26
|
Cheok J, Pressey RL, Weeks R, VanDerWal J, Storlie C. The plans they are a‐changin’: More frequent iterative adjustment of regional priorities in the transition to local actions can benefit implementation. DIVERS DISTRIB 2017. [DOI: 10.1111/ddi.12660] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
|
27
|
Magris RA, Pressey RL, Mills M, Vila-Nova DA, Floeter S. Integrated conservation planning for coral reefs: Designing conservation zones for multiple conservation objectives in spatial prioritisation. Glob Ecol Conserv 2017. [DOI: 10.1016/j.gecco.2017.05.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
|
28
|
Schwartz MW, Cook CN, Pressey RL, Pullin AS, Runge MC, Salafsky N, Sutherland WJ, Williamson MA. Decision Support Frameworks and Tools for Conservation. Conserv Lett 2017. [DOI: 10.1111/conl.12385] [Citation(s) in RCA: 100] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/02/2023] Open
|
29
|
Lohr CA, Hone J, Bode M, Dickman CR, Wenger A, Pressey RL. Modeling dynamics of native and invasive species to guide prioritization of management actions. Ecosphere 2017. [DOI: 10.1002/ecs2.1822] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
|
30
|
Hamel MA, Pressey RL, Evans LS, Andréfouët S. The Importance of Fishing Grounds as Perceived by Local Communities Can be Undervalued by Measures of Socioeconomic Cost Used in Conservation Planning. Conserv Lett 2017. [DOI: 10.1111/conl.12352] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
|
31
|
Fuentes MMPB, Gredzens C, Bateman BL, Boettcher R, Ceriani SA, Godfrey MH, Helmers D, Ingram DK, Kamrowski RL, Pate M, Pressey RL, Radeloff VC. Conservation hotspots for marine turtle nesting in the United States based on coastal development. ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS : A PUBLICATION OF THE ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA 2016; 26:2706-2717. [PMID: 27907265 DOI: 10.1002/eap.1386] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/14/2016] [Revised: 05/09/2016] [Accepted: 05/13/2016] [Indexed: 06/06/2023]
Abstract
Coastal areas provide nesting habitat for marine turtles that is critical for the persistence of their populations. However, many coastal areas are highly affected by coastal development, which affects the reproductive success of marine turtles. Knowing the extent to which nesting areas are exposed to these threats is essential to guide management initiatives. This information is particularly important for coastal areas with both high nesting density and dense human development, a combination that is common in the United States. We assessed the extent to which nesting areas of the loggerhead (Caretta caretta), the green (Chelonia mydas), the Kemp's ridley (Lepidochelys kempii), and leatherback turtles (Dermochelys coriacea) in the continental United States are exposed to coastal development and identified conservation hotspots that currently have high reproductive importance and either face high exposure to coastal development (needing intervention), or have low exposure to coastal development, and are good candidates for continued and future protection. Night-time light, housing, and population density were used as proxies for coastal development and human disturbance. About 81.6% of nesting areas were exposed to housing and human population, and 97.8% were exposed to light pollution. Further, most (>65%) of the very high- and high-density nesting areas for each species/subpopulation, except for the Kemp's ridley, were exposed to coastal development. Forty-nine nesting sites were selected as conservation hotspots; of those high-density nesting sites, 49% were sites with no/low exposure to coastal development and the other 51% were exposed to high-density coastal development. Conservation strategies need to account for ~66.8% of all marine turtle nesting areas being on private land and for nesting sites being exposed to large numbers of seasonal residents.
