad and Tobago in their

National Budget for 2019, has prioritized the
construction of an inter-island ferry port in Toco.
The Toco Port’s primary purpose is to serve as a
faster alternate sea route between eastern Trinidad
4
Integrating ecosystem services into Land Use Planning in Trinidad and Tobago: A case study of developing an inter-island ferry port near an
ecologically sensitive area in Toco.
Camille Guichard Student I.D 815011021 Final Project 2019
Data Collection and Sources. For the purposes of and biodiversity. The likelihood of exposure of the
this study and the specific data needs of the IHRA habitat to a stressor (the activity the creates
Model, habitat data and stressor data were required pressure on the ecosystem’s ability to effectively
to be formatted for a GIS environment. The provide the service) and the consequence of this
timeframe allotted for this study did not permit the exposure (Sharp, Tallis, and Ricketts 2018) is done
acquisition of primary quantitative data for the site, using an integration of global expert knowledge
therefore existing spatial data, in the form of and local expert knowledge at the Town and
shapefiles of habitat and stressor data for the Toco Country Planning Division, to assign a rating
study area, was sought from relevant state agencies. system to a set of criteria for each attribute.
Sources of GIS Datasets were:
If the stressor does not spatially overlap a habitat
- Fisheries Division, Ministry of Agriculture both the exposure value and the consequence value
and Land & Fisheries are given a 0 Score, thereby ensuring a risk value
- Institute of Marine Affairs score of 0 as well. The model also allows for a score
- Coastal Protection Unit, Ministry of Works to be placed on the data’s quality and the weighted
and Transport importance to the criteria, thereby ensuring that the
- Town and Country Planning Division user can prioritize or rank each criterion in order of
particular significance(Sharp, Tallis, and Ricketts
To determine the opinion of the most prominent 2018). Exposure and consequence scores are
users of the study area, a survey of local fishermen calculated in the Model using established and
was carried out. The survey format was that of a tested expert algorithms, as follows:
simple questionnaire of 13 questions, carried out on
two separate days. The survey yielded a sample
size of 54 fishermen from Toco and environs
namely Mission, Grand Riviere and Point Cumana.
Finally, a review of published scientific research
carried out in and around the study area yielded a
paper that documented a survey of the coral
community at the proposed port site. A rapid
assessment of coral reef at the site was carried out
by Belford and Phillip between 2006-2008, and the
coordinates and location specifics of the sample The Risk to the habitat caused by the stressor is
area was extrapolated to create the required coral calculated within the model using the following
habitat shapefile for input into the model. equation
Overview of InVEST Software and IHRA
Model. InVEST is suite of free open-source GIS-
based spatial software models designed for
mapping the ecological or economical value of ES, (Sharp, Tallis, and Ricketts 2018)
that enables decision and policy makers to evaluate
and quantify trade-offs associated with alternative Application of the IHRA Model to the Toco Port
management choices; and to identify areas where Proposal. Applying this model to the development
investment in natural capital can enhance human proposed for Toco, required the input of GIS
development and conservation (Sharp, Tallis, and shapefiles of the stressors and key habitats or
Ricketts 2018). Using GIS supported data as ecosystems and ES to be affected. The data
information sources and producing maps as gathering process resulted in two specific habitat
outputs, the software presents results in either layers being created and two key stressor
biophysical or economic terms. shapefiles. Previous sampling in the area revealed
the existence of a coral colony in the Toco Bay.
The IHRA model allows users to assess the risk Data from this research was used to create the coral
posed to coastal and marine habitats by human habitat shapefile. The information gathered from
activities and the potential consequences of the Fisheries Division and the Survey of the local
exposure for the delivery of environmental services fishing community was used to create a shapefile
5
Integrating ecosystem services into Land Use Planning in Trinidad and Tobago: A case study of developing an inter-island ferry port near an
ecologically sensitive area in Toco.
Camille Guichard Student I.D 815011021 Final Project 2019
for the Toco Bay fisheries. The two key stressor
shapefiles, created from data obtained from the
State agencies, were the proposed Port and the
associated dredging. The Model also required the
creation of a subregion shapefile so that an
ecosystem risk plot could be produced along with
the individual habitat risk plots. The subregion file
was created using the community boundary data
from the Central Statistical Office (CSO) of the
closest communities that bordered the Toco Bay
coastline. For the purposes of this study the
communities Mission and Toco share a boundary
along this sector of the coast, and as such both Figure 2: HRA using Euclidean Approach
communities were used to create the subregion
shapefile; and consequently, assessed in the HRA The model uses the data to produce risk plots, maps
and percentage risk based on the data input. The
The shapefiles were used together with exposure
variation of risk is displayed at a grid cell scale
and consequence criteria, ranked and scored
based on relative risk according to the stressor
according to risk, data quality and weighting
overlap/impact on the individual habitat as well as
importance, as described previously and shown in
the entire ecosystem according to the sub-regional
Table 1 below. Five criteria were chosen for the
data included.
Toco HRA, which requires a minimum of four (4)
criteria to run successfully. These were: Spatial Essentially, the results operate on the rule that
Overlap, Temporal Overlap, Intensity, Change in habitats with high exposure and consequence to
Area and Frequency in Disturbance. The other anthropogenic activities, are essentially habitats at
criteria were omitted because of lack of relevant high risk (Sharp, Tallis, and Ricketts 2018).
data. This ranking of criteria allows the user to
determine the degree of exposure to the stressor Results
that the habitat experiences and the consequence of
The study focuses on risk to two main habitat types
this exposure in terms of sensitivity and/or
in Toco that provides essential ecosystem services:
recovery.
Coral and Fisheries. The two key stressors for the
The model permits the user to choose between risk Bay namely, the Port development and the
calculations using either the Euclidean approach or associated reclamation-dredging were expected to
a Multiplicative approach. Expert literature have a direct impact on the coral and fish
suggests that the Multiplicative approach is ecosystem in the Bay. The Habitat Risk
favoured for cumulative risk assessments. Assessment Model produced three (3) risk plots:
Ecosystem risk assessments, however, arguably
- an ecosystem risk plot,
favour the Euclidean approach (Arkema et al.
- risk plots for the habitats in the Toco
2014; Sharp, Tallis, and Ricketts 2018). Given the
subregion and;
scale and scope of this study area the Euclidean
- risk plots for the habitats in the Mission
approach was used for the Toco HRA. This method
subregion (Figures 3,4 and 5 below).
of risk calculation allows the model to produce
results that can support a land use planner during
the decision-making process. Risk plots using this
calculation show the direct relationship between
habitat by stressor, by the Euclidean distance from
the beginning of the exposure and consequence
space (See Figure 2 below). The multiplicative
approach, however, produces only the cumulative
impact of all stressors on the habitats.

