Integrating priority areas and ecological corridors into national network for conservation planning in China

2018 ◽  
Vol 626 ◽  
pp. 22-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jie Liang ◽  
Xinyue He ◽  
Guangming Zeng ◽  
Minzhou Zhong ◽  
Xiang Gao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Conservation Planning ◽  
National Network ◽  
Ecological Corridors ◽  
Priority Areas

scholarly journals Navigating the complexities of coordinated conservation along the river Nile

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. eaau7668 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. R. Allan ◽  
N. Levin ◽  
K. R. Jones ◽  
S. Abdullah ◽  
J. Hongoh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Conservation Planning ◽  
River Nile ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Conservation Action ◽  
Priority Areas ◽  
Conservation Costs ◽  
Spatial Conservation Planning ◽  
Conservation Plan ◽  
Collaborative Conservation ◽  
Business As Usual

The river Nile flows across 11 African countries, supporting millions of human livelihoods, and holding globally important biodiversity and endemism yet remains underprotected. No basin-wide spatial conservation planning has been attempted to date, and the importance of coordinated conservation planning for the Nile’s biodiversity remains unknown. We address these gaps by creating a basin-wide conservation plan for the Nile’s freshwater fish. We identify priority areas for conservation action and compare cross-boundary collaboration scenarios for achieving biodiversity conservation targets, accounting for river connectivity. We found that collaborative conservation efforts are crucial for reducing conservation costs, saving 34% of costs compared to an uncoordinated, business-as-usual scenario. While most Nile basin countries benefit from coordinating conservation planning, costs and benefits are unequally distributed. We identify “hot spots” consistently selected as conservation priority areas across all collaboration scenarios, and provide a framework for improving return on conservation investment for large and complex river systems globally.

scholarly journals Balancing conservation priorities for nature and for people in Europe

Science ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 372 (6544) ◽  
pp. 856-860
Author(s):  
Louise M. J. O’Connor ◽  
Laura J. Pollock ◽  
Julien Renaud ◽  
Willem Verhagen ◽  
Peter H. Verburg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Conservation Planning ◽  
Conservation Priorities ◽  
Terrestrial Vertebrates ◽  
Spatial Overlap ◽  
Priority Areas

There is an urgent need to protect key areas for biodiversity and nature’s contributions to people (NCP). However, different values of nature are rarely considered together in conservation planning. Here, we explore potential priority areas in Europe for biodiversity (all terrestrial vertebrates) and a set of cultural and regulating NCP while considering demand for these NCP. We quantify the spatial overlap between these priorities and their performance in representing different values of nature. We show that different priorities rarely coincide, except in certain irreplaceable ecosystems. Notably, priorities for biodiversity better represent NCP than the reverse. Theoretically, protecting an extra 5% of land has the potential to double conservation gains for biodiversity while also maintaining some essential NCP, leading to co-benefits for both nature and people.

scholarly journals Systematic Conservation Planning for Intraspecific Genetic Diversity

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Paz-Vinas ◽  
Géraldine Loot ◽  
Virgilio Hermoso ◽  
Charlotte Veyssiere ◽  
Nicolas Poulet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Diversity ◽  
Conservation Planning ◽  
Allelic Richness ◽  
Single Species ◽  
Diversity Indices ◽  
Intraspecific Diversity ◽  
Systematic Conservation Planning ◽  
Conservation Areas ◽  
Conservation Units ◽  
Priority Areas

AbstractIntraspecific diversity informs the demographic and evolutionary histories of populations, and should be a main conservation target. Although approaches exist for identifying relevant biological conservation units, attempts to identify priority conservation areas for intraspecific diversity are scarce, especially within a multi-specific framework. We used neutral molecular data on six European freshwater fish species (Squalius cephalus, Phoxinus phoxinus, Barbatula barbatula, Gobio occitaniae, Leuciscus burdigalensis and Parachondrostoma toxostoma) sampled at the riverscape scale (i.e. the Garonne-Dordogne River basin, France) to determine hot- and cold-spots of genetic diversity, and to identify priority conservation areas using a systematic conservation planning approach. We demonstrate that systematic conservation planning is efficient for identifying priority areas representing a predefined part of the total genetic diversity of a whole landscape. With the exception of private allelic richness, classical genetic diversity indices (allelic richness, genetic uniqueness) were poor predictors for identifying priority areas. Moreover, we identified weak surrogacies among conservation solutions found for each species, implying that conservation solutions are highly species-specific. Nonetheless, we showed that priority areas identified using intraspecific genetic data from multiple species provide more effective conservation solutions than areas identified for single species or on the basis of traditional taxonomic criteria.

scholarly journals Systematic conservation planning for intraspecific genetic diversity