Collapse
|
32
|
Dale AP, Vella K, Pressey RL, Brodie J, Gooch M, Potts R, Eberhard R. Risk analysis of the governance system affecting outcomes in the Great Barrier Reef. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 2016; 183:712-721. [PMID: 27641654 DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.09.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2016] [Revised: 08/29/2016] [Accepted: 09/03/2016] [Indexed: 06/06/2023]
Abstract
The state and trend of the Great Barrier Reef's (GBR's) ecological health remains problematic, influencing United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) statements regarding GBR governance. While UNESCO's concerns triggered separate strategic assessments by the Australian and Queensland governments, there has been no independent and integrated review of the key risks within the overall system of governance influencing GBR outcomes. As a case study of international significance, this paper applies Governance Systems Analysis (GSA), a novel analytical framework that identifies the governance themes, domains and subdomains most likely to influence environmental and socio-economic outcomes in complex natural systems. This GBR-focussed application of GSA identifies governance subdomains that present high, medium, or low risk of failure to produce positive outcomes for the Reef. This enabled us to determine that three "whole of system" governance problems could undermine GBR outcomes. First, we stress the integrative importance of the Long Term Sustainability Plan (LTSP) Subdomain. Sponsored by the Australian and Queensland governments, this subdomain concerns the primary institutional arrangements for coordinated GBR planning and delivery, but due to its recent emergence, it faces several internal governance challenges. Second, we find a major risk of implementation failure in the achievement of GBR water quality actions due to a lack of system-wide focus on building strong and stable delivery systems at catchment scale. Finally, we conclude that the LTSP Subdomain currently has too limited a mandate/capacity to influence several high-risk subdomains that have not been, but must be more strongly aligned with Reef management (e.g. the Greenhouse Gas Emission Management Subdomain). Our analysis enables exploration of governance system reforms needed to address environmental trends in the GBR and reflects on the potential application of GSA in other complex land and sea-scapes across the globe.
Collapse
|
33
|
Cheok J, Pressey RL, Weeks R, Andréfouët S, Moloney J. Sympathy for the Devil: Detailing the Effects of Planning-Unit Size, Thematic Resolution of Reef Classes, and Socioeconomic Costs on Spatial Priorities for Marine Conservation. PLoS One 2016; 11:e0164869. [PMID: 27829042 PMCID: PMC5102401 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0164869] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2016] [Accepted: 10/03/2016] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Spatial data characteristics have the potential to influence various aspects of prioritising biodiversity areas for systematic conservation planning. There has been some exploration of the combined effects of size of planning units and level of classification of physical environments on the pattern and extent of priority areas. However, these data characteristics have yet to be explicitly investigated in terms of their interaction with different socioeconomic cost data during the spatial prioritisation process. We quantify the individual and interacting effects of three factors—planning-unit size, thematic resolution of reef classes, and spatial variability of socioeconomic costs—on spatial priorities for marine conservation, in typical marine planning exercises that use reef classification maps as a proxy for biodiversity. We assess these factors by creating 20 unique prioritisation scenarios involving combinations of different levels of each factor. Because output data from these scenarios are analogous to ecological data, we applied ecological statistics to determine spatial similarities between reserve designs. All three factors influenced prioritisations to different extents, with cost variability having the largest influence, followed by planning-unit size and thematic resolution of reef classes. The effect of thematic resolution on spatial design depended on the variability of cost data used. In terms of incidental representation of conservation objectives derived from finer-resolution data, scenarios prioritised with uniform cost outperformed those prioritised with variable cost. Following our analyses, we make recommendations to help maximise the spatial and cost efficiency and potential effectiveness of future marine conservation plans in similar planning scenarios. We recommend that planners: employ the smallest planning-unit size practical; invest in data at the highest possible resolution; and, when planning across regional extents with the intention of incidentally representing fine-resolution features, prioritise the whole region with uniform costs rather than using coarse-resolution data on variable costs.
Collapse
|
34
|
Pressey RL, Visconti P, Ferraro PJ. Making parks make a difference: poor alignment of policy, planning and management with protected-area impact, and ways forward. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2016; 370:rstb.2014.0280. [PMID: 26460132 PMCID: PMC4614736 DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2014.0280] [Citation(s) in RCA: 69] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
Policy and practice around protected areas are poorly aligned with the basic purpose of protection, which is to make a difference. The difference made by protected areas is their impact, defined in program evaluation as the outcomes arising from protection relative to the counterfactual of no protection or a different form of protection. Although impact evaluation of programs is well established in fields such as medicine, education and development aid, it is rare in nature conservation. We show that the present weak alignment with impact of policy targets and operational objectives for protected areas involves a great risk: targets and objectives can be achieved while making little difference to the conservation of biodiversity. We also review potential ways of increasing the difference made by protected areas, finding a poor evidence base for the use of planning and management ‘levers’ to better achieve impact. We propose a dual strategy for making protected areas more effective in their basic role of saving nature, outlining ways of developing targets and objectives focused on impact while also improving the evidence for effective planning and management.