6
Integrating ecosystem services into Land Use Planning in Trinidad and Tobago: A case study of developing an inter-island ferry port near an
ecologically sensitive area in Toco.
Camille Guichard Student I.D 815011021 Final Project 2019

Figure 3: Ecosystem Risk Plot for Toco Subregion Figure 5: Risk Plots for Coral and Fish Habitats in Mission

The ecosystem risk plot (Fig. 3 above) identified These results align to the scientific principle of the
the ecosystem at the Toco section of the bay as model which describes high exposure and high
being at a significantly higher risk than the section consequence, results in a high-risk scenario. The
of the Bay bounded by Mission which was plots produced by the model identify clearly that
classified as at minimal risk.
the spatial overlap and change in area, two key
The individual habitat risk plots for coral and criteria that were weighed as very important in the
fishery in Toco section of the Bay (Fig. 4 below), model, were significantly high between the Port
showed the proposed port as the stressor which stressor and the fishery.
represented the highest risk to the coral habitat
whilst both the proposed port and associated Though there was no direct overlap of the fish
dredging posed great risk to the fisheries. habitat with the dredging stressor in Toco, the zone
of influence was represented in the model as a
buffer of 30m, thereby still impacting the fish
habitat. Likewise, at Mission, the risk plot for fish
showed little to no risk to the habitat because there
was no fish habitat data input for Mission, for an
assessment to be made. Alternately only a small
percentage of the coral habitat is located along the
portion of the Bay that resides with Toco, which is
directly affected by the Port stressor, whilst the
larger percentage is in Mission.
The HRA also produced tables (Figure 6 below)
showing the habitat-stressor interaction per region
by scoring the exposure (E) and consequence (C)
the risk and percentage of the cumulative grid cell
Figure 4: Risk Plots for Coral and Fish Habitats in Toco
per habitat at risk because of the stressor. In this
cross- boundary scenario, the model assesses the
The section of the Bay that was bounded by the percentage risk spatially by grid cell analysis. For
Mission community boundary showed zero risk to instance, there is 100% risk to the coral in Mission
the fish habitat by both stressors (Fig 5) and that the by reclamation dredging, because that is the only
risk to the coral habitat arose from the associated stressor directly impacting that Community.
However, with both stressors impacting both
dredging activity.
habitats in the Toco Section of the Bay, the % risk
was divided between them. This is also why the

7
Integrating ecosystem services into Land Use Planning in Trinidad and Tobago: A case study of developing an inter-island ferry port near an
ecologically sensitive area in Toco.
Camille Guichard Student I.D 815011021 Final Project 2019
Toco section of the Bay, was presented as being at
greater risk than Mission.

