A Recipe for Achieving Aichi: Conservation Planning for 2020 Biodiversity Targets

The contribution of scientific research to conservation planning

Global declines in biodiversity and the widespread degradation of ecosystem services have led to urgent calls to safeguard both. Responses to this urgency include calls to integrate the needs of ecosystem services and biodiversity into the design of conservation interventions. The benefits of such integration are purported to include improvements in the justification and resources available for these interventions. Nevertheless, additional costs and potential trade-offs remain poorly understood in the design of interventions that seek to conserve biodiversity and ecosystem services. We sought to investigate the synergies and trade-offs in safeguarding ecosystem services and biodiversity in South Africa's Little Karoo. We used data on three ecosystem services--carbon storage, water recharge, and fodder provision--and data on biodiversity to examine several conservation planning scenarios. First, we investigated the amount of each ecosystem service captured incidentally by a conservation plan to meet targets for biodiversity only while minimizing opportunity costs. We then examined the costs of adding targets for ecosystem services into this conservation plan. Finally, we explored trade-offs between biodiversity and ecosystem service targets at a fixed cost. At least 30% of each ecosystem service was captured incidentally when all of biodiversity targets were met. By including data on ecosystem services, we increased the amount of services captured by at least 20% for all three services without additional costs. When biodiversity targets were reduced by 8%, an extra 40% of fodder provision and water recharge were obtained and 58% of carbon could be captured for the same cost. The opportunity cost (in terms of forgone production) of safeguarding 100% of the biodiversity targets was about US$500 million. Our results showed that with a small decrease in biodiversity target achievement, substantial gains for the conservation of ecosystem services can be achieved within our biodiversity priority areas for no extra cost.

A conservation planning study in Papua New Guinea (PNG) addresses the role of biodiversity surrogates and biodiversity targets, in the context of the trade-offs required for planning given real-world costs and constraints. In a trade-ofts framework, surrogates must be judged in terms of their success in predicting general biodiversity complementarity values ? the amount of additional biodiversity an area can contribute to a protected set. Wrong predictions of low complementarity (and consequent allocation of non-protective land uses) may be more worrisome than wrong predictions of high complementarity (and consequent allocation of protection, perhaps unnecessarily forgoing other land uses benefiting society). Trade-ofts and targets work well when predictions of complementarity are based on surrogate information that is expressed as a continuum of variation. The PNG study used hierarchical variation for environmental domains and vegetation types, and a nominated target then dictated the level within those hierarchies that was used. Internationally-promoted targets provide a potential basis for comparative evaluation of biodiversity protection levels among countries or regions. However, conventional application of percentage targets, in focusing on proportions of total area or on proportions of habitat types, does not serve the goal of biodiversity protection or sustainability well because targets can be miss-used to restrict the amount of biodiversity protected. At the same time, recent complaints about percentage targets are equally misguided in claiming, based on species-area curves, that 10% targets imply 50% extinctions. We apply a new approach to percentage targets in PNG, in which the maximum diversity that could be protected by an unconstrained 10% of the total area of the country becomes the working biodiversity target. Reaching that same biodiversity target may then require more than 10% of the area, because of constraints (e.g., existing reserves) and costs. In the baseline analysis for PNG, we found that hierarchical variation at the level of 564 vegetation types, combined with the 608 environmental domains, could be protected in an unconstrained 10% of the country. This process of determining a biodiversity target also revealed some "must-have" areas for any future conservation plan. Sur.h must-have areas were also identified for a 15%-based target. The satisfaction of the 10%-based target in practice required 16.8% of PNG (Faith et al. 2001a). This low-cost proposed protected set corresponded to greater net benefits relative to our application of two conventional targets approaches.

An area of convergence appears to be emerging between the approaches of conservation planning and the concepts of multifunctional landscapes, which if exploited correctly may assist in overcoming the resource and other constraints faced by biodiversity conservation, while at the same time furthering the aims of multifunctional landscapes to improve production abilities and overall sustainability. Using a multi-zone conservation planning approach, we explore the conservation costs, benefits to biodiversity conservation and possible ecosystem service payments associated with various land-use configurations, in the Little Karoo of South Africa, in order to develop and showcase a multifunctional landscape planning approach and its data requirements, as well as the possible cost savings to conservation agencies. The study uses four conservation planning scenarios, five land-use types, their conservation costs and biodiversity benefits, as well as possible payments from carbon sequestration and tourism. We find that the costs and biodiversity benefits associated with different land-uses varies substantially between land-uses, and also spatially within a land-use type. By incorporating this variation into a multi-zone conservation planning approach land-uses can be allocated in a way that achieves biodiversity targets while at the same time reducing costs by up to 50 % when compared with traditional binary approaches to conservation. Despite some challenges presented by cost and ecosystem service value data and the determination of land-use impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services, the ability of conservation planning approaches to reflect differential contributions of particular land-uses to biodiversity targets and ecosystem services holds much potential for conservation planning, for multifunctional landscape objectives and for growing the resources and partnerships available to the establishment of sustainable and resilient landscapes.