Collapse
|
35
|
Gurney GG, Pressey RL, Cinner JE, Pollnac R, Campbell SJ. Integrated conservation and development: evaluating a community-based marine protected area project for equality of socioeconomic impacts. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2016; 370:rstb.2014.0277. [PMID: 26460130 DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2014.0277] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Despite the prevalence of protected areas, evidence of their impacts on people is weak and remains hotly contested in conservation policy. A key question in this debate is whether socioeconomic impacts vary according to social subgroup. Given that social inequity can create conflict and impede poverty reduction, understanding how protected areas differentially affect people is critical to designing them to achieve social and biological goals. Understanding heterogeneous responses to protected areas can improve targeting of management activities and help elucidate the pathways through which impacts of protected areas occur. Here, we assessed whether the socioeconomic impacts of marine protected areas (MPAs)-designed to achieve goals for both conservation and poverty alleviation-differed according to age, gender or religion in associated villages in North Sulawesi, Indonesia. Using data from pre-, mid- and post-implementation of the MPAs for control and project villages, we found little empirical evidence that impacts on five key socioeconomic indicators related to poverty differed according to social subgroup. We found suggestive empirical evidence that the effect of the MPAs on environmental knowledge differed by age and religion; over the medium and long terms, younger people and Muslims showed greater improvements compared with older people and Christians, respectively.
Collapse
|
36
|
Ferraro PJ, Pressey RL. Measuring the difference made by conservation initiatives: protected areas and their environmental and social impacts. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2016; 370:rstb.2014.0270. [PMID: 26460123 DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2014.0270] [Citation(s) in RCA: 83] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Success in conservation depends on our ability to reduce human pressures in areas that harbour biological diversity and ecosystem services. Legally protecting some of these areas through the creation of protected areas is a key component of conservation efforts globally. To develop effective protected area networks, practitioners need credible, scientific evidence about the degree to which protected areas affect environmental and social outcomes, and how these effects vary with context. Such evidence has been lacking, but the situation is changing as conservation scientists adopt more sophisticated research designs for evaluating protected areas' past impacts and for predicting their future impacts. Complementing these scientific advances, conservation funders and practitioners are paying increasing attention to evaluating their investments with more scientifically rigorous evaluation designs. This theme issue highlights recent advances in the science of protected area evaluations and explores the challenges to developing a more credible evidence base that can help societies achieve their goals of protecting nature while enhancing human welfare.
Collapse
|
37
|
Bode M, Williamson DH, Weeks R, Jones GP, Almany GR, Harrison HB, Hopf JK, Pressey RL. Planning Marine Reserve Networks for Both Feature Representation and Demographic Persistence Using Connectivity Patterns. PLoS One 2016; 11:e0154272. [PMID: 27168206 PMCID: PMC4864080 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154272] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2015] [Accepted: 04/11/2016] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Marine reserve networks must ensure the representation of important conservation features, and also guarantee the persistence of key populations. For many species, designing reserve networks is complicated by the absence or limited availability of spatial and life-history data. This is particularly true for data on larval dispersal, which has only recently become available. However, systematic conservation planning methods currently incorporate demographic processes through unsatisfactory surrogates. There are therefore two key challenges to designing marine reserve networks that achieve feature representation and demographic persistence constraints. First, constructing a method that efficiently incorporates persistence as well as complementary feature representation. Second, incorporating persistence using a mechanistic description of population viability, rather than a proxy such as size or distance. Here we construct a novel systematic conservation planning method that addresses both challenges, and parameterise it to design a hypothetical marine reserve network for fringing coral reefs in the Keppel Islands, Great Barrier Reef, Australia. For this application, we describe how demographic persistence goals can be constructed for an important reef fish species in the region, the bar-cheeked trout (Plectropomus maculatus). We compare reserve networks that are optimally designed for either feature representation or demographic persistence, with a reserve network that achieves both goals simultaneously. As well as being practically applicable, our analyses also provide general insights into marine reserve planning for both representation and demographic persistence. First, persistence constraints for dispersive organisms are likely to be much harder to achieve than representation targets, due to their greater complexity. Second, persistence and representation constraints pull the reserve network design process in divergent directions, making it difficult to efficiently achieve both constraints. Although our method can be readily applied to the data-rich Keppel Islands case study, we finally consider the factors that limit the method's utility in information-poor contexts common in marine conservation.
