Abstract
The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)'s strategic plan advocates the use of environmental surrogates, such as ecosystems, as a basis for planning where new protected areas should be placed. However, the efficiency and effectiveness of this ecosystem-based planning approach to adequately capture threatened species in protected area networks is unknown. We tested the application of this approach in Australia according to the nation's CBD-inspired goals for expansion of the national protected area system. We set targets for ecosystems (10% of the extent of each ecosystem) and threatened species (variable extents based on persistence requirements for each species) and then measured the total land area required and opportunity cost of meeting those targets independently, sequentially and simultaneously. We discover that an ecosystem-based approach will not ensure the adequate representation of threatened species in protected areas. Planning simultaneously for species and ecosystem targets delivered the most efficient outcomes for both sets of targets, while planning first for ecosystems and then filling the gaps to meet species targets was the most inefficient conservation strategy. Our analysis highlights the pitfalls of pursuing goals for species and ecosystems non-cooperatively and has significant implications for nations aiming to meet their CBD mandated protected area obligations.
Highlights
The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)’s strategic plan advocates the use of environmental surrogates, such as ecosystems, as a basis for planning where new protected areas should be placed
We discover that an ecosystem-based approach will not ensure the adequate representation of threatened species in protected areas
Our analysis highlights the pitfalls of pursuing goals for species and ecosystems non-cooperatively and has significant implications for nations aiming to meet their CBD mandated protected area obligations
Summary
The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)’s strategic plan advocates the use of environmental surrogates, such as ecosystems, as a basis for planning where new protected areas should be placed. Australia’s National Reserve System’s (NRS’s) primary goal at the time of research was to protect 10% of each of its 85 bioregions [26] by representing at least 80% of the different types of ecosystems within each bioregion by 2015, with a secondary goal to represent core areas for threatened species by 2030 [26] This plan is an example of a coarse/fine filter approach, which advocates planning for ecosystems and filling the gaps for species [27,28], which is applied in North America [28,29]. We assess the potential for efficiency and effectiveness in threatened species and ecosystem coverage in the expanding protected area network across Australia, arguably the first country to fully embrace a systematic planning approach using ecosystem-based targets to design the protected area estate [26,32,33]. We define efficiency as the amount of area required to meet a given set of targets, and effectiveness as the level of representation of a target in a given protected area network
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