Figure 6: Tables showing risk scores for each habitat-

stressor interaction

Figure 6 also breaks down the risk score by

exposure and consequence per habitat stressor
interaction. For instance, the exposure score
between the coral-dredging relationship in any of
the risk plots, scored exposure with variance but
gave consequence the highest rating. This is
because the consequence criterion ‘Change in area’
was given the high score of 3 up to 100% loss in
area (See Table 1 below). Conversely, the exposure
criteria particularly spatial overlap, were given
varying scores from high to low based on the
location and degree of overlap; hence the varying
scores of risk. Likewise, there were no scoring for
either an interaction between the Fish habitat and
either stressor as there was essentially no overlap
or direct interaction with these variables in
Mission.
The areas that presented as High Risk were the
zones of interaction between coral and dredging
and the port and fish habitat. This result again
corresponded directly with the spatial data input
into the model and the scoring of the criteria
according to Table 1. The Model also produced
spatial representations of the risk plots, in the form
of maps (Figure 8 below & Appendix I) illustrating
the stressor-habitat interaction and risk analysis per
grid cell produced by the HRA Model.

8
Integrating ecosystem services into Land Use Planning in Trinidad and Tobago: A case study of developing an inter-island ferry port near an
ecologically sensitive area in Toco.
Camille Guichard Student I.D 815011021 Final Project 2019

Table 1: Expert Scoring for and Definition of Criteria for Exposure and Consequence