2018 ◽  
Vol 285 (1877) ◽  
pp. 20172746 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Paz-Vinas ◽  
Géraldine Loot ◽  
Virgilio Hermoso ◽  
Charlotte Veyssière ◽  
Nicolas Poulet ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Diversity ◽  
Conservation Planning ◽  
Allelic Richness ◽  
Single Species ◽  
Diversity Indices ◽  
Intraspecific Diversity ◽  
Systematic Conservation Planning ◽  
Conservation Areas ◽  
Conservation Units ◽  
Priority Areas

Intraspecific diversity informs the demographic and evolutionary histories of populations, and should be a main conservation target. Although approaches exist for identifying relevant biological conservation units, attempts to identify priority conservation areas for intraspecific diversity are scarce, especially within a multi-specific framework. We used neutral molecular data on six European freshwater fish species (Squalius cephalus,Phoxinus phoxinus, Barbatula barbatula,Gobio occitaniae,Leuciscus burdigalensisandParachondrostoma toxostoma) sampled at the riverscape scale (i.e. the Garonne-Dordogne river basin, France) to determine hot- and coldspots of genetic diversity, and to identify priority conservation areas using a systematic conservation planning approach. We demonstrate that systematic conservation planning is efficient for identifying priority areas representing a predefined part of the total genetic diversity of a whole landscape. With the exception of private allelic richness (PA), classical genetic diversity indices (allelic richness, genetic uniqueness) were poor predictors for identifying priority areas. Moreover, we identified weak surrogacies among conservation solutions found for each species, implying that conservation solutions are highly species-specific. Nonetheless, we showed that priority areas identified using intraspecific genetic data from multiple species provide more effective conservation solutions than areas identified for single species or on the basis of traditional taxonomic criteria.

scholarly journals Global priorities for conservation across multiple dimensions of mammalian diversity

2017 ◽  
Vol 114 (29) ◽  
pp. 7641-7646 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fernanda T. Brum ◽  
Catherine H. Graham ◽  
Gabriel C. Costa ◽  
S. Blair Hedges ◽  
Caterina Penone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Conservation Planning ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Integrative Approach ◽  
Conservation Priorities ◽  
Area Network ◽  
Priority Areas ◽  
Multiple Dimensions ◽  
Mammal Conservation ◽  
Taxonomic Groups

Conservation priorities that are based on species distribution, endemism, and vulnerability may underrepresent biologically unique species as well as their functional roles and evolutionary histories. To ensure that priorities are biologically comprehensive, multiple dimensions of diversity must be considered. Further, understanding how the different dimensions relate to one another spatially is important for conservation prioritization, but the relationship remains poorly understood. Here, we use spatial conservation planning to (i) identify and compare priority regions for global mammal conservation across three key dimensions of biodiversity—taxonomic, phylogenetic, and traits—and (ii) determine the overlap of these regions with the locations of threatened species and existing protected areas. We show that priority areas for mammal conservation exhibit low overlap across the three dimensions, highlighting the need for an integrative approach for biodiversity conservation. Additionally, currently protected areas poorly represent the three dimensions of mammalian biodiversity. We identify areas of high conservation priority among and across the dimensions that should receive special attention for expanding the global protected area network. These high-priority areas, combined with areas of high priority for other taxonomic groups and with social, economic, and political considerations, provide a biological foundation for future conservation planning efforts.

scholarly journals Systematic conservation planning in the eastern English Channel: comparing the Marxan and Zonation decision-support tools

2011 ◽  
Vol 69 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliette Delavenne ◽  
Kristian Metcalfe ◽  
Robert J. Smith ◽  
Sandrine Vaz ◽  
Corinne S. Martin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Conservation Planning ◽  
Planning Process ◽  
Marine Protected Area ◽  
Wide Distribution ◽  
Systematic Conservation Planning ◽  
Decision Support Tools ◽  
English Channel ◽  
Priority Areas ◽  
Support Tools

Abstract Delavenne, J., Metcalfe, K., Smith, R. J., Vaz, S., Martin, C. S., Dupuis, L., Coppin, F., and Carpentier, A. 2012. Systematic conservation planning in the eastern English Channel: comparing the Marxan and Zonation decision-support tools. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 69: 75–83. The systematic conservation approach is now commonly used for the design of efficient marine protected area (MPA) networks, and identifying these priority areas often involves using specific conservation-planning software. Several such software programmes have been developed in recent years, each differing in the underlying algorithms used. Here, an investigation is made into whether the choice of software influences the location of priority areas by comparing outputs from Marxan and Zonation, two widely used conservation-planning, decision-support tools. Using biological and socio-economic data from the eastern English Channel, outputs are compared and it is shown that the two software packages identified similar sets of priority areas, although the relatively wide distribution of habitat types and species considered offered much flexibility. Moreover, the similarity increased with increasing spatial constraint, especially when using real-world cost data, suggesting that the choice of cost metric has a greater influence on conservation-planning analyses than the choice of software. However, Marxan generally produced more efficient results and Zonation produced results with greater connectivity, so the most appropriate software package will depend on the overall goals of the MPA planning process.