A method for incorporating climate change modelling into marine conservation planning: An Indo-west Pacific example

Formulating conservation targets for biodiversity pattern and process in the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa

In their Policy Forum “Ecosystem services for 2020” (15 October, p. [323][1]), C. Perrings et al. discuss possible missing elements in the Convention on Biological Diversity's proposed new targets. They suggest that targets for biodiversity be based directly on ecosystem services because people will then have a stake in the program's success. This approach undersells both biodiversity and the role of ecosystem services. Biodiversity's value extends beyond current ecosystem services and includes likely future benefits we cannot anticipate. Recognizing the benefits of ecosystem services can reduce the cost of retaining relatively intact areas of local biodiversity, but we need to plan for larger-scale conservation. A recognized ecosystem service does more than support some local elements of biodiversity; it makes a low-cost contribution toward conserving the biodiversity of the larger region. Regionally, ecosystem services may be more important as indicators of relative cost and intactness than of biodiversity. When considering regional trade-offs, we cannot simply target ecosystem services and ignore the elements of biodiversity that are not required for the service. Adopting the ecosystem services option for a specific locality may not be as good for balanced regional biodiversity conservation as adopting full conversion of that locality ([ 1 ][2]). An example that has been used to illustrate this point is a locality offering either complete conversion to forestry logging or “sympathetic” logging with partial biodiversity retention. Adopting the ecosystem service based on sympathetic logging, while lowering opportunity costs and maintaining some biodiversity in that locality, nevertheless would mean greater regional biodiversity loss for a given level of regional forestry production. As an alternative to targets focused on current perceptions of important services, it is time to consider higher-level targets and goals in an effort to better balance overall biodiversity conservation, ecosystem services, and other needs of society. I propose that we implement new systematic conservation planning to more efficiently serve these different needs ([ 2 ][3], [ 3 ][4]). Because greater efficiency can mean more biodiversity protection for a given rate of land conversion, higher-level targets could allow us to focus on reducing the rate of biodiversity loss as opposed to the more narrow goal of maintaining ecosystem services. 1. [↵][5] 1. D. P. Faith , Biodiversity and Regional Sustainability Analysis, (CSIRO, Canberra, 1995); . 2. [↵][6] 1. D. P. Faith , Glob. Environ. Change Soc. Pol. Dimensions 15, 5 (2005). [OpenUrl][7][CrossRef][8] 3. [↵][9] 1. F. Grant, 2. J. Young, 3. P. Bridgewater, 4. A. D. Watt , Eds., “Targets for biodiversity beyond 2010: Research supporting policy” (Report of e-conference, 2009), p. 44; [www.epbrs.org/PDF/Final%20long%20report.pdf][10]. [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.1196431 [2]: #ref-1 [3]: #ref-2 [4]: #ref-3 [5]: #xref-ref-1-1 View reference 1 in text [6]: #xref-ref-2-1 View reference 2 in text [7]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DGlob.%2BEnviron.%2BChange%2BSoc.%2BPol.%2BDimensions%26rft.volume%253D15%26rft.spage%253D5%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1016%252Fj.gloenvcha.2004.12.003%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [8]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2004.12.003&link_type=DOI [9]: #xref-ref-3-1 View reference 3 in text [10]: http://www.epbrs.org/PDF/Final%20long%20report.pdf

Protected areas are a key instrument for conservation. Despite this, they are vulnerable to risks associated with weak governance, land-use intensification, and climate change. We used a novel hierarchical optimization approach to identify priority areas for expanding the global protected area system that explicitly accounted for such risks while maximizing protection of all known terrestrial vertebrate species. To incorporate risk categories, we built on the minimum set problem, where the objective is to reach species distribution protection targets while accounting for 1 constraint, such as land cost or area. We expanded this approach to include multiple objectives accounting for risk in the problem formulation by treating each risk layer as a separate objective in the problem formulation. Reducing exposure to these risks required expanding the area of the global protected area system by 1.6% while still meeting conservation targets. Incorporating risks from weak governance drove the greatest changes in spatial priorities for protection, and incorporating risks from climate change required the largest increase (2.52%) in global protected area. Conserving wide-ranging species required countries with relatively strong governance to protect more land when they bordered nations with comparatively weak governance. Our results underscore the need for cross-jurisdictional coordination and demonstrate how risk can be efficiently incorporated into conservation planning. Planeación de las áreas protegidas para conservar la biodiversidad en un futuro incierto.