Source: Arkema et al 2014; Tallis et al. 2013 cited in Cabral et al 2015

p311) 9
Integrating ecosystem services into Land Use Planning in Trinidad and Tobago: A case study of developing an inter-island ferry port near an ecologically sensitive area in Toco.
Camille Guichard Student I.D 815011021 Final Project 2019
Maps 7 and 9 above illustrate the shapefile data for capacity to fulfil. A complete representation of the
the stressor/s and habitat/s in the context of the survey results is given in Appendix III.
HRA assessment. It is to be noted that areas of
highest risk, denoted in red and pink, are where Limitations to Study. The success of this study
there is direct spatial overlap between the stressor was largely dependent on the availability and
and habitat, as this exposure criterion and its quality of data and heavily reliant on verifiable
corresponding consequence criterion ‘change in spatial data in GIS format. Given the timeframe for
area’ are weighted as most impactful on the conducting this research, primary data could not be
habitats. Key areas to observe would be where obtained and therefore a heavy reliance was placed
there are ‘hotspots’ or zones where there is spatial on obtaining data from external sources.
overlap between both stressors and a particular Government agencies were the primary source of
habitat. There are representative of areas at highest data, and the security and bureaucratic protocols
risk, and where management options could be proved extremely time consuming. Further to
prioritized. which, as a relatively undisturbed region of the
country, existing data was extremely limited. As a
Questionnaire Results. A sample size of 54 result of this, habitat and species data as well as the
respondents ranging between 20-50 years old, were related exposure and consequence criteria was
asked 13 questions (See Appendix II) over a period limited the model. As the model also allowed the
of two Saturdays. All respondents were men, and data quality to be scored, the habitat data obtained
all were categorized as fishermen who resided in was ranked poor to adequate as the quality could
and around the Toco Bay and immediate environs not be verified.
(Mission, Grand Rivere and Point Cumana
communities. 100% of the respondents classified Another limitation to this study was the model
themselves as commercial fishermen. All itself. As a relatively new software, it was prone to
respondents fished at Toco Bay, except in periods bugs and general technical constraints. The
of rough weather, where they relocated to the next Stanford systems administrator through online
sheltered Bay in proximity; Salibya Bay. Similarly, forums, was easily accessible and upgrades were
all respondents anchored at Toco Bay unless the readily available.
weather and ocean conditions did not permit such,
at which point they anchored at Salibya Bay;
Analysis and Discussion
considered to be a more sheltered and protected This study does not assess the complete extent of
Bay. 90% of the group fished seven days per week ecosystems and ecosystems services for the Toco
and 85% fished more than once daily. All Bay study region. The choice of coral and fish
respondents were accompanied by 2-3 persons on habitats were based on data availability. The rapid
any given haul. 94% of respondents indicated that assessment of coral by Belford and Phillips during
income obtained from commercial fishing was the 2006-2008, revealed Toco Bay’s coral population
primary source of income and of those 51 persons, to be a diverse mix of hard and soft as well as reef
86% relied on that income to service a household and non-reef building coral (Belford and Phillip
of 4 or more persons. All respondents were aware 2011). Coral reefs are considered to be one of the
of the proposed ferry-port, but only 13% were most biologically diverse marine ecosystems
concerned that this development may have (Marchese 2015). The are considered an essential
negative impacts. Amongst the concerns listed provider of ecological goods and services; ranging
were; intrusion of criminal activity, loss of from protection to shorelines from ocean currents,
community character and way of life, dispersal of to functioning as spawning grounds and nurseries
fish further south east that may affect local for various marine organisms to providing seafood
incomes, pollution of fisheries and traffic. 87% products for human consumption and habitats for
(47) of the 54 respondents believed the proposed food sources for marine life (Moberg and Folke
development would improve the local 2015). The decline of coral reef in the Caribbean
infrastructure, upgrade the existing fish depot and has been largely attributed to anthropogenic
bring employment, although many were unsure activity and has been directly linked with
what type of employment, they would have the dwindling fish stock and increased nutrient
pollution in those areas (Bellwood et al. 2004). The
10
Integrating ecosystem services into Land Use Planning in Trinidad and Tobago: A case study of developing an inter-island ferry port near an
ecologically sensitive area in Toco.
Camille Guichard Student I.D 815011021 Final Project 2019
reef system in Toco Bay, though small and analysis. The IHRA was able to do this in the case
unprotected in comparison to the Bucco Reef of Toco Bay. By including a shapefile for
system in Tobago, still provides these essential community boundaries, the model was able to
services to the Toco shoreline. produce separate risk plots for habitats that were
located within the two communities that shared a
Fisheries are also considered a high value boundary along Toco Bay. This is particularly
ecosystem (Allan et al. 2013). The economic important for planners, as most conservation
activity associated with commercial fishing, strategies, often involve a shared management plan
recreational and tourism activity as well as their (Koontz and Newig 2014; Sheil and Lawrence
ecological importance as diverse species rich 2004; Pomeroy et al. 2005; Disterheft et al. 2012;
habitats, have been well documented (Allan et al. Christie, White, and Deguit 2002; Mcgee 2009).
2013; Berkes 2003; Alvarez Perez et al. 2009). In Planners must often consider how such shared
Toco Bay, the provisioning service afforded by the plans will be successfully implemented given
fisheries, are essential to the local livelihoods. As shared financial, administrative and political
highlighted by the results of the questionnaire, all responsibilities. The ability to produce scientific