scholarly journals Half of the world’s tree biodiversity is unprotected and is increasingly threatened by human activities

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wen-Yong Guo ◽  
Josep M. Serra-Diaz ◽  
Franziska Schrodt ◽  
Wolf L. Eiserhardt ◽  
Brian S. Maitner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Functional Traits ◽  
Conservation Planning ◽  
Ecosystem Functioning ◽  
Human Impacts ◽  
Conservation Priority ◽  
Priority Areas ◽  
Conservation Actions ◽  
Different Dimensions ◽  
Global Biodiversity

AbstractAlthough trees are key to ecosystem functioning, many forests and tree species across the globe face strong threats. Preserving areas of high biodiversity is a core priority for conservation; however, different dimensions of biodiversity and varied conservation targets make it difficult to respond effectively to this challenge. Here, we (i) identify priority areas for global tree conservation using comprehensive coverage of tree diversity based on taxonomy, phylogeny, and functional traits; and (ii) compare these findings to existing protected areas and global biodiversity conservation frameworks. We find that ca. 51% of the top-priority areas for tree biodiversity are located in current protected areas. The remaining half top-priority areas are subject to moderate to high human pressures, indicating conservation actions are needed to mitigate these human impacts. Our findings emphasize the effectiveness of using tree conservation priority areas for future global conservation planning.

scholarly journals Determining priority areas for an Endangered cold-adapted snake on warming mountaintops

Oryx ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Edvárd Mizsei ◽  
Márton Szabolcs ◽  
Loránd Szabó ◽  
Zoltán Boros ◽  
Kujtim Mersini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Conservation Planning ◽  
Keystone Species ◽  
Single Species ◽  
Range Shift ◽  
Conservation Value ◽  
Systematic Conservation Planning ◽  
Remotely Sensed Data ◽  
Cold Adapted ◽  
Priority Areas ◽  
Spatial Prioritization

Abstract Spatial prioritization in systematic conservation planning has traditionally been developed for several to many species and/or habitats, and single-species applications are rare. We developed a novel spatial prioritization model based on accurate estimates of remotely-sensed data and maps of threats potentially affecting long-term species persistence. We used this approach to identify priority areas for the conservation of the Endangered Greek meadow viper Vipera graeca, a cold-adapted species inhabiting mountaintops in the Pindos Mountains of Greece and Albania. We transformed the mapped threats into nine variables to estimate conservation value: habitat suitability (climate suitability, habitat size, occupancy, vegetation suitability), climate change (future persistence, potential for altitudinal range shift) and land-use impact (habitat alteration, degradation, disturbance). We applied the Zonation systematic conservation planning tool with these conservation value variables as biodiversity features to rank the areas currently occupied by the species and to identify priority areas where the chances for population persistence are highest. We found that 90% of current habitats will become unsuitable by the 2080s and that conservation actions need to be implemented to avoid extinction as this is already a threatened species with a narrow ecological niche. If threats are appropriately quantified and translated into variables of conservation value, spatial conservation planning tools can successfully identify priority areas for the conservation of single species. Our study demonstrates that spatial prioritization for single umbrella, flagship or keystone species is a promising approach for the conservation of species for which few data are available.

scholarly journals Community Priority setting for Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder Research in Australia

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Finlay-Jones ◽  
Elizabeth J Elliott ◽  
Diane Mayers ◽  
Helen Gailes ◽  
Paula Sargent ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Service Providers ◽  
Neurodevelopmental Disorder ◽  
Research Priorities ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Spectrum Disorder ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Diverse Range ◽  
National Network ◽  
Priority Areas ◽  
Survey Responses

IntroductionFetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder caused by prenatal alcoholexposure (PAE). FASD research is a rapidly growing field that crosses multiple disciplines. To ensureresearch is relevant and meaningful for people living with FASD, their families, and the broader publicthere is a need to engage community members in setting priorities for research. ObjectivesOur primary objective was to formally identify the views of people living with FASD, their par-ents/caregivers, service providers, and the general community on the research priorities for FASDand alcohol use in pregnancy in Australia. Our secondary objective was to provide an overview ofcurrent research in the highest priority areas identified. MethodsThe approach for this study involved two community surveys and a consensus workshop, followed bya rapid literature review. Survey responses (n = 146) were collected and grouped using qualitativethematic analysis. The themes identified were then ranked in a second survey (n = 45). The 22highest ranked themes were considered in a workshop with 21 community members, and consensuson the top ten priority areas was sought. The priority areas were grouped into conceptually similartopics and rapid literature reviews were undertaken on each. ResultsA diverse range of priorities was identified within key areas of prevention, diagnosis, and therapy. Onrequest from participants, separate priority lists were developed by Aboriginal and non-Aboriginalparticipants. ConclusionsThere is need for a national network of researchers to take forward the research commenced by theCentre of Research Excellence, FASD Research Australia, in addressing community priorities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document