Biodiversity targets, or estimates of the quantities of biodiversity features that should be conserved in a region, are fundamental to systematic conservation planning. We propose that targets for species should be based on the quantitative thresholds developed for the Vulnerable category of the IUCN Red List system, thereby avoiding future listings of species in an IUCN Red List threat category or an increase in the extinction risk, or ultimate extinction, of species already listed as threatened. Examples of this approach are presented for case studies from South Africa, including threatened taxa listed under the IUCN Red List criteria of A to D, a species listed as Near Threatened, a species of conservation concern due to its rarity, and one species in need of recovery. The method gives rise to multiple representation targets, an improvement on the often used single representation targets that are inadequate for long term maintenance of biodiversity or the arbitrary multiple representation and percentage targets that are sometimes adopted. Through the implementation of the resulting conservation plan, these targets will ensure that the conservation status of threatened species do not worsen over time by qualifying for higher categories of threat and may actually improve their conservation status by eliminating the threat of habitat loss and stabilizing population declines. The positive attributes ascribed to the IUCN Red List system, and therefore to the species targets arising from this approach, are important when justifying decisions that limit land uses known to be detrimental to biodiversity.

Promoting equity in the use of algorithms for high-seas conservation

Action plans for species conservation are an important tool to meet global and national biodiversity targets – A study case in Brazil

A framework for systematic conservation planning and management of Mediterranean landscapes

A practical approach to setting heuristic marine biodiversity targets for systematic conservation planning

Quality conservation planning requires quality input data. However, the broad scale sampling strategies typically employed to obtain primary species distribution data are prone to geographic bias in the form of errors of omission. This study provides a quantitative measure of sampling bias to inform accuracy assessment of conservation plans based on the South African Frog Atlas Project. Significantly higher sampling intensity near to cities and roads is likely to result in overstated conservation priority and heightened conservation conflicts in urban areas. Particularly well sampled protected areas will also erroneously appear to contribute highly to amphibian biodiversity targets. Conversely, targeted sampling in the arid northwest and along mountain ranges is needed to ensure that these under-sampled regions are not excluded from conservation plans. The South African Frog Atlas Project offers a reasonably accurate picture of the broad scale west-to-east increase in amphibian richness and abundance, but geographic bias may limit its applicability for fine scale conservation planning. The Global Amphibian Assessment species distribution data offered a less biased alternative, but only at the cost of inflated commission error.

Successful implementation of marine conservation plans is largely inhibited by inadequate consideration of the broader social and economic context within which conservation operates. Marine waters and their biodiversity are shared by a host of stakeholders, such as commercial fishers, recreational users and offshore developers. Hence, to improve implementation success of conservation plans, we must incorporate other marine activities while explicitly examining trade-offs that may be required. In this study, we test how the inclusion of multiple marine activities can shape conservation plans. We used the entire Mediterranean territorial waters of Israel as a case study to compare four planning scenarios with increasing levels of complexity, where additional zones, threats and activities were added (e.g., commercial fisheries, hydrocarbon exploration interests, aquaculture, and shipping lanes). We applied the marine zoning decision support tool Marxan to each planning scenario and tested a) the ability of each scenario to reach biodiversity targets, b) the change in opportunity cost and c) the alteration of spatial conservation priorities. We found that by including increasing numbers of marine activities and zones in the planning process, greater compromises are required to reach conservation objectives. Complex plans with more activities incurred greater opportunity cost and did not reach biodiversity targets as easily as simplified plans with less marine activities. We discovered that including hydrocarbon data in the planning process significantly alters spatial priorities. For the territorial waters of Israel we found that in order to protect at least 10% of the range of 166 marine biodiversity features there would be a loss of ∼15% of annual commercial fishery revenue and ∼5% of prospective hydrocarbon revenue. This case study follows an illustrated framework for adopting a transparent systematic process to balance biodiversity goals and economic considerations within a country's territorial waters.