United States
Environmental
Protection Agency
Incorporation of Ecosystem Goods and Services into Ecological Risk Assessment
Charles G Maurice1; Bruce Duncan2; Sarah L Mazur3; Marc Russell4
1 Office of Research and Development / Office of Science Policy;2 Region 10 / Office of Environmental Review and Assessment;3 Office of Research and Development / Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program;
4 Office of Research and Development / National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory
Introduction
Linking the benefits of the natural environment to the health and wellbeing of people has become
increasingly important. One way to better understand this human/environment linkage is to identify,
evaluate and characterize benefits from nature, which we call "ecosystem goods and services" (EGS).
When these goods and services directly benefit humans, we call them Final EGS (FEGS).
Within the U.S. EPA Superfund and RCRA hazardous waste site cleanup processes, ecological risk
assessment (ERA) is the mechanism by which threats to non-human ecological receptors are
evaluated. Various efforts have considered incorporating EGS into hazardous waste site decisions (e.g.,
U.S. EPA 2017 which includes a broader survey of EPA EGS efforts and references) and ecological risk
assessment (e.g., U.S. EPA 2016 which describes the linkage between assessment endpoints and
EGS). However, it can be difficult to identify and quantify the benefits and communicate about them to
decision makers and stakeholders. We believe incorporating EGS methodologies and tools into
ecological risk assessment can help address this challenge.
Depending on the circumstances, EGS can be incorporated into specific steps of the ecological risk
assessment or throughout the process as a whole. We aim to conceptually highlight potential ways that
EGS can be incorporated into ecological risk assessment.
Objectives
Suggest steps in the ERA process where EGS concepts could be incorporated
Increase familiarity of EGS concepts and tools among ecorisk assessors
Promote development of a strategic and consistent approach to incorporating EGS into ERA
Highlight the utility and value of incorporating EGS into ERA
EGS Environmental Classes and Beneficiary Categories
EGS can be depicted by a standardized hierarchy of environmental classes and beneficiary categories,
represented by a 6-digit code (i.e., XX.YYYY) developed by Landers and Nahlik (2013). The 2 digits
identify the environmental class/subclass and the 4 digits identify the human beneficiary
category/subcategory. This allows multiple benefits to be identified for individuals or groups of people.
People Who Care (Existence)
00.0603 Recreatior
Municipal, and Resi
Example of 4-digit Beneficiary Category/subcategory
code usage. (From Landers and Nahlik 2013)	
2-Digit
Environmental
Codes
Classes & Subclasses
1
Aquatic
11
Rivers/Streams
12
Wetlands
13
Lakes/Ponds
14
Estuaries/Near Coastal/Marine
15
Groundwater
2
Terrestrial
21
Forests
22
Agroecosystems
23
Created Greenspace
24
Grasslands
25
Scrubland/Shrubland
26
Barren/Rock/Sand
27
Tundra
28
Ice/Snow
29
Caves
3
Atmospheric
31
Atmosphere
Crosswalk of Example EGS Activities with Generic ERA Phases
ERA Phases3
Example EGS Topics and Activities
Some Potential EPA EGS Toolsb
Decision Questions
Planning and
Scoping
• Identify EGS in site landscape
•	FEGS Scoping Toolc
•	FEGS Classification System
•	National Ecosystem Services Classification
System (NESCS)
•	Who are the stakeholders and what are their relative standings and levels of impact?
•	Do EGS classification systems help with selection, completeness, and comparability
across assessment endpoints?
•	Would inclusion of EGS facilitate broader conversation with stakeholders and include
ecosystem structure, function and benefits they had not considered?
Problem
Formulation
•	Describe EGS benefits
•	Estimate magnitudes of EGS benefits
•	Incorporate EGS into conceptual site model (CSM)
•	FEGS Scoping Tool0
•	EcoService Models Library (ESML)
•	Eco-Health Relationship Browser
•	EnviroAtlas
•	Decision Analysis for a Sustainable Environment,
Economy, and Society (DASEES)C
•	What resources have stakeholders indicated are important for protection?
