Skip to main content

Table 2 Specific framework of habitat risk assessment

From: Identifying ecological risk and cost–benefit value for supporting habitat restoration: a case study from Sansha Bay, southeast China

Attribute

Score criteriaa

Low risk

Medium risk

High risk

Exposure

 Spatial overlay

Habitat and stressor overlay for 0‒20%

Habitat and stressor overlay for 20‒50%

Habitat and stressor overlay for 50‒100%

 Stress intensity

Low intensity

Medium intensity

High intensity

Consequence–sensitivity

 Loss in area

Low loss in area (0‒20%)

Medium loss in area (20‒50%)

High loss in area (50‒100%)

 Change in structure

Low loss in structure (0–20% loss, little to no structural damage)

Medium loss in structure (20–50% loss, partial structural damage)

High loss in structure (50–100% loss, total structural damage)

Consequence–resilience

 Biodiversity of planktonb

Diversity index for 2‒3

Diversity index for 1‒2

Diversity index for 0‒1

 Biodiversity of benthosb

Diversity index for 2‒3

Diversity index for 1‒2

Diversity index for 0‒1

 Management effectiveness

Very effective with the number of marine protection area (> 2)

Somewhat effective with the number of marine protection area (1‒2)

Not effective, poorly managed with no marine protection area

  1. aIndicates that the scoring criteria is in accordance with Sharp et al. (2018)
  2. bIndicates that the scoring criteria is in accordance with the PRC National Standard (2008)