The influence of planning unit characteristics on the efficiency and spatial pattern of systematic conservation planning assessments

被引:50
作者
Nhancale, Bruno A. [1 ]
Smith, Robert J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Kent, Durrell Inst Conservat & Ecol, Canterbury CT2 7NR, Kent, England
关键词
Systematic conservation planning; Marxan; Reserve selection; Planning units; SPECIES RICHNESS; PROTECTED AREAS; BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION; RESERVE SELECTION; SCALE DEPENDENCE; TRADE-OFFS; COSTS; REPRESENTATION; NETWORK; IMPLEMENTATION;
D O I
10.1007/s10531-011-0063-7
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
Systematic conservation planning is a widely used approach for designing protected area systems and ecological networks. This generally involves dividing the planning region into a series of planning units and using computer software to select portfolios of these units that meet specified conservation targets whilst minimising conservation costs. Previous research has shown that changing the size and shape of these planning units can alter the apparent spatial characteristics of the underlying data and thus influence conservation assessment results. However, this may be less problematic when using newer software that can account for additional constraints based on portfolio costs and fragmentation levels. Here we investigate these issues using a dataset from southern Africa and measure the extent to which changing planning unit shape, size and baseline affects the results of conservation planning assessments. We show that using hexagonal planning units instead of squares produces more efficient and less fragmented portfolios and that using larger planning units produces portfolios that are less efficient but more likely to identify the same priority areas. We also show that using real-world constraints in the analysis, based on reducing socio-economic costs and minimising fragmentation levels, reduces the influence of planning unit characteristics on the results and so argue that future studies should adopt a similar approach when investigating factors that influence conservation assessments.
引用
收藏
页码:1821 / 1835
页数:15
相关论文
共 62 条
  • [1] Opportunity costs: Who really pays for conservation?
    Adams, Vanessa M.
    Pressey, Robert L.
    Naidoo, Robin
    [J]. BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2010, 143 (02) : 439 - 448
  • [2] Species distributions, land values, and efficient conservation
    Ando, A
    Camm, J
    Polasky, S
    Solow, A
    [J]. SCIENCE, 1998, 279 (5359) : 2126 - 2128
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2009, SPATIAL CONSERVATION
  • [4] Araújo MB, 2002, P ROY SOC B-BIOL SCI, V269, P1971, DOI 10.1098/rspb.2002.2121
  • [5] Ball I.R., 2000, MARXAN (V1.8.2): Marine Reserve Design Using Spatially Explicit Annealing
  • [6] Conservation conflicts across Africa
    Balmford, A
    Moore, JL
    Brooks, T
    Burgess, N
    Hansen, LA
    Williams, P
    Rahbek, C
    [J]. SCIENCE, 2001, 291 (5513) : 2616 - 2619
  • [7] Global variation in terrestrial conservation costs, conservation benefits, and unmet conservation needs
    Balmford, A
    Gaston, KJ
    Blyth, S
    James, A
    Kapos, V
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2003, 100 (03) : 1046 - 1050
  • [8] Effect of different sampling schemes on the spatial placement of conservation reserves in Utah, USA
    Bassett, SD
    Edwards, TC
    [J]. BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2003, 113 (01) : 141 - 151
  • [9] Rectangular and hexagonal grids used for observation, experiment and simulation in ecology
    Birch, Colin P. D.
    Oom, Sander P.
    Beecham, Jonathan A.
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL MODELLING, 2007, 206 (3-4) : 347 - 359
  • [10] Diagonal and orthogonal neighbours in grid-based simulations: Buffon's stick after 200 years
    Birch, CPD
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL MODELLING, 2006, 192 (3-4) : 637 - 644