Collapse
|
38
|
Hughes TP, Cameron DS, Chin A, Connolly SR, Day JC, Jones GP, McCook L, McGinnity P, Mumby PJ, Pears RJ, Pressey RL, Russ GR, Tanzer J, Tobin A, Young MAL. A critique of claims for negative impacts of Marine Protected Areas on fisheries. ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS : A PUBLICATION OF THE ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA 2016; 26:637-641. [PMID: 27209801 DOI: 10.1890/15-0457] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/05/2023]
|
39
|
Bridge TCL, Grech AM, Pressey RL. Factors influencing incidental representation of previously unknown conservation features in marine protected areas. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2016; 30:154-165. [PMID: 26040905 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12557] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/14/2015] [Accepted: 05/25/2015] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
Spatially explicit information on species distributions for conservation planning is invariably incomplete; therefore, the use of surrogates is required to represent broad-scale patterns of biodiversity. Despite significant interest in the effectiveness of surrogates for predicting spatial distributions of biodiversity, few researchers have explored questions involving the ability of surrogates to incidentally represent unknown features of conservation interest. We used the Great Barrier Reef marine reserve network to examine factors affecting incidental representation of conservation features that were unknown at the time the reserve network was established. We used spatially explicit information on the distribution of 39 seabed habitats and biological assemblages and the conservation planning software Marxan to examine how incidental representation was affected by the spatial characteristics of the features; the conservation objectives (the minimum proportion of each feature included in no-take areas); the spatial configuration of no-take areas; and the opportunity cost of conservation. Cost was closely and inversely correlated to incidental representation. However, incidental representation was achieved, even in a region with only coarse-scale environmental data, by adopting a precautionary approach that explicitly considered the potential for unknown features. Our results indicate that incidental representation is enhanced by partitioning selection units along biophysical gradients to account for unknown within-feature variability and ensuring that no-take areas are well distributed throughout the region; by setting high conservation objectives that (in this case >33%) maximize the chances of capturing unknown features incidentally; and by carefully considering the designation of cost to planning units when using decision-support tools for reserve design. The lessons learned from incidental representation in the Great Barrier Reef have implications for conservation planning in other regions, particularly those that lack detailed environmental and ecological data.
Collapse
|
40
|
Sheaves M, Coles R, Dale P, Grech A, Pressey RL, Waltham NJ. Enhancing the Value and Validity of EIA: Serious Science to Protect Australia's Great Barrier Reef. Conserv Lett 2016. [DOI: 10.1111/conl.12219] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
|
41
|
Álvarez-Romero JG, Pressey RL, Ban NC, Brodie J. Advancing Land-Sea Conservation Planning: Integrating Modelling of Catchments, Land-Use Change, and River Plumes to Prioritise Catchment Management and Protection. PLoS One 2015; 10:e0145574. [PMID: 26714166 PMCID: PMC4695094 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145574] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/22/2015] [Accepted: 12/04/2015] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Human-induced changes to river loads of nutrients and sediments pose a significant threat to marine ecosystems. Ongoing land-use change can further increase these loads, and amplify the impacts of land-based threats on vulnerable marine ecosystems. Consequently, there is a need to assess these threats and prioritise actions to mitigate their impacts. A key question regarding prioritisation is whether actions in catchments to maintain coastal-marine water quality can be spatially congruent with actions for other management objectives, such as conserving terrestrial biodiversity. In selected catchments draining into the Gulf of California, Mexico, we employed Land Change Modeller to assess the vulnerability of areas with native vegetation to conversion into crops, pasture, and urban areas. We then used SedNet, a catchment modelling tool, to map the sources and estimate pollutant loads delivered to the Gulf by these catchments. Following these analyses, we used modelled river plumes to identify marine areas likely influenced by land-based pollutants. Finally, we prioritised areas for catchment management based on objectives for conservation of terrestrial biodiversity and objectives for water quality that recognised links between pollutant sources and affected marine areas. Our objectives for coastal-marine water quality were to reduce sediment and nutrient discharges from anthropic areas, and minimise future increases in coastal sedimentation and eutrophication. Our objectives for protection of terrestrial biodiversity covered species of vertebrates. We used Marxan, a conservation planning tool, to prioritise interventions and explore spatial differences in priorities for both objectives. Notable differences in the distributions of land values for terrestrial biodiversity and coastal-marine water quality indicated the likely need for trade-offs between catchment management objectives. However, there were priority areas that contributed to both sets of objectives. Our study demonstrates a practical approach to integrating models of catchments, land-use change, and river plumes with conservation planning software to inform prioritisation of catchment management.
