Katrine Eldegard, Andrea F. Vallejo Vargas, Regine Benz, Anders Gunnar Helle
{"title":"Good Condition, but Noisy: Critical Gaps in Ecological Assessment Frameworks","authors":"Katrine Eldegard, Andrea F. Vallejo Vargas, Regine Benz, Anders Gunnar Helle","doi":"10.1111/con4.70085","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Ecological condition assessments can guide conservation priorities yet often neglect pervasive stressors such as noise pollution. We examined whether assessed ecological condition reflects exposure to transportation noise exceeding 50 dB Lden (day–evening–night levels), a conservative threshold given documented negative effects on wildlife at lower levels. Using site-level data from assessments in Norway, based on the EcoSyst framework, which relies on structural field parameters, we analyzed noise exposure across ecological condition classes (good, moderate, poor, very reduced). This revealed a critical mismatch: noise-exposed area and the proportion of habitat exposed were both higher, or similar, in “good” condition habitats than in poorer condition classes—contrary to expectation. Current frameworks, which focus solely on structural indicators, risk overstating ecosystem integrity by failing to account for acoustic degradation. We recommend integrating noise exposure into ecological condition assessment protocols and ecosystem accounting frameworks to strengthen their validity and relevance for conservation planning and policy.</p>","PeriodicalId":157,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Letters","volume":"19 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/con4.70085","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Letters","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/con4.70085","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Ecological condition assessments can guide conservation priorities yet often neglect pervasive stressors such as noise pollution. We examined whether assessed ecological condition reflects exposure to transportation noise exceeding 50 dB Lden (day–evening–night levels), a conservative threshold given documented negative effects on wildlife at lower levels. Using site-level data from assessments in Norway, based on the EcoSyst framework, which relies on structural field parameters, we analyzed noise exposure across ecological condition classes (good, moderate, poor, very reduced). This revealed a critical mismatch: noise-exposed area and the proportion of habitat exposed were both higher, or similar, in “good” condition habitats than in poorer condition classes—contrary to expectation. Current frameworks, which focus solely on structural indicators, risk overstating ecosystem integrity by failing to account for acoustic degradation. We recommend integrating noise exposure into ecological condition assessment protocols and ecosystem accounting frameworks to strengthen their validity and relevance for conservation planning and policy.
生态条件评估可以指导保护优先事项,但往往忽视了无处不在的压力因素,如噪音污染。我们研究了评估的生态条件是否反映了超过50 dB Lden(日夜水平)的交通噪声暴露,这是一个保守的阈值,因为有记录表明较低水平对野生动物有负面影响。基于EcoSyst框架(依赖于结构现场参数),我们使用来自挪威评估的现场级数据,分析了不同生态条件等级(良好、中等、差、非常低)的噪音暴露情况。这揭示了一个关键的不匹配:与预期相反,在“良好”条件的栖息地中,噪音暴露面积和栖息地暴露比例都高于或相似。目前的框架仅关注结构指标,由于未能考虑到声退化,可能会夸大生态系统的完整性。我们建议将噪音暴露纳入生态条件评估协议和生态系统核算框架,以加强其对保护规划和政策的有效性和相关性。
期刊介绍:
Conservation Letters is a reputable scientific journal that is devoted to the publication of both empirical and theoretical research that has important implications for the conservation of biological diversity. The journal warmly invites submissions from various disciplines within the biological and social sciences, with a particular interest in interdisciplinary work. The primary aim is to advance both pragmatic conservation objectives and scientific knowledge. Manuscripts are subject to a rapid communication schedule, therefore they should address current and relevant topics. Research articles should effectively communicate the significance of their findings in relation to conservation policy and practice.