•	What health concerns do they have?
•	Has there been prioritization by stakeholders?
•	What do spatial data-layers tell us about the site and it's surrounding area?
Analysis
•	Evaluate potential EGS/site contaminants connectivity
•	Evaluate potential effects of site contaminants on EGS
•	Evaluate EGS condition (functionality, impairment level)
•	Evaluate EGS resilience/vulnerability to site contaminants
•	Calculate EGS cost savings and other benefits
•	Assess EGS capacity (type, temporal, seasonal)
•	Assess EGS importance to stakeholders
•	Assess EGS maintenance effort and cost
•	Identify key features or parameters to protect EGS benefits
•	EcoService Models Library (ESML)
•	EnviroAtlas
•	EPA H20 Tool
•	Rapid Benefit Indicators (RBI) Approach
•	Visualizing Ecosystem Land Management
Assessments (VELMA) Model
•	Causal Analysis/Diagnosis Decision Information
System (CADDIS)
•	Are EGS attributes quantifiable (i.e., can they be measured or modeled)?
•	Which indicators might serve as proxy for assessing classes of EGS?
•	What spatial and temporal factors need to be considered?
•	Can EGS-related ecological receptors be aggregated in space or across
contaminants?
•	What are the estimated differences in benefits between multiple future scenarios?
•	How do upstream and downstream areas affect or are affected by the site?
•	How might benefits be valued?
Risk
Characterization
•	Compare costs and benefits of EGS
•	Characterize site contaminant threats to EGS
•	Characterize EGS impairment level by site contaminants
•	EcoService Models Library (ESML)
•	EnviroAtlas
•	EPA H20 Tool
•	Rapid Benefit Indicators (RBI) Approach
•	Would EGS help with risk characterization of aggregate and cumulative risk?
•	Can costs and benefits be compared using similar units of measure?
•	Where are the beneficiaries?
•	Which beneficial uses might be impacted or restored?
Risk
Communication01
• Articulate EGS benefits and costs
• All of the above
•	What EGS do decision makers and stakeholders care about?
•	How do EGS contribute to human health and wellbeing?
a From U.S. EPA 1998 b Descriptions and links available at: https://www.epa.qov/eco-research/ecosvstem-services c Beta version - not yet publicly available d Risk Communication is not an ERA Phase, but instead occurs throughout the ERA process.
Example Conceptual Site Model
EGS: Aquatic
Birds (fauna)
Potential
Beneficiaries:
Adapted from Landers and Nahlik 2013
Other EGS: open
of environment
Potential
people who care
property owners
who benefit
from reduced
risk of
flooding/erosion
Conclusions and Future Directions
Through the development of new EGS tools and resources,
EPA has taken some important first steps towards
incorporating EGS into ecological risk assessment. These
new tools and resources have revealed new opportunities for
further incorporating EGS into ecological risk assessment,
however, more work is still needed to fully explore these
opportunities.
Potential next steps are:
•	Developing and publishing an EcoUpdate and other
guidelines on the topic.
•	Developing more methods, tools, and case studies to help
identify, quantify, and prioritize EGS and EGS features, as
well as evaluate and communicate societal values of EGS.
References
Landers, D. and A. Nahlik. 2013. Final Ecosystem Goods and Services
Classification System (FEGS-CS). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-13/ORD-004914.
U.S. EPA. 1998. Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. EPA630-R-95-002F.
U.S. EPA. 2016. Generic Ecological Assessment Endpoints (GEAEs) For Ecological
Risk Assessment: Second Edition with Generic Ecosystem Services Endpoints
Added. EPA 100-F-15-005.
U.S. EPA. 2017. Engineering Forum Issue Paper: Ecosystem Services at
Contaminated Site Cleanups. EPA 542-R-17-004. Available:
https://semspub.epa.qov/work/HQ/100000459.i3df
Disclaimer. The views expressed in this poster are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views
or policies of the U.S. EPA.
www.epa.gov/research
Innovative Research for a Sustainable Future

-------