the survey respondents classified themselves as evidence that illustrate the direct impact of
commercial fishermen. The survey also anthropogenic activity on a community creates that
highlighted a diversity in the species caught, citing civic responsibility that may not be achieved if a
shark, cavali, redfish, kingfish and salmon amongst community believes the hazards or risk external to
others, as popular hauls. With 44 of the 54 them (Renn et al. 1993; Parkins and Mitchell 2005;
respondents relying on the income gained from McCool and Guthrie 2001; Kemp and Martens
fishing to maintain households of four or more 2007). For instance, in Toco Bay both the Mission
persons; the socio-economic importance of the and Toco communities have habitats that are
fishery to the local community is clear. directly adversely affected, and therefore at risk.
The proposed inter ferry port is a key feature of the Whilst a cumulative impact assessment is useful to
Government’s Vision 2030 agenda and has been gauge the scale and scope of risk to the habitats in
allocated within the 2019 National Budget totality, the ability to present a case for why
(Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Mission should be interested in a shared plan for
Tobago 2016). It is currently in design stage, and managing the risk to the coral ecosystem and why
construction is proposed to begin within the near Toco should be aware of the risk to its fisheries to
future. The task that lies before land use planners, those specific communities, is important to create
is to successfully integrate the ecosystem concerns the necessary buy-in from both communities to
of this ecologically sensitive site, the socio- successfully implement a shared management plan.
economic concerns of the local community and the The results of the study also allow the planner to
national economic development agenda of the determine, not only the areas of risk that should be
country. particularly managed, but also gaps and missed
Ecosystem modelling tools such as the InVEST opportunities. It is clear, for example, that there
HRA used in this study, presents the opportunity exists a disconnect between the opinions and
for land use planners to make decisions supported perspectives of the local fishing community about
by scientific data, to mitigate the risks associated the risks posed by the proposed development, and
with such development, and present sustainable the analysis produced by the IHRA model. The
management options through policy and site model highlights very clear areas of risk to both the
development standard (Goldstein et al. 2012; Daily coral and fish habitats, yet only 13% of the sample
et al. 2009). Land use planners in Trinidad and surveyed, indicated any concerns about the
Tobago assess applications at a local area or possible risk posed by the Port development. This
community level. With the devolution of the is of some concern given that the questionnaire also
planning permitting process from central revealed that a significant percentage of the
government to a local government function on the respondents were dependent on the income from
horizon via the partially proclaimed PAFD Act of retail of fish, as their primary source of income, to
2014, it is essential that any ecosystem modelling service a household of four of more. This
tool be able to produce community or sub-regional disconnect could be assessed further through a
11
Integrating ecosystem services into Land Use Planning in Trinidad and Tobago: A case study of developing an inter-island ferry port near an
ecologically sensitive area in Toco.
Camille Guichard Student I.D 815011021 Final Project 2019
socio-economic impact assessment [SIA] which References
can be recommend by the planner and fulfilled by
Trinidad and Tobago’s Environment Management Allan, J David, Peter B McIntyre, Sigrid D P Smith, Benjamin S
Halpern, Gregory L Boyer, Andy Buchsbaum, G A Burton,
Authority [EMA], who is also responsible for et al. 2013. “Joint Analysis of Stressors and Ecosystem
overseeing the environmental impact assessment Services to Enhance Restoration Effectiveness.”
[EIA] process. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110 (1).
372–77. doi:10.1073/pnas.1213841110.
Finally, the planner can also use this combined data Alvarez Perez, Jose Angel, Paulo Ricardo Pezzuto, Roberto
to assess the location of the port in the context of Wahrlich, and Ana Luisa de Souza Soares. 2009. “Deep
the importance of the fisheries and coral habitat Water Fisheries in Brazil: History, Status and Perspectives.”
Latin American Journal of Aquatic Research 37 (3): 513–42.
location. The planner can weigh the economic and doi:10.3856/vol37.
ecological importance of the habitats to the local
Arkema, Katie K., Gregory Verutes, Joanna R. Bernhardt,
livelihoods, in the context of the national economic Chantalle Clarke, Samir Rosado, Maritza Canto, Spencer A.
importance of the Port and suggest mitigating Wood, et al. 2014. “Assessing Habitat Risk from Human
measures. For instance, given that the Toco Bay is Activities to Inform Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning: A
Demonstration in Belize.” Environmental Research Letters 9
the chosen location, shifting the siting of the port (11). IOP Publishing. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/9/11/114016.
within the bay to an area that produces the least risk
Barral, María Paula, and Maceira Néstor Oscar. 2012. “Land-Use
when relevant data is applied to the model and Planning Based on Ecosystem Service Assessment: A Case
compared is a possibility. The model clearly Study in the Southeast Pampas of Argentina.” Agriculture,
highlights the section of the Bay located in Mission Ecosystems and Environment 154: 34–43.
doi:10.1016/j.agee.2011.07.010.
as at minimal risk from the stressors whilst the
Toco section of the Bay is at a much higher risk. Belford, S., and D. Phillip. 2011. “Rapid Assessment of a Coral
One proposed solution can be that the risk be Reef Community in a Marginal Habitat in the Southern
Caribbean: A Simple Way to Know What’s out There.”
shared as much as possible between the two Asian Journal of Biological Sciences 4 (7): 520–31.
communities by shifting the port site closer to doi:10.3923/ajbs.2011.520.531.
Mission to decrease the impact on the fisheries in Bellwood, D R, T P Hughes, C Folke, and M Nyström. 2004.
the Toco section of the Bay; as this may prove to “Confronting the Coral Reef Crisis.” Nature 429 (6994):
be an effective trade-off. 827–33. doi:10.1038/nature02691.