Collapse
|
42
|
Magris RA, Heron SF, Pressey RL. Conservation Planning for Coral Reefs Accounting for Climate Warming Disturbances. PLoS One 2015; 10:e0140828. [PMID: 26535586 PMCID: PMC4633137 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0140828] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2015] [Accepted: 09/29/2015] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Incorporating warming disturbances into the design of marine protected areas (MPAs) is fundamental to developing appropriate conservation actions that confer coral reef resilience. We propose an MPA design approach that includes spatially- and temporally-varying sea-surface temperature (SST) data, integrating both observed (1985-2009) and projected (2010-2099) time-series. We derived indices of acute (time under reduced ecosystem function following short-term events) and chronic thermal stress (rate of warming) and combined them to delineate thermal-stress regimes. Coral reefs located on the Brazilian coast were used as a case study because they are considered a conservation priority in the southwestern Atlantic Ocean. We show that all coral reef areas in Brazil have experienced and are projected to continue to experience chronic warming, while acute events are expected to increase in frequency and intensity. We formulated quantitative conservation objectives for regimes of thermal stress. Based on these objectives, we then evaluated if/how they are achieved in existing Brazilian MPAs and identified priority areas where additional protection would reinforce resilience. Our results show that, although the current system of MPAs incorporates locations within some of our thermal-stress regimes, historical and future thermal refugia along the central coast are completely unprotected. Our approach is applicable to other marine ecosystems and adds to previous marine planning for climate change in two ways: (i) by demonstrating how to spatially configure MPAs that meet conservation objectives for warming disturbance using spatially- and temporally-explicit data; and (ii) by strategically allocating different forms of spatial management (MPA types) intended to mitigate warming impacts and also enhance future resistance to climate warming.
Collapse
|
43
|
Gurney GG, Pressey RL, Ban NC, Álvarez-Romero JG, Jupiter S, Adams VM. Efficient and equitable design of marine protected areas in Fiji through inclusion of stakeholder-specific objectives in conservation planning. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2015; 29:1378-1389. [PMID: 25916976 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12514] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2014] [Accepted: 01/02/2015] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
The efficacy of protected areas varies, partly because socioeconomic factors are not sufficiently considered in planning and management. Although integrating socioeconomic factors into systematic conservation planning is increasingly advocated, research is needed to progress from recognition of these factors to incorporating them effectively in spatial prioritization of protected areas. We evaluated 2 key aspects of incorporating socioeconomic factors into spatial prioritization: treatment of socioeconomic factors as costs or objectives and treatment of stakeholders as a single group or multiple groups. Using as a case study the design of a system of no-take marine protected areas (MPAs) in Kubulau, Fiji, we assessed how these aspects affected the configuration of no-take MPAs in terms of trade-offs between biodiversity objectives, fisheries objectives, and equity in catch losses among fisher stakeholder groups. The achievement of fisheries objectives and equity tended to trade-off concavely with increasing biodiversity objectives, indicating that it is possible to achieve low to mid-range biodiversity objectives with relatively small losses to fisheries and equity. Importantly, the extent of trade-offs depended on the method used to incorporate socioeconomic data and was least severe when objectives were set for each fisher stakeholder group explicitly. We found that using different methods to incorporate socioeconomic factors that require similar data and expertise can result in plans with very different impacts on local stakeholders.
