scholarly journals Identifying gaps in protected areas to expand integrated riverine ecosystem conservation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Major ◽  
Denielle Perry ◽  
Clare Aslan ◽  
Ryan McManamay
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Riverine Ecosystem ◽  
Ecosystem Conservation

Ecological Areas and Challenges of Urbanization

2022 ◽  
pp. 219-236
Author(s):  
Garima Toor ◽  
Tarush Chandra
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Protected Areas ◽  
Environmental Quality ◽  
Economic Change ◽  
Urban Transformation ◽  
Environmental Restoration ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Ecosystem Conservation ◽  
Peripheral Areas

Ecological areas are the network of protected areas that contribute to the ecosystem's productivity and services. With increased human demands, towns and cities are blooming with changes in landuse patterns around their peripheral areas or in the immediate vicinity. Land intensification and disproportionate urbanization have inflicted various challenges such as qualitative and quantitative depletion of natural resources, ecosystem services, and degradation of environmental quality in and around ecological areas. The chapter will focus on the circumstantial elucidation of ecological areas, their recorded challenges caused by urbanization, and the need for their conservation in previous research studies. The authors explore reported challenges encompassing ecological areas by urbanization. This will help understand the various aspects of urban transformation, like physical, social, cultural, and economic change in and around the ecological areas, and develop measures and strategies for ecosystem conservation and environmental restoration in ecological areas.

scholarly journals Marine Protected Areas as a tool for fishery management and ecosystem conservation: an Introduction

2008 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Hoffmann ◽  
Angel Pérez-Ruzafa
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Marine Protected Areas ◽  
Fishery Management ◽  
Marine Science ◽  
Ecosystem Conservation

Abstract Hoffmann, E. and Pérez-Ruzafa, A. 2008. Marine Protected Areas as a tool for fishery management and ecosystem conservation: an Introduction. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 66: 1–5.

scholarly journals Global assessment of ‘border protected areas’: ecosystem conservation along international borders

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre Ibisch ◽  
Elisabeth Dresen ◽  
Monika T. Hoffmann
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Global Assessment ◽  
Ecosystem Conservation ◽  
International Borders

Crossing Divides: Conducting Mixed Methods Research in Protected Areas

2018 ◽  
Vol 79 (3) ◽  
pp. 291
Author(s):  
BIJAYASHREE SATPATHY
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Protected Areas ◽  
Mixed Methods Research

ESTIMATION OF ABOVE GROUND BIOMASS OF THE THREE SITES (GRAZED SITE, PROTECTED SITE AND SEED SOWN SITE) FOR COMPARING THEIR PRODUCTIVITY IN KASHMIR VALLEY

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
AFSHAN ANJUM BABA ◽  
SYED NASEEM UL-ZAFAR GEELANI ◽  
ISHRAT SALEEM ◽  
MOHIT HUSAIN ◽  
PERVEZ AHMAD KHAN ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Aboveground Biomass ◽  
Plant Biomass ◽  
Summer Season ◽  
Above Ground Biomass ◽  
Spring Season ◽  
Kashmir Valley ◽  
Ground Biomass ◽  
Maximum Value ◽  
Protected Site

The plant biomass for protected areas was maximum in summer (1221.56 g/m2) and minimum in winter (290.62 g/m2) as against grazed areas having maximum value 590.81 g/m2 in autumn and minimum 183.75 g/m2 in winter. Study revealed that at Protected site (Kanidajan) the above ground biomass ranged was from a minimum (1.11 t ha-1) in the spring season to a maximum (4.58 t ha-1) in the summer season while at Grazed site (Yousmarag), the aboveground biomass varied from a minimum (0.54 t ha-1) in the spring season to a maximum of 1.48 t ha-1 in summer seasonandat Seed sown site (Badipora), the lowest value of aboveground biomass obtained was 4.46 t ha-1 in spring while as the highest (7.98 t ha-1) was obtained in summer.

Characterising essential breeding habitat for whales informs the development of large-scale Marine Protected Areas in the South Pacific

2016 ◽  
Vol 548 ◽  
pp. 263-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
RE Lindsay ◽  
R Constantine ◽  
J Robbins ◽  
DK Mattila ◽  
A Tagarino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Marine Protected Areas ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
South Pacific ◽  
Breeding Habitat ◽  
The South

Modeling cetacean habitat use in an urban coastal area in southeastern Brazil

2020 ◽  
Vol 642 ◽  
pp. 227-240
Author(s):  
L Lodi ◽  
R Tardin ◽  
G Maricato
Keyword(s):  
Habitat Use ◽  
Protected Areas ◽  
Linear Models ◽  
Anthropogenic Activities ◽  
Buffer Zone ◽  
Humpback Whales ◽  
Southeastern Brazil ◽  
Major Influence ◽  
Cetacean Species ◽  
Few Data

Most studies of cetacean habitat use do not consider the influence of anthropogenic activities. We investigated the influence of environmental and anthropogenic variables on habitat use by humpback Megaptera novaeangliae and Bryde’s whales Balaenoptera brydei off the coast of the Brazilian city of Rio de Janeiro. Although there are 2 marine protected areas (MPAs) in this area, few data are available on cetacean habitat use or on the overlap of different cetacean species within these MPAs. Our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of the MPAs and propose a buffer zone to better protect the biodiversity of the study area. We conducted systematic surveys and developed spatial eigenvector generalized linear models to characterize habitat use by the species in the study area. Habitat use by humpback whales was influenced only by depth, whereas for Bryde’s whales there was the additional influence of anthropogenic variables. For Bryde’s whales, which use the area for feeding, sea surface temperature and the distance to anchorages had a major influence on habitat use. We also showed that neither of the MPAs in the study area adequately protects the hotspots of either whale species. Most of the humpback whale grid cells with high sighting predictions were located within 2 km of the MPAs, while areas of high sighting prediction of Bryde’s whales were located up to 5 km from the MPAs, closer to beaches. Our findings provide important insights for the delimitation of protected areas and zoning of the MPAs.

Assessing Beneficiary Benefits for the Introduction of Payments for Ecosystem Services in Wetland Protected Areas

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 19-39
Author(s):  
Miju Kim ◽  
Chi-Ok Oh ◽  
Namhee Kim ◽  
Wooyeong Joo
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Protected Areas ◽  
Payments For Ecosystem Services
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document