Berkes, Fikret. 2003. “Alternatives to Conventional Management:

Conclusion Lessons from Small-Scale Fisheries.” Environments 31 (1):
5–20. doi:NB-02-14-126-EN-N.
The Government of Trinidad and Tobago as part of
Braat, Leon C. 2012. “Ecosystem Services-Science, Policy and
its public sector investment programme (PSIP), has Practice: Introduction to the Journal and the Inaugural
allocated funding to a National Spatial Data Issue.” Ecosystem Services 1 (1): 1–3.
Infrastructure [NSDI] project (Government of the doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.007.

Republic of Trinidad and Tobago 2018). The NSDI Cabral, P., H. Levrel, J. Schoenn, E. Thiébaut, P. Le Mao, R.
seeks to facilitate sharing of spatial data throughout Mongruel, C. Rollet, et al. 2015. “Marine Habitats
Ecosystem Service Potential: A Vulnerability Approach in
all levels of government, the private sector and the Normand-Breton (Saint Malo) Gulf, France.” Ecosystem
non-governmental organisations as well as the Services 16 (December): 306–18.
academic community (Ramlal 2015). Taken in the doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.09.007.
context of the current legislative reform in the land Carr, Mark H, Joseph E Neigel, James A Estes, Sandy Andelman,
use planning sector, that seeks to improve the Robert R Warner, and John L Largier. 2003. “Comparing
Marine and Terrestrial Ecosystems : Implications for the
decision-making process for development Design of Coastal Marine Reserves.” Ecological
approvals; the ability to successfully integrate Applications 13 (1): 90–107. doi:10.1890/1051-
ecosystem and ecosystem service management 0761(2003)013[0090:cmatei]2.0.co;2.
within the land use permitting process is very Castella, Jean Christophe, Suan Pheng Kam, Dang Dinh Quang,
feasible. With modelling tools such as InVEST Peter H Verburg, and Chu Thai Hoanh. 2007. “Combining
being made freely available, and with the Top-down and Bottom-up Modelling Approaches of Land
Use/Cover Change to Support Public Policies: Application
development of an NSDI on the Government’s to Sustainable Management of Natural Resources in
agenda, the future promises sustainable land use Northern Vietnam.” Land Use Policy 24 (3): 531–45.
planning policies, practices and decisions. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2005.09.009.

Christie, P, A White, and E Deguit. 2002. “Starting Point or

Solution? Community-Based Marine Protected Areas in the

12
Integrating ecosystem services into Land Use Planning in Trinidad and Tobago: A case study of developing an inter-island ferry port near an
ecologically sensitive area in Toco.
Camille Guichard Student I.D 815011021 Final Project 2019
Philippines.” Journal of Environmental Management 66: https://www.planning.gov.tt/sites/default/files/PSIP Trinidad
441–54. doi:10.1006/jema.2002.0595. 2018.pdf.

Costanza, Robert, Matthew A Wilson, Austin Troy, Alexey Halpern, Benjamin S., Shaun Walbridge, Kimberly A. Selkoe,
Voinov, Shang Liu, R Costanza, Troy Wilson, A Voinov, A Carrie V. Kappel, and Fiorenza Micheli. 2008. “A Global
Liu, and D ’ Agostino. 2006. “The Value of New Jersey’ s Map of Human Impact on Marine Ecosystems.” Science 319
Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital.” New Jersey (5865): 946–48. doi:10.1126/science.1151084.
Department of Environmental Protection.
http://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/iss_pub. Hamilton, Clive, Christophe Bonneuil, and Francois Gemenne.
2015. The Anthropocene and the Global Environmental
Crossman, Neville D, Benjamin Burkhard, Stoyan Nedkov, Louise Crisis.
Willemen, Katalin Petz, Ignacio Palomo, Evangelia G https://books.google.bs/books?id=RathCQAAQBAJ&dq=gl
Drakou, et al. 2013. “A Blueprint for Mapping and obal+environmental+crisis+&lr=&source=gbs_navlinks_s.
Modelling Ecosystem Services.” Ecosystem Services 4: 4–
14. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.02.001. Hughes, Terence P, David R Bellwood, Carl Folke, Robert S
Steneck, and James Wilson. 2005. “New Paradigms for
Daily, Gretchen C., Stephen Polasky, Joshua Goldstein, Peter M. Supporting the Resilience of Marine Ecosystems.” Trends in
Kareiva, Harold A. Mooney, Liba Pejchar, Taylor H. Ecology and Evolution. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2005.03.022.
Ricketts, James Salzman, and Robert Shallenberger. 2009.
“Ecosystem Services in Decision Making: Time to Deliver.” IMA. 2016a. “State of the Marine Environment Trinidad & Tobago
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 7 (1): 21–28. - 2016.” Institute of Marine Affairs.
doi:10.1890/080025. http://www.planning.gov.tt/sites/default/files/State of the
Marine Environment %28SOME%29 Report 2016
Disterheft, Antje, Sandra Sofia Ferreira Da Silva Caeiro, Maria %28IMA%29.pdf.
Rosário Ramos, and Ulisses Manuel De Miranda Azeiteiro.
2012. “Environmental Management Systems (EMS) ———. 2016b. “State of the Marine Environment Trinidad &
Implementation Processes and Practices in European Higher Tobago - 2016.” Institute of Marine Affairs.
Education Institutions - Top-down versus Participatory http://www.planning.gov.tt/sites/default/files/State of the
Approaches.” Journal of Cleaner Production 31 (August). Marine Environment %28SOME%29 Report 2016
Elsevier: 80–90. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.02.034. %28IMA%29.pdf.

Duggan, Jennifer M., Bradley A Eichelberger, Shan Ma, Joshua J Kemp, René, and Pim Martens. 2007. “Sustainable Development:
Lawler, and Guy Ziv. 2015. “Informing Management of How to Manage Something That Is Subjective and Never
Rare Species with an Approach Combining Scenario Can Be Achieved?” Sustainability: Science, Practice and
Modeling and Spatially Explicit Risk Assessment.” Policy 3 (2): 5–14. doi:10.1080/15487733.2007.11907997.
Ecosystem Health and Sustainability 1 (6): 1–18.
Koontz, Tomas M, and Jens Newig. 2014. “From Planning to
doi:10.1890/EHS14-0009.1.
Implementation: Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches for
Environmental Management Authority. 2001. “Biodiversity Collaborative Watershed Management.” Policy Studies
Strategy & Action Plan Trinidad and Tobago.” National Journal 42 (3): 416–42. doi:10.1111/psj.12067.
Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan.
Marchese, Christian. 2015. “Biodiversity Hotspots: A Shortcut for
https://www.cbd.int/doc/world/tt/tt-nbsap-01-p1-en.pdf.
a More Complicated Concept.” Global Ecology and
Espinasa, Ramon and Malte Humpert. 2016. “Energy Dossier: Conservation 3. Elsevier B.V.: 297–309.
Trinidad and Tobago.” Inter-American Development Bank doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2014.12.008.
Technical Note, no. 938: 1–57.
McCool, Stephen F, and Kathleen Guthrie. 2001. “Society &
Goldstein, Joshua H, Giorgio Caldarone, Thomas Kaeo Duarte, Natural Resources : Mapping the Dimensions of Successful
Driss Ennaanay, Neil Hannahs, Guillermo Mendoza, Public Participation in Messy Natural Resources
Stephen Polasky, Stacie Wolny, and Gretchen C Daily. Management Situations.” Society and Natural Resources 14
2012. “Integrating Ecosystem-Service Tradeoffs into Land- (4): 309–23. https.
Use Decisions.” Proceedings of the National Academy of
Mcgee, Brant. 2009. “The Community Referendum: Participatory
Sciences 109 (19): 7565–70. doi:10.1073/pnas.1201040109.
Democracy and the Right to Free, Prior and Informed
GoRTT. 1960. TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT. Consent to Development.” Berkeley Journal of International
Republic of Trinidad and Tobago www.legalaffairs.gov.tt. Law 27 (2). doi:10.15779/Z38T94C.

———. 2014. Planning and Faciltitation of Development. Metzger, M J, A Rounsevell, L Acosta-Michlik, R Leemans, and D
Republic of Trinidad and Tobago. Schröter. 2006. “The Vulnerability of Ecosystem Services to
Land Use Change.” Agriculture, Ecosystems and
———. 2016. “Biodiversity in Trinidad and Tobago.” Trinidad Environment 114: 69–85. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2005.11.025.
and Tobago’s Biosafety Clearing House. Secretariat of the
Convention on Biological Diversity. Ministry of Works and Transport. 2017. “Master Works Issue 1.”
http://tt.biosafetyclearinghouse.net/0003.shtml. http://www.mowt.gov.tt/documents/Master Works Issue 1 -
2017.pdf.
Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago. 2016.
“Vision 2030.” Moberg, Fredrik, and Carl Folke. 2015. “Ecological Goods and
http://www.planning.gov.tt/sites/default/files/Vision 2030- Services of Coral Reef Ecosystems.” Ecological Economics
The National Development Strategy of Trinidad and Tobago 29 (September): 215–33. doi:10.1016/S0921-
2016-2030.pdf. 8009(99)00009-9.

