DOI: 10.5061/dryad.msbcc2g6s
title: Activity-pressure-habitat linkage matrix: Identifying impact chains to assess impact risk to tropical marine ecosystems from human activities in four Southeast Asian case studies Version 1.0

description: Society relies on intact marine ecosystems for ecosystem services such as
 nutrition, livelihoods, health, and wellbeing. Yet, to obtain these
 benefits, we carry out activities, introducing pressures to ecosystems,
 damaging and degrading habitats and reducing their capacity to optimally
 provide ecosystem services. Biodiversity and ecosystem services are
 consequently being lost globally but impact chains from these activities
 are poorly understood, especially in tropical marine ecosystems. We
 identified for the first time impact chains linking activities with
 pressures they introduce in five tropical coastal and marine habitats,
 specifically through application in four Southeast Asian case study sites.
 Using expert elicitation based on existing evidence, we weighted each
 impact chain according to pressure extent, frequency and persistence, and
 habitat resistance and resilience. This dataset consists of a series of
 matrices linking human activities, the pressures they introduce, and the
 habitats they interact with, for four Southeast Asian case study sites.
 There are five tabs in the file that describe the elements of matrices.
 There are eight tabs with the main data matrices, two matrices per case
 study. The first matrix per case study contains the ‘links’, which
 indicate where an association was identified between an activity-pressure
 combination and a habitat in a given case study (the impact chains). Cell
 colour indicates a confidence score for each of these links. The second
 matrix per case study gives an impact risk weighting for each
 activity-pressure-habitat (impact chain) combination according to five
 criteria. These data can be used to assess ecological impact risk in these
 habitats and case studies. 
description: We studied four marine reserves and protected areas across four
 countries in Southeast Asia. These were: Cu Lao Cham – Hoi An Biosphere
 Reserve, Vietnam; Tun Mustapha Marine Park, Malaysia; Taytay Bay, part of
 Palawan UNESCO UNESCO Man and Biosphere (MAB)Reserve, the Philippines; and
 Taka Bonerate Kepulauan Selayar (TBKS) UNESCO MAB Reserve,
 Indonesia. For each case study, we identified the
 activities that interact with marine habitats, using local expert
 knowledge. We used a common typology of 11 pressures that can be
 introduced by those activities and can interact with five broad benthic
 and pelagic habitat types. Local expert teams, using their expert
 judgement, supported by literature evidence where available,
 systematically identified links between activities and pressures, then
 between activity-pressure combinations and their potential to overlap with
 each habitat in the case study sites. Expert elicitation was used to come
 to an agreement within the case study team and then across case studies as
 a group. An indication of confidence was given for each link. The
 confidence assessment had two tiers, one based on whether literature or
 other documented evidence was used in identifying links, and one based on
 expert judgement only. This process created the basic linkage framework,
 and one such matrix is provided for each case study site in this dataset.
   Each impact chain in the linkage framework was then
 weighted according to five criteria that capture either the exposure of a
 habitat to an impact risk or sensitivity of a habitat to an impact risk.
 Exposure criteria were the activity-pressure extent, frequency and
 persistence. Sensitivity criteria were the habitat resistance and
 resilience to an activity-pressure, capturing the likely severity of
 habitat damage, including taking into account the intensity or magnitude
 of the activity-pressure, and potential recovery. The same local expert
 teams weighted the extent and frequency criteria, which are specific to
 the case study sites. The identified impact chains were each considered in
 turn, available evidence was discussed, and expert elicitation was used to
 come to an agreement amongst the group. The other criteria, persistence,
 resistance and resilience, were weighted during a series of workshops with
 a research team with expertise on ecology of the habitats and on
 activity-pressure interactions with habitats. These criteria were
 considered specific to the activity-pressure interaction with the habitat
 rather than the specific location, and weightings were applied to generic
 impact chains rather than location specific chains. The intensity of the
 specific activity-pressure-habitat combination was taken into account
 where, for example, organic enrichment from shrimp farming overlapping
 with sediment habitats would result in lower resistance and resilience
 scores than from informal human settlements introducing the same pressure
 and overlapping with the same habitat. The evidence for the weighting of
 each criterion for each impact chain was discussed in turn and expert
 elicitation used to reach a consensus on categorisation. The generic
 weightings were then applied to the case study specific matrices and a
 further review was carried out by local expert teams in case of any
 exceptions to the generic weightings, for example if an activity-pressure
 combination had a greater magnitude of intensity in one location and/or
 habitat, making the consequence more severe, the score would be adjusted
 to account for this. As before, an indication of confidence was given for
 each weighting. One weighted linkage matrix is provided for each case
 study in this dataset.
