4.7 Article

Integrating biodiversity, ecosystem services and socio-economic data to identify priority areas and landowners for conservation actions at the national scale

Journal

BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION
Volume 206, Issue -, Pages 56-64

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.11.037

Keywords

Aichi target 11; Spatial conservation prioritization; Temperate grassland; Zonation software; Ecosystem services; Sustainable development goals

Funding

  1. Academy of Finland [250444]
  2. ERC-StG [260393]
  3. Academy of Finland Centre of Excellence Programme [250444]
  4. European Research Council (ERC) [260393] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Gaps in research exist for country-wide analyses to identify areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services to help reach Aichi Target 11 in developing countries. Here we provide a spatial conservation prioritization approach that ranks landowners for maximizing the representation of biodiversity features and ecosystem services, while exploring the trade-offs with agricultural and commercial forestry production and land cost, using Uruguay as a case study. Specifically, we explored four policy scenarios, ranging from a business as usual scenario where only biodiversity and ecosystem services were included in the analysis to a potentially unsustainable scenario where expansion of alternative land uses and economic development would be given higher priority over biodiversity and ecosystem services. At the 17% land target proposed for conservation, the representation levels for biodiversity and ecosystem services were, on average, higher under the business as usual scenario. However, a small addition to the proposed target (from 17 to 20%) allowed to meet same representation levels for biodiversity and ecosystem services, while decreasing conflict with agricultural and commercial forestry production and opportunity costs to local landowners. Under the unsustainable scenario, a striking 41% addition to the conservation target (from 17 to 58%) was needed to meet same representation levels for threatened ecosystems and ecosystem services, which are crucial to sustain human well-being. Our results highlight that more realistic and potentially higher conservation targets, than politically set targets, can be achieved at the country level when sustainable development needs are also accounted for. (C) 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available