———. 2018. “Public Sector Investment Programme Trinidad.” Mohammed, Elizabeth. 2017. “Current Initiatives for Fisheries

13
Integrating ecosystem services into Land Use Planning in Trinidad and Tobago: A case study of developing an inter-island ferry port near an
ecologically sensitive area in Toco.
Camille Guichard Student I.D 815011021 Final Project 2019
Management in Trinidad and Tobago.” Enhancing Ocean Science & Policy 7 (1): 1–13.
Governance in the Caribbean :Fisheries Division. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2003.10.004.
https://u.tt/uploads/05_Elizabeth_mohammed_FD_final_-
_Current_Initiatives_for_Fisheries_Management_in_TT_30 Steffen, W., J. Grinevald, P. Crutzen, and J. McNeill. 2011. “The
Jun17.pdf. Anthropocene: Conceptual and Historical Perspectives.”
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A:
Pagiola, Stefano, Konrad Von Ritter, and Joshua Bishop. 2004. Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 369
“Assessing the Economic Value of Ecosystem (1938): 842–67. doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0327.
Conservation.” https://www.cbd.int/doc/case-studies/inc/cs-
inc-iucn-nc-wb-en.pdf. Tompkins, Emma, W. Neil Adger, and Katrina Brown. 2002.
“Institutional Networks for Inclusive Coastal Management
Parkins, John R., and Ross E Mitchell. 2005. “Public Participation in Trinidad and Tobago.” Environment and Planning A 34
as Public Debate: A Deliberative Turn in Natural Resource (6): 1095–1111. doi:10.1068/a34213.
Management.” Society and Natural Resources 18 (6): 529–
40. doi:10.1080/08941920590947977. Wyatt, Katherine H., Robert Griffin, Anne D. Guerry, Mary
Ruckelshaus, Michael Fogarty, and Katie K. Arkema. 2017.
Pascual, Unai, Roldan Muradian, Luke Brander, Erik Gómez- “Habitat Risk Assessment for Regional Ocean Planning in
Baggethun, Berta Martín-López, Madhu Verma, Paul the U.S. Northeast and Mid-Atlantic.” PLoS ONE 12 (12):
Armsworth, et al. 2010. “The Economics of Valuing 1–20. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0188776.
Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity.”
http://www.teebweb.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/D0-
Chapter-5-The-economics-of-valuing-ecosystem-services-
and-biodiversity.pdf.

Pomeroy, Robert S., Lani M. Watson, John E. Parks, and Gonzalo

A. Cid. 2005. “How Is Your MPA Doing? A Methodology
for Evaluating the Management Effectiveness of Marine
Protected Areas.” Ocean and Coastal Management 48 (7–8):
485–502. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2005.05.004.

Ramlal, Bisham. 2015. “National Spatial Data Infrastructure in

Trinidad and Tobago: Status and Prospects.” GISCTT
Symposium.
https://docs.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=http://cdn.giss
tt.com/static/docs/symposium/2015/presentation-1.pdf.

Renn, Ortwin, Thomas Webler, Horst Rakel, Peter Dienel, and &
Branden. 1993. “Public Participation in Decision Making: A
Three-Step Procedure.” Policy Sciences 26 (26): 189–189.
https://elib.uni-
stuttgart.de/bitstream/11682/7231/1/ren17.pdf.

Rodriguez, Jon Paul, Douglas T Beard Jr, Elena M Bennett, and

Graeme S Cumming. 2006. “Trade-Offs Across Space ,
Time , and Ecosystem Services.” Ecology and Society 11
(1). doi:10.5751/ES-01667-110128.

Sabatier, Paul A. 1991. “Toward Better Theories of the Policy

Process.” PS: Political Science and Politics 24 (2): 147.
doi:10.2307/419923.

Sharp, R, H.T. Tallis, and T Ricketts. 2018. InVEST 3.6.0. User

Guide. The Natural Capital Project. Stanford University,
University of Minnesota, The Nature Conservancy and
World Wildlife Fund.
http://releases.naturalcapitalproject.org/invest-
userguide/latest/.

Sheil, Douglas, and Anna Lawrence. 2004. “Tropical Biologists,

Local People and Conservation: New Opportunities for
Collaboration.” Trends in Ecology and Evolution.
doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.09.019.

Spruijt, Pita, Anne B. Knol, Eleftheria Vasileiadou, Jeroen Devilee,

Erik Lebret, and Arthur C. Petersen. 2014. “Roles of
Scientists as Policy Advisers on Complex Issues: A
Literature Review.” Environmental Science and Policy 40
(June). Elsevier: 16–25. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2014.03.002.

Steel, Brent, Peter List, Denise Lach, and Bruce Shindler. 2004.
“The Role of Scientists in the Environmental Policy Process:
A Case Study from the American West.” Environmental
14
Integrating ecosystem services into Land Use Planning in Trinidad and Tobago: A case study of developing an inter-island ferry port near an
ecologically sensitive area in Toco.