description: # Activity-pressure-habitat linkage matrix: Identifying impact chains to
 assess impact risk to tropical marine ecosystems from human activities in
 four Southeast Asian case studies Version 1.0
 [https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.msbcc2g6s](https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.msbcc2g6s) ## Description of the data and file structure These data were collected from 2021-2022 as part of the UKRI funded project Blue Communities. We identified for the first time impact chains linking activities with pressures they introduce in five tropical coastal and marine habitats, specifically through application in four Southeast Asian case study sites. Using expert elicitation based on existing evidence, we weighted each impact chain according to pressure extent, frequency and persistence, and habitat resistance and resilience. This dataset consists of a series of matrices linking human activities, the pressures they introduce, and the habitats they interact with, for four Southeast Asian case study sites. There are five tabs in the file that describe the elements of matrices. There are eight tabs with the main data matrices, two matrices per case study. The first matrix per case study contains the ‘links’, which indicate where an association was identified between an activity-pressure combination and a habitat in a given case study (the impact chains). Cell colour indicates a confidence score for each of these links. The second matrix per case study gives an impact risk weighting for each activity-pressure-habitat (impact chain) combination according to five criteria. These data can be used to assess ecological impact risk in these habitats and case studies.  ### Files and variables #### File: Culhane\_et\_al\_2024\_Activity\_Pressure\_Risk\_Matrix\_Dataset.xlsx **Description:**  The four case studies are abbreviated as: * VN: Cu Lao Cham – Hoi An Biosphere Reserve, Vietnam; * MY: Tun Mustapha Marine Park, Malaysia; * PH: Taytay Bay, part of Palawan UNESCO UNESCO Man and Biosphere (MAB)Reserve, the Philippines; * IN: Taka Bonerate Kepulauan Selayar (TBKS) UNESCO MAB Reserve, Indonesia. For each case study, in the 'Links' tab, a '1' indicates an association between an activity-pressure combination and a habitat i.e. an activity-pressure-habitat interaction or impact chain, and a '0' indicates where no association was identified. The colour of the cell indicates the confidence in that association (explained in the 'Confidence' tab) (confidence was not assessed for no association or '0' links). In the 'Weights' tab, each row is one impact chain, previously identified as being present in the case study (coming from the Links table). The cells are the weights of the links under the risk criteria (explained in the 'Weighting Key' tab). The colour of the cell indicates the confidence in that weighting. | **Data Type** | **Tab Name** | **Description** | | :------------------------------------------- | :------------ | :-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Description of elements of linkage framework | Case Studies | Location of case studies and abbreviations used. | | Description of elements of linkage framework | Activities | The human activities identified as present in each case study site. | | Description of elements of linkage framework | Pressures | The typology of pressures and their descriptions, adapted from previous work by Jaglal, (2010), JNCC (2011), Borgwardt et al., (2019), Knights et al., (2013), Robinson et al., (2013), Robinson and Culhane, (2017). | | Description of elements of linkage framework | Confidence | A key to the confidence assessment used in the main matrices. The confidence in each relationship identified was given a confidence category indicated by colour. | | Description of elements of linkage framework | Weighting Key | A key to the risk criteria weights given to each link in the 'Weights' matrix tables.  | | Main Data Matrices: Impact chains | IN Links | The 'impact chains' (i.e. the activity-pressure-habitat combinations) identified for the Indonesia case study site. | | Main Data Matrices: Weighted impact chains | IN Weights | The impact chains for the Indonesia case study site weighted according to five risk criteria. | | Main Data Matrices: Impact chains | PH Links | The 'impact chains' (i.e. the activity-pressure-habitat combinations) identified for the Philippines case study site. | | Main Data Matrices: Weighted impact chains | PH Weights | The impact chains for the Philippines case study site weighted according to five risk criteria. | | Main Data Matrices: Impact chains | MY Links | The 'impact chains' (i.e. the activity-pressure-habitat combinations) identified for the Malaysia case study site. | | Main Data Matrices: Weighted impact chains | MY Weights | The impact chains for the Malaysia case study site weighted according to five risk criteria. | | Main Data Matrices: Impact chains | VN Links | The 'impact chains' (i.e. the activity-pressure-habitat combinations) identified for the Vietnam case study site. | | Main Data Matrices: Weighted impact chains | VN Weights | The impact chains for the Vietnam case study site weighted according to five risk criteria. | ## Code/software Microsoft Excel