Collapse
|
44
|
Ban SS, Pressey RL, Graham NAJ. Assessing the Effectiveness of Local Management of Coral Reefs Using Expert Opinion and Spatial Bayesian Modeling. PLoS One 2015; 10:e0135465. [PMID: 26284372 PMCID: PMC4540441 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0135465] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2015] [Accepted: 07/23/2015] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Multiple stressors are an increasing concern in the management and conservation of ecosystems, and have been identified as a key gap in research. Coral reefs are one example of an ecosystem where management of local stressors may be a way of mitigating or delaying the effects of climate change. Predicting how multiple stressors interact, particularly in a spatially explicit fashion, is a difficult challenge. Here we use a combination of an expert-elicited Bayesian network (BN) and spatial environmental data to examine how hypothetical scenarios of climate change and local management would result in different outcomes for coral reefs on the Great Barrier Reef (GBR), Australia. Parameterizing our BN using the mean responses from our experts resulted in predictions of limited efficacy of local management in combating the effects of climate change. However, there was considerable variability in expert responses and uncertainty was high. Many reefs within the central GBR appear to be at risk of further decline based on the pessimistic opinions of our expert pool. Further parameterization of the model as more data and knowledge become available could improve predictive power. Our approach serves as a starting point for subsequent work that can fine-tune parameters and explore uncertainties in predictions of responses to management.
Collapse
|
45
|
Lawler JJ, Ackerly DD, Albano CM, Anderson MG, Dobrowski SZ, Gill JL, Heller NE, Pressey RL, Sanderson EW, Weiss SB. The theory behind, and the challenges of, conserving nature's stage in a time of rapid change. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2015; 29:618-629. [PMID: 25922899 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12505] [Citation(s) in RCA: 86] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2014] [Accepted: 01/21/2015] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
Most conservation planning to date has focused on protecting today's biodiversity with the assumption that it will be tomorrow's biodiversity. However, modern climate change has already resulted in distributional shifts of some species and is projected to result in many more shifts in the coming decades. As species redistribute and biotic communities reorganize, conservation plans based on current patterns of biodiversity may fail to adequately protect species in the future. One approach for addressing this issue is to focus on conserving a range of abiotic conditions in the conservation-planning process. By doing so, it may be possible to conserve an abiotically diverse "stage" upon which evolution will play out and support many actors (biodiversity). We reviewed the fundamental underpinnings of the concept of conserving the abiotic stage, starting with the early observations of von Humboldt, who mapped the concordance of abiotic conditions and vegetation, and progressing to the concept of the ecological niche. We discuss challenges posed by issues of spatial and temporal scale, the role of biotic drivers of species distributions, and latitudinal and topographic variation in relationships between climate and landform. For example, abiotic conditions are not static, but change through time-albeit at different and often relatively slow rates. In some places, biotic interactions play a substantial role in structuring patterns of biodiversity, meaning that patterns of biodiversity may be less tightly linked to the abiotic stage. Furthermore, abiotic drivers of biodiversity can change with latitude and topographic position, meaning that the abiotic stage may need to be defined differently in different places. We conclude that protecting a diversity of abiotic conditions will likely best conserve biodiversity into the future in places where abiotic drivers of species distributions are strong relative to biotic drivers, where the diversity of abiotic settings will be conserved through time, and where connectivity allows for movement among areas providing different abiotic conditions.
Collapse
|
46
|
Comer PJ, Pressey RL, Hunter ML, Schloss CA, Buttrick SC, Heller NE, Tirpak JM, Faith DP, Cross MS, Shaffer ML. Incorporating geodiversity into conservation decisions. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2015; 29:692-701. [PMID: 25923052 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12508] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2014] [Accepted: 01/21/2015] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
In a rapidly changing climate, conservation practitioners could better use geodiversity in a broad range of conservation decisions. We explored selected avenues through which this integration might improve decision making and organized them within the adaptive management cycle of assessment, planning, implementation, and monitoring. Geodiversity is seldom referenced in predominant environmental law and policy. With most natural resource agencies mandated to conserve certain categories of species, agency personnel are challenged to find ways to practically implement new directives aimed at coping with climate change while retaining their species-centered mandate. Ecoregions and ecological classifications provide clear mechanisms to consider geodiversity in plans or decisions, the inclusion of which will help foster the resilience of conservation to climate change. Methods for biodiversity assessment, such as gap analysis, climate change vulnerability analysis, and ecological process modeling, can readily accommodate inclusion of a geophysical component. We adapted others' approaches for characterizing landscapes along a continuum of climate change vulnerability for the biota they support from resistant, to resilient, to susceptible, and to sensitive and then summarized options for integrating geodiversity into planning in each landscape type. In landscapes that are relatively resistant to climate change, options exist to fully represent geodiversity while ensuring that dynamic ecological processes can change over time. In more susceptible landscapes, strategies aiming to maintain or restore ecosystem resilience and connectivity are paramount. Implementing actions on the ground requires understanding of geophysical constraints on species and an increasingly nimble approach to establishing management and restoration goals. Because decisions that are implemented today will be revisited and amended into the future, increasingly sophisticated forms of monitoring and adaptation will be required to ensure that conservation efforts fully consider the value of geodiversity for supporting biodiversity in the face of a changing climate.
Collapse
|
47
|
Beier P, Sutcliffe P, Hjort J, Faith DP, Pressey RL, Albuquerque F. A review of selection-based tests of abiotic surrogates for species representation. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2015; 29:668-679. [PMID: 25923191 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12509] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2014] [Accepted: 01/21/2015] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
Because conservation planners typically lack data on where species occur, environmental surrogates--including geophysical settings and climate types--have been used to prioritize sites within a planning area. We reviewed 622 evaluations of the effectiveness of abiotic surrogates in representing species in 19 study areas. Sites selected using abiotic surrogates represented more species than an equal number of randomly selected sites in 43% of tests (55% for plants) and on average improved on random selection of sites by about 8% (21% for plants). Environmental diversity (ED) (42% median improvement on random selection) and biotically informed clusters showed promising results and merit additional testing. We suggest 4 ways to improve performance of abiotic surrogates. First, analysts should consider a broad spectrum of candidate variables to define surrogates, including rarely used variables related to geographic separation, distance from coast, hydrology, and within-site abiotic diversity. Second, abiotic surrogates should be defined at fine thematic resolution. Third, sites (the landscape units prioritized within a planning area) should be small enough to ensure that surrogates reflect species' environments and to produce prioritizations that match the spatial resolution of conservation decisions. Fourth, if species inventories are available for some planning units, planners should define surrogates based on the abiotic variables that most influence species turnover in the planning area. Although species inventories increase the cost of using abiotic surrogates, a modest number of inventories could provide the data needed to select variables and evaluate surrogates. Additional tests of nonclimate abiotic surrogates are needed to evaluate the utility of conserving nature's stage as a strategy for conservation planning in the face of climate change.
Collapse
|
48
|
Visconti P, Bakkenes M, Baisero D, Brooks T, Butchart SHM, Joppa L, Alkemade R, Di Marco M, Santini L, Hoffmann M, Maiorano L, Pressey RL, Arponen A, Boitani L, Reside AE, van Vuuren DP, Rondinini C. Projecting Global Biodiversity Indicators under Future Development Scenarios. Conserv Lett 2015. [DOI: 10.1111/conl.12159] [Citation(s) in RCA: 137] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
|
49
|
Fuentes MMPB, Blackwood J, Jones B, Kim M, Leis B, Limpus CJ, Marsh H, Mitchell J, Pouzols FM, Pressey RL, Visconti P. A decision framework for prioritizing multiple management actions for threatened marine megafauna. ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS : A PUBLICATION OF THE ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA 2015; 25:200-214. [PMID: 26255368 DOI: 10.1890/13-1524.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
Resources for conserving biodiversity are invariably insufficient. This situation creates the need for transparent, systematic frameworks to help stakeholders prioritize the allocation of resources across multiple management actions. We developed a novel framework that explicitly prioritizes actions to minimize the impacts of several threats across a species' range. The framework uses a budget constraint and maximizes conservation outcomes from a set of management actions, accounting for the likelihood of the action being successfully applied and accepted by local and Indigenous communities. This approach is novel in that it integrates local knowledge and expert opinion with optimization software, thereby minimizing assumptions about likelihood of success of actions and their effectiveness. To test the framework, we used the eastern Gulf of Carpentaria and Torres Strait population of the flatback turtle, Natator depressus, as a case study. This approach allowed the framework to be applied in a data-poor context, a situation common in conservation planning. The framework identified the best set of actions to maximize the conservation of flatback eggs for scenarios with different budgets and management parameters and allowed comparisons between optimized and preselected scenarios. Optimized scenarios considered all implementable actions to explore how to best allocate resources with a specified budget and focus. Preselected scenarios were used to evaluate current allocations of funds and/or potential budget allocations suggested by different stakeholders. Scenarios that used a combination of aerial and ground strategies to reduce predation of eggs performed better than scenarios that focused only on reducing harvest of eggs. The performances of optimized and preselected scenarios were generally similar among scenarios that targeted similar threats. However, the cost-effectiveness of optimized scenarios was usually higher than that of preselected scenarios, demonstrating the value of conducting a systematic optimization approach. Our method provides a foundation for more effective conservation investments and guidance to prioritize actions within recovery plans while considering the sociopolitical and cultural context of decisions. The framework can be adapted easily to a wide range of species, geographical scales, and life stages.
Collapse
|
50
|
Anthony KRN, Marshall PA, Abdulla A, Beeden R, Bergh C, Black R, Eakin CM, Game ET, Gooch M, Graham NAJ, Green A, Heron SF, van Hooidonk R, Knowland C, Mangubhai S, Marshall N, Maynard JA, McGinnity P, McLeod E, Mumby PJ, Nyström M, Obura D, Oliver J, Possingham HP, Pressey RL, Rowlands GP, Tamelander J, Wachenfeld D, Wear S. Operationalizing resilience for adaptive coral reef management under global environmental change. GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY 2015; 21:48-61. [PMID: 25196132 PMCID: PMC4310291 DOI: 10.1111/gcb.12700] [Citation(s) in RCA: 95] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2014] [Revised: 07/23/2014] [Accepted: 07/23/2014] [Indexed: 05/18/2023]
Abstract
Cumulative pressures from global climate and ocean change combined with multiple regional and local-scale stressors pose fundamental challenges to coral reef managers worldwide. Understanding how cumulative stressors affect coral reef vulnerability is critical for successful reef conservation now and in the future. In this review, we present the case that strategically managing for increased ecological resilience (capacity for stress resistance and recovery) can reduce coral reef vulnerability (risk of net decline) up to a point. Specifically, we propose an operational framework for identifying effective management levers to enhance resilience and support management decisions that reduce reef vulnerability. Building on a system understanding of biological and ecological processes that drive resilience of coral reefs in different environmental and socio-economic settings, we present an Adaptive Resilience-Based management (ARBM) framework and suggest a set of guidelines for how and where resilience can be enhanced via management interventions. We argue that press-type stressors (pollution, sedimentation, overfishing, ocean warming and acidification) are key threats to coral reef resilience by affecting processes underpinning resistance and recovery, while pulse-type (acute) stressors (e.g. storms, bleaching events, crown-of-thorns starfish outbreaks) increase the demand for resilience. We apply the framework to a set of example problems for Caribbean and Indo-Pacific reefs. A combined strategy of active risk reduction and resilience support is needed, informed by key management objectives, knowledge of reef ecosystem processes and consideration of environmental and social drivers. As climate change and ocean acidification erode the resilience and increase the vulnerability of coral reefs globally, successful adaptive management of coral reefs will become increasingly difficult. Given limited resources, on-the-ground solutions are likely to focus increasingly on actions that support resilience at finer spatial scales, and that are tightly linked to ecosystem goods and services